This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 28 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK Routledge Handbook of Radical Politics Ruth Kinna, Uri Gordon Animal Liberation Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315619880-5 Will Boisseau Published online on: 29 May 2019 How to cite :- Will Boisseau. 29 May 2019, Animal Liberation from: Routledge Handbook of Radical Politics Routledge Accessed on: 28 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315619880-5 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 1.2 ANIMAL LIBERATION Will Boisseau Moral concern about the relationship between human and non-human animals has a long history which extends to philosophers such as Pythagoras and the growth of Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism. The first organised animal welfare societies emerged in Britain in the 1820s, including the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), which wanted animals to be treated ‘humanely’ while avoiding ‘unnecessary’ suffering, al- though the RSPCA did not campaign against vivisection or the meat industry. The radical animal liberation movement which aimed to undertake direct action to save the lives of animals while causing economic sabotage to the industries that exploited animals developed in Britain during the 1960s within the Hunt Saboteurs Association (HSA) and expanded in the mid-1970s with the formation of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). Since the 1970s, the animal liberation movement grew to become one of the most signif- icant social movements in Western Europe and North America; in the early 1980s, animal liberation activists in the UK undertook ‘more direct action and caused more physical and financial damage than the entire British revolutionary left put together’ (Law, 1982, p. 23). The animal liberation movement inspired new generations of activists to broaden their ac- tion repertoire. Radical environmentalists such as Earth First! and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) took ‘inspiration and courage’ from the ‘ambitious direct action culture surrounding the ALF’ (Tsolkas, 2015). New tactical advances were inspired by Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), who worked as an above-ground group, while the ALF undertook illegal direct action against the targets publicised by SHAC. It was partly the fear of these tactics spreading to other revolutionary groups that led to an international state crackdown on ani- mal liberation activism. In America, the FBI took extensive and costly action to try and halt the rise of the ALF and ELF (Potter). In Britain, the convictions of animal liberation activists under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act have been described by Corporate Watch (2009) as ‘one of the worst injustices in the recent history of the UK’s political prosecutions’ (pp. 6–7). The repression, which in America included the imprisonment of a researcher for refusing to testify to a federal grand jury (Scarce, 2005), has led to a recent decline in militant forms of direct action and a rise in educational work (Starr et al., 2008, p. 267). If the animal liberation protest cycle which began in the mid-1970s with the formation of the ALF is ex- periencing a trough in the mid-2010s, then the growth and mainstreaming of veganism may be regarded as one unexpected residue of animal liberation activism. 42 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 18:27 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315619880, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315619880-5 Animal Liberation Despite the advances made, and the risks undertaken, by animal liberation activists, the movement remains dogged with accusations that it represents bourgeois reformism and that animal activists are ‘predominantly middle class, overwhelmingly white and privileged, in- sensitive to class oppression and the lack of diversity within their movements’ (Best, 2014, p. 85). In response to these criticisms, new animal liberation activism focuses on concepts such as total liberation and the intersectionality of human, animal and Earth liberation. This chapter is divided into four key sections. First, we consider the principal concerns of the movement; the second section considers the movement’s action repertoire; the third section looks at the main concepts that uphold the current animal liberation movement; and the final section considers the radical political theories which relate to animal liberation in- cluding ecofeminism, anarchism and critical animal studies (CAS). The chapter focuses on animal liberation groups who directly rescue animals from places of abuse or cause economic sabotage to companies which profit from animal abuse. The main groups we will consider are the ALF and SHAC. There are also many different animal liberation groups, for instance, those who seek to cause physical harm to animal abusers like the Animal Rights Militia (ARM), Justice Department and Animal Liberation Brigade (ALB); those who focus on a single issue such as the HSA; prisoner support groups such as Bite Back and the Animal Liberation Front Supporters’ Group (ALF SG); groups who pro- mote nonviolent direct action and open rescue such as Direct Action Everywhere (DxE); in- ternational direct action groups such as the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and groups, connected with animal liberation, who promote veganism such as Food Not Bombs. Before considering the movement’s key concepts, the distinction between the animal liberation movement and groups associated with animal welfare and animal rights is worth noting. The animal welfare movement, connected with the RSPCA in Britain and The Humane Society of the United States in America, believes that animals should be treated humanely while avoiding unnecessary suffering, a belief in animal welfare means that ani- mals can still be consumed as food, hunted or used in experiments but that this should not be done with gratuitous or unnecessary violence. An animal rights position, as represented by groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), states that animals should not be used instrumentally as a means to human ends under any circumstances (Singer, 1995; Regan, 2004; Francione, 2010). Finally, an animal liberation approach accepts the premise of animal rights, but focuses on the domestication of animals and has adopted tactics including direct action and the liberation of animals. Steven Best (2014) explains that while liberation- ists ‘often rely on rights-based assumptions while upholding abolitionists’ goals’, they also aim to ‘free animals from captivity and to attack exploiters through various means’ including diverse forms of direct action and economic sabotage (p. 82). Concerns The animal liberation movement emerged from the hunt saboteurs’ movement in Britain, and as such, the hunting of animals for fun was the first concern of the movement. The ALF widened the scope of animal liberationists to target the vivisection industry, and ultimately the ALF aimed to ‘liberate animals from [all] places of abuse’, including laboratories, factory farms, fur farms, circuses and pet shops, and to ‘inflict economic damage to those who profit from the misery and exploitation of animals’ (ALF, undated b). Soon, animal liberationists were concerned by the countless ways that animals are exploited by the ‘animal-industrial complex’ (Twine, 2012). The animal liberation movement has broadened its concern to the interrelation of human, animal and Earth liberation; this includes the connections between 43 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 18:27 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315619880, chapter2, 10.4324/9781315619880-5 Will Boisseau the meat industry and world hunger, and the links between the meat and dairy industries and climate change. Of course, some human issues were always embedded within the animal liberation movement, for instance, the first hunt saboteurs in Britain took pride in the class conflict with upper-class hunters involved in sabbing. The principal concern of the HSA in Britain is disrupting hunts in order to prevent the fox, or other targeted animal, being killed. Hunt sabs act nonviolently but are prepared to use self-defence if necessary. Hunts are often disrupted by activists spraying false scent, perhaps using garlic water, calling off the hounds or otherwise distracting hunters (HSA, 1987). Activists involved in sabbing take great pride that their direct action makes an imme- diate and visible impact, as one activist explained: ‘what you do in that day directly effects something’s life, you know, quite often you’ll see the animal you saved, you’ll see it running away… It’s still quite satisfying to know that what you did there and then saved that crea- ture’s life’ (interview with hunt sab). As we will see, it is often the experiences of activists in the field that shape the movement’s political theory. In Britain, hunt sabbing has been an uncontroversial issue for the animal lib- eration movement; such activism involves conflicts with the police, the class enemy and the establishment. However, the issue of hunting becomes more controversial when it is carried out by indigenous communities across the world for food and sustenance. There have been fierce debates within the animal liberation movement about the hunting practices of indige- nous peoples such as the Inuits and the lack of class awareness or intersectionality shown by some animal rights activists.