DOCSLIB.ORG

Speech Marianne LA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Speech Marianne LA LEZING MARIANNE – ANIMAL RIGHTS CONFERENCE I’m very happy to speak to all of you here tonight. I have a tale to tell on the struggle for animal rights, and I hope to be able to give you inspiration for our movement. On 22nd November 2006, for the first time ever in the world, Dutch voters elected members of a Party for the Animals to a national parliament. With two, and nearly three, seats, we achieved a victory, which has inspired animal rights advocates across the globe. In the Netherlands, animal suffering is often hidden from view. Each year, millions of factory farmed animals are sent to slaughter after living short and miserable lives: 14 million pigs, 450 million chickens and nearly one million calves. Each year 3.7 million mink are killed for their fur and 600.000 animals are used in animal testing experiments. In this context, I would like to tell you about the rise of our party and the role that we now play in the advancement of animal rights in the Netherlands. Animal welfare has long been a side dish for the few traditional Dutch politicians who, according to their party’s manifesto, were willing to defend it. But it is a key issue for those politicians who believe that animal welfare is high-priced nonsense. When prime minister Balkenende came to power in 2002, the farmers’ representatives of his coalition parties were keen to reverse all animal welfare measures from the last 20 years as swiftly as possible. Animals became objects once again, which were only intended to serve the appetite and the economic purposes of people. This is why the plan to set up a Party for the Animals was hatched in late 2002. A party that would initially serve to remind the parliamentary parties about their good intentions. It immediately became evident that our strategy worked when we participated in the elections of 2003. Overnight, other parties adopted animal welfare as an issue in their election programs and communications. Many other parties jumped on the bandwagon as a result of our role as a “pace rabbit in the marathon”, because they realised that animal welfare was becoming an increasingly important issue for the electorate. During the TV broadcast of the election results, to everyone’s surprise the Party for the Animals scored higher than all the other new parties combined! Last November, we finally made it into the Dutch House of Representatives, winning two seats thanks to many great people who invested their energy and money into campaigning with us, and thanks to 2% of all voters. Since that breakthrough, we have been working our butts off in parliament. Our tools vary, from participating in debates with Secretaries of Government Departments, to asking parliamentary questions, to proposing measures through petitions the parliament votes on. We asked our Prime Minister Balkenende about an official dinner where our Queen Beatrix served foie gras to her guests. He apologized and said this would be a one time mistake, and it will never happen again! Many environmental and animal welfare organisations have to work hard to get their 5 minutes in the spotlight of politics. It’s really special that we have managed to get in the door, and that we will eventually be a permanent factor (even though we would rather not be needed there). Within the possibilities of a party with 2 seats, in a parliament that has only been in office for 8 months, I can safely say that we have achieved the maximum and perhaps more than that. We get more publicity per seat than any other party, our proposals are being adopted, we ask more parliamentary questions than anyone, we’re the fastest growing political party in Holland, we’re rising in the polls and we’re being discovered by animal protectionists all over the world. At this moment we have 9 seats in regional parliaments, 2 seats in the National parliament and one seat in the Senate! During the debate on the agricultural budget for 2007, 80% of the speaking time of all parties in parliament was taken up by animal rights and animal welfare. The Secretary of Agriculture (Mr. Veerman) stated that this happened for the first time in history. More and more insiders acknowledge that they initially saw us as a passing phase, but that they now see us as a new and permanent factor to be reckoned with. We deliver a message that wasn’t heard before in politics. Before, if you were an environment-friendly politician, you drove a Toyota Prius. Nowadays it’s becoming clear that being a vegetarian saves 50% more greenhouse gases than switching to a Prius. Of course we polarize the debate with such statements, but we approach issues from a different perspective. We see traditional parties anxiously monitoring the polls and being surprised to see that we are growing rather than disappearing. They don’t seem to understand that we would love to become redundant and for our work to be unnecessary, and that we don’t begrudge other parties their own animal-friendly successes. We have brought the “soft factor” into politics and are perceived by more and more people as a serious new movement that just might become bigger than a number of traditional parties. Our aims are compassion, sustainability and we’re choosing no- regret scenario’s for animals, nature and the environment. At the moment, we are the balancing vote in many cases, in a parliament almost evenly divided between left and right. When it comes to topics like immigration policy, public transport, privacy laws, stemcell research; in many of those cases the proposals stand or fall with the two deciding votes of the Party for the Animals. This of course helps tremendously to be taken seriously by the other parties ☺. It is possible for us to grow, because 8% of voters is considering giving their vote to us and more and more people discover us and are beginning to appreciate our efforts. Outside of the Netherlands, many people are convinced that we are at the forefront of a worldwide movement to raise the level of civilization. During an earlier visit to the US this year I have explored the possibility of founding a Party for the Animals in the US, which has already been done in the UK, Germany, Belgium, Spain, France, Luxemburg, Canada and is being prepared in Austria. There is no limit to what compassion can do in the long run. We take heart from the wisdom of Gandhi, who said of his own emancipation movement: first they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win. As has happened with other emancipation movements such as for women’s suffrage and civil rights, we experienced all this. But the promise that after all of that we will win, makes it all exciting and worthwhile. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INVITATION Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi: Award Ceremony for Richard Ryder: in Part 2 Only Starting at 9:00 A.M
    Peter-Singer-Preis 2021 The award ceremony is carried out as a closed event and is open to altogether 120 guests only Förderverein des Association for the Peter-Singer-Preises Promotion of the Peter für Strategien zur Singer Prize for AWARD CEREMONY MEMBERSHIP Tierleidminderung e.V. Strategies to Reduce the Suffering of Animals Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi as the Winner of the 6th and Richard Ryder as the I would like to become a member of the Association for the Promo- tion of the Peter Singer Prize for Strategies to Reduce the Suffe- th ring of Animals. Winner of the 7 Peter Singer Prize for Strategies to Reduce the Suffering of Animals. Registered non-profit association www.peter-singer-preis.de • E-Mail: [email protected] th My membership fee is Euro every year DATE: Saturday, May 29 , 2021 (minimal fee is 50 Euro every year for one person) VENUE: Hollywood Media Hotel (Cinema Hall) • Kurfürstendamm 202 • 10719 Berlin PARTICIPATION I would like to participate in the whole evemt. PROGRAMME: FIRST PART PROGRAMME: SECOND PART in part 1 only INVITATION Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi: Award Ceremony for Richard Ryder: in part 2 only Starting at 9:00 A.M. Starting at 4:00 P.M. Name: • Welcome: Dr. Walter Neussel • Moderation: Prof. Edna Hillmann Street, house number: • Moderation: Prof. Dr. Peter Singer (Professor for Animal Husbandry, Humboldt University, Berlin) • Prof. Dr. Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker Postcode, city: (Honorary President of the Club of Rome): • Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Dieter Birnbacher Telephone, fax: Avoiding Collapse of the “Full World” (Institute of Philosophy, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf): • Renate Künast Email adress: (Former German Minister of Consumer Protection, „Speciesism“– a Re-Evaluation Place, date, signature: Food and Agriculture from 2001 to 2005): • Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming
    J Agric Environ Ethics (2010) 23:455–468 DOI 10.1007/s10806-009-9226-x Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming Evelyn B. Pluhar Accepted: 30 November 2009 / Published online: 18 December 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract Scientists have shown that the practice of factory farming is an increasingly urgent danger to human health, the environment, and nonhuman animal welfare. For all these reasons, moral agents must consider alternatives. Vegetarian food production, humane food animal farming, and in-vitro meat production are all explored from a variety of ethical perspectives, especially utilitarian and rights- based viewpoints, all in the light of current U.S. and European initiatives in the public and private sectors. It is concluded that vegetarianism and potentially in-vitro meat production are the best-justified options. Keywords Factory farming Á Humane farming Á In-vitro meat production Á Rights theory Á Utilitarianism Á Vegetarianism factory farming (FAK-tuh-ree FAHR-ming) noun: an industrialized system of producing meat, eggs, and milk in large-scale facilities where the animal is treated as a machine (Wordsmith 2008) After several years of receiving ‘‘A Word for the Day’’ from a dictionary service, the author was interested to see the above definition pop up in the email inbox. The timing was perhaps not coincidental. In spring 2008, the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production completed a two-year investigation of factory- farming practices in the United States. At the end of its 1,100-page report, the Commission recommended a ten-year timeline for the termination of the most intensive production techniques, including battery cages, gestation crates, and force- feeding birds to harvest their fatty livers for foie gras (Hunger Notes 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A
    s l a m m a y t T i M S N v I i A e G t A n i p E S r a A C a C E H n T M i THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity The Humane Society of the United State s/ World Society for the Protection of Animals 2009 1 1 1 2 0 A M , n o t s o g B r o . 1 a 0 s 2 u - e a t i p s u S w , t e e r t S h t u o S 9 8 THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A. Rose, E.C.M. Parsons, and Richard Farinato, 4th edition Editors: Naomi A. Rose and Debra Firmani, 4th edition ©2009 The Humane Society of the United States and the World Society for the Protection of Animals. All rights reserved. ©2008 The HSUS. All rights reserved. Printed on recycled paper, acid free and elemental chlorine free, with soy-based ink. Cover: ©iStockphoto.com/Ying Ying Wong Overview n the debate over marine mammals in captivity, the of the natural environment. The truth is that marine mammals have evolved physically and behaviorally to survive these rigors. public display industry maintains that marine mammal For example, nearly every kind of marine mammal, from sea lion Iexhibits serve a valuable conservation function, people to dolphin, travels large distances daily in a search for food. In learn important information from seeing live animals, and captivity, natural feeding and foraging patterns are completely lost.
    [Show full text]
  • MAC1 Abstracts – Oral Presentations
    Oral Presentation Abstracts OP001 Rights, Interests and Moral Standing: a critical examination of dialogue between Regan and Frey. Rebekah Humphreys Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom This paper aims to assess R. G. Frey’s analysis of Leonard Nelson’s argument (that links interests to rights). Frey argues that claims that animals have rights or interests have not been established. Frey’s contentions that animals have not been shown to have rights nor interests will be discussed in turn, but the main focus will be on Frey’s claim that animals have not been shown to have interests. One way Frey analyses this latter claim is by considering H. J. McCloskey’s denial of the claim and Tom Regan’s criticism of this denial. While Frey’s position on animal interests does not depend on McCloskey’s views, he believes that a consideration of McCloskey’s views will reveal that Nelson’s argument (linking interests to rights) has not been established as sound. My discussion (of Frey’s scrutiny of Nelson’s argument) will centre only on the dialogue between Regan and Frey in respect of McCloskey’s argument. OP002 Can Special Relations Ground the Privileged Moral Status of Humans Over Animals? Robert Jones California State University, Chico, United States Much contemporary philosophical work regarding the moral considerability of nonhuman animals involves the search for some set of characteristics or properties that nonhuman animals possess sufficient for their robust membership in the sphere of things morally considerable. The most common strategy has been to identify some set of properties intrinsic to the animals themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecocide: the Missing Crime Against Peace'
    35 690 Initiative paper from Representative Van Raan: 'Ecocide: The missing crime against peace' No. 2 INITIATIVE PAPER 'The rules of our world are laws, and they can be changed. Laws can restrict, or they can enable. What matters is what they serve. Many of the laws in our world serve property - they are based on ownership. But imagine a law that has a higher moral authority… a law that puts people and planet first. Imagine a law that starts from first do no harm, that stops this dangerous game and takes us to a place of safety….' Polly Higgins, 2015 'We need to change the rules.' Greta Thunberg, 2019 Table of contents Summary 1 1. Introduction 3 2. The ineffectiveness of current legislation 7 3. The legal framework for ecocide law 14 4. Case study: West Papua 20 5. Conclusion 25 6. Financial section 26 7. Decision points 26 Appendix: The institutional history of ecocide 29 Summary Despite all our efforts, the future of our natural environments, habitats, and ecosystems does not look promising. Human activity has ensured that climate change continues to persist. Legal instruments are available to combat this unprecedented damage to the natural living environment, but these instruments have proven inadequate. With this paper, the initiator intends to set forth an innovative new legal concept. This paper is a study into the possibilities of turning this unprecedented destruction of our natural environment into a criminal offence. In this regard, we will use the term ecocide, defined as the extensive damage to or destruction of ecosystems through human activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to the European Commission
    To: Commissioners Kyriakides and Wojciechowski European Commission B-1049 Brussels, Belgium Please reply to: Animal Politics Foundation [email protected] Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 32 1012RZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands Subject: Live animal transports 15th of April 2021 Dear Commissioners Kyriakides and Wojciechowski, We, politicians from all over the world, call on the European Commission to take immediate steps to ensure effective protection of animals during long-distance transport. Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU stipulates that, as sentient beings, full regard should be paid to animal welfare requirements. However, time and time again, it has been shown that this fundamental part of the EU treaties is being ignored in the case of long-distance live animal transport. We ask the European Commission to act with the urgency appropriate to such situations involving the life and death of sentient beings. Millions of animals are transported annually, both within the European Union and to third countries. Animals are transported in terrible conditions, on journeys that can last several days, weeks or even months. They are crammed inside often dirty vehicles (trucks, vessels, and airplanes), suffer from high temperatures, dehydration, a lack of ventilation and stress. Many die during the journey. The recent tragedies on board the Queen Hind, Karim Allah and Elbeik vessels show it is time to take action. In all these cases, contingency plans were lacking, massive and severe animal suffering and the death of thousands of animals as a result. COVID-19 has worsened the situation: animals are regularly stuck at borders, sometimes with more than a 12-hour delay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Electorates of Greenleft and the Party for the Animals Otjes, Simon; Krouwel, Andre
    University of Groningen Two shades of Green? The electorates of GreenLeft and the Party for the Animals Otjes, Simon; Krouwel, Andre Published in: Environmental Politics DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2015.1067349 IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2015 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Otjes, S., & Krouwel, A. (2015). Two shades of Green? The electorates of GreenLeft and the Party for the Animals. Environmental Politics, 24(6), 991-1013. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1067349 Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 26-09-2021 Environmental Politics, 2015 Vol. 24, No. 6, 991–1013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1067349 Two shades of Green? The electorates of GreenLeft and the Party for the Animals Simon Otjesa* and André Krouwelb aDocumentation Centre Dutch Political Parties, Groningen University, The Netherlands; bDepartment of Communication Science/Kieskompas B.V., VU University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands The Netherlands has two electorally significant parties that might be con- sidered to be part of the ‘Green’ family: GreenLeft and the Party for the Animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenger Party List
    Appendix List of Challenger Parties Operationalization of Challenger Parties A party is considered a challenger party if in any given year it has not been a member of a central government after 1930. A party is considered a dominant party if in any given year it has been part of a central government after 1930. Only parties with ministers in cabinet are considered to be members of a central government. A party ceases to be a challenger party once it enters central government (in the election immediately preceding entry into office, it is classified as a challenger party). Participation in a national war/crisis cabinets and national unity governments (e.g., Communists in France’s provisional government) does not in itself qualify a party as a dominant party. A dominant party will continue to be considered a dominant party after merging with a challenger party, but a party will be considered a challenger party if it splits from a dominant party. Using this definition, the following parties were challenger parties in Western Europe in the period under investigation (1950–2017). The parties that became dominant parties during the period are indicated with an asterisk. Last election in dataset Country Party Party name (as abbreviation challenger party) Austria ALÖ Alternative List Austria 1983 DU The Independents—Lugner’s List 1999 FPÖ Freedom Party of Austria 1983 * Fritz The Citizens’ Forum Austria 2008 Grüne The Greens—The Green Alternative 2017 LiF Liberal Forum 2008 Martin Hans-Peter Martin’s List 2006 Nein No—Citizens’ Initiative against
    [Show full text]
  • Using Emotions to Frame Issues and Identities in Conflict: Farmer
    Negotiation and Conflict Management Research Using Emotions to Frame Issues and Identities in Conflict: Farmer Movements on Social Media Tim M. Stevens ,1 Noelle Aarts2 and Art Dewulf3 1 Strategic Communication, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands 2 ISIS, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 3 Public Administration and Policy, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, The Netherlands Keywords Abstract framing, conflict, identity, emotion, social media, animal Polarization and group formation processes on social media networks have welfare, animal husbandry. received ample academic attention, but few studies have looked into the discursive interactions on social media through which intergroup conflicts Correspondence develop. In this comparative case study, we analyzed two social media con- Tim M. Stevens, Strategic flicts between farmers and animal right advocates to understand how con- Communication, Wageningen flicts establish, escalate, and return dormant through issue and identity University and Research Centre, framing and the discursive use of emotions. The results show that the two P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands; groups used the same set of frames throughout the three phases. We iden- e-mail: [email protected]. tify this as a symmetric conflict framing repertoire. The groups both use a dominant moral frame (animal welfare is of absolute value), but express doi: 10.34891/9mmd-q341 distinct views on policy solutions. This triggers a contestation of credibility (who knows best and who cares most for animals) in which the two groups use the same set of issue and identity frames to directly oppose each other. The binary opposition is initially established through issue framing but escalates into an identity conflict that involves group labeling and blaming.
    [Show full text]
  • WP05 Steven Van Hauwaert ESR Final Report
    SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME THE PEOPLE PROGRAMME MARIE CURIE ACTIONS – NETWORKS FOR INITIAL TRAINING (ITN) ELECDEM TRAINING NETWORK IN ELECTORAL DEMOCRACY GRANT AGREEMENT NUMBER: 238607 Deliverable D5.1 – Institutional Structures and Partisan Attachments Final Report Early Stage Research fellow (ESR) Steven Van Hauwaert Host Institution University of Vienna, Austria The ELECDEM project was funded by the FP7 People Programme ELECDEM 238607 A. ABSTRACT The academic literature proposes a wide variety of factors that contribute to the explanation of far right party development. However, these constructs are typically structural in nature, rather variable-oriented and are not necessarily able to explain far right party development as a whole. Much too often, the existing literature assumes far right parties develop independently from one another, even though processes such as globalisation make this highly unlikely. Therefore, this study refutes this assumption and claims far right party development is much more interdependent than the literature describes. To do so, this study proposes to complement existing explanatory frameworks by shifting its principal focus and emphasising more dynamic variables and processes. This innovative study’s main objective is to bring time and agency back into the analysis, thereby complementing existing frameworks. In other words, the timing and the pace of far right party development should be considered when explaining this phenomenon, just like it should include the far right party itself. Largely based on social movement and policy diffusion literature, this study identifies, describes and analyses the different facets and the importance of diffusion dynamics in the development of West-European far right parties. The focus on the similarities and differences of diffusion patterns and the ensuing consequences for far right party development, allows this study to explore the nature, the role and the extent of diffusion dynamics in the development of West-European far right parties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dutch Parliamentary Elections: Outcome and Implications
    CRS INSIGHT The Dutch Parliamentary Elections: Outcome and Implications March 20, 2017 (IN10672) | Related Author Kristin Archick | Kristin Archick, Specialist in European Affairs ([email protected], 7-2668) The March 15, 2017, parliamentary elections in the Netherlands garnered considerable attention as the first in a series of European contests this year in which populist, antiestablishment parties have been poised to do well, with possibly significant implications for the future of the European Union (EU). For many months, opinion polls projected an electoral surge for the far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-EU Freedom Party (PVV), led by Geert Wilders. Many in the EU were relieved when the PVV fell short and the center-right, pro-EU People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), led by incumbent Prime Minister Mark Rutte, retained its position as the largest party in the Dutch parliament. Several commentators suggest that the Dutch outcome may be a sign that populism in Europe and "euroskeptism" about the EU are starting to lose momentum, but others remain cautious about drawing such conclusions yet. Election Results The Dutch political scene has become increasingly fragmented; 28 political parties competed in the 2017 elections for the 150-seat Second Chamber, the "lower"—but more powerful—house of the Dutch parliament. Concerns about immigration, national identity, and the role of Islam in the Netherlands (approximately 5.5% of the country's 17 million people are Muslim) dominated the campaigning. The VVD came in first, with 33 seats, but lost roughly one-fifth of its previous total. The PVV finished second, with 20 seats, making modest gains on its 2012 election results but not performing as well as expected.
    [Show full text]