http://www.queersunited.blogspot.com

queerunity’s last blog post..The Daily Show Makes Inappropriate Reference to “Trannys”

Looking at prison populations, AR activists, as a portion of the activist prison population, are still small. The largest section probably coming from Black liberationists imprisoned in the 70s and 80s. But in recent years, the list of activist prisoners that are entering prison cells (not just being detained) are increasingly animal and earth liberationists. I realize there are several factors going into that and that some activists are simply deported (even if they are now U.S. citizens… this happened to a friend). One of the reasons is that COINTELPRO and other programs proved to be successful in targeting and destroying liberation movements led by people of color through the early 80s. Another is that while human liberation movements were being quelled by cooptation into reform movements, animal and earth liberation movements were springing out of their respective reform movements. Again, there are a lot of reasons for this. To many to get into here (as if I can even understand all the reasons). Besides, I don’t think this is the real issue either of us is trying to get at.

I agree that even hinting that animal rights activists bear the brunt of police repression is laughable. Not even laughable. Sad, really. Sad because it shows how out of touch people are with the reality of the prison industrial complex and the criminalization of communities of color in this country.

On the topic of SHAC and their charges, it is important to note the difference between the Animal Enterprise Protection Act (AEPA), passed in 1992, and the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) – a 2006 enhancement introduced because people didn’t think AEPA went far enough to target AR activists. I don’t want to reinvent the wheel, so I just defer to Will Potter for the AETA analysis.

But focusing on SHAC specifically, you state

So if SHAC hadn’t engaged in nasty, illegal activities, no one could have gone to jail

The problem with this logic is that they were not charged with any “nasty, illegal activities.” Not even consipiracy to commit such activities. As you later point, they were convicted of consipiracy to violate a charge enhancement, not actually a charge in itself. They were targeted, as you also point out because they “closely associate themselves with things like harassment, vandalism, and placing people in fear of bodily injury and death, then those “activists” are putting themselves at risk.” Even if they associated themselves with people who commit such crimes, so what? We have the freedom to associate with whomever we like. Association with those that break laws does not make one a criminal.

But you are right, all of this is a bit of a non sequitur. And I agree that animal advocacy is not unlawful and that is important for people to remember, but it is being intentionally and increasingly criminalized. The use of terms like eco-terrorist help in that criminalization process. A member of Congress speaking on the floor went so far as to call HSUS a terrorist organization. The fucking Humane Society! If we ignore these blatant attacks by the media, corporations and elected officials, then it will be easier to:
1) forget that most animal advocates work well within our legal rights, and
2) further criminalize already legal activities (association, assembly, etc), thus making it harder to be effective within legal constructs.

I understand that you don’t care to have any discussion about animal activists as targets of repression because the vast majority of targets are not animal activists and the most severe criminalization of communities is within communities of color. I respect that. But as someone who is an animal activists and who has friends in prison as animal activists and has been targeted by police repression, I refuse to give in to the notion that we must focus on certain crimes against communities before we can focus on others. We can work together and recognize the commonality of struggle. In fact, we must if we are to abolish all possibilities of oppression and exploitation (if I may rip-off Lenin).

btw, this:

A focus only on “activism” (if the question implied that) makes invisible white supremacy.

Brilliant! Thanks for the insight.

This myth has been widely promoted, but it is not true. The AETA is a penalty enhancement for crimes committed in the name of animal rights. Sure it’s problematic because it’s ideologically motivated, but it is not the case that mere lost profits = terrorism.

The important thing to understand about the SHAC7 case is that they were charged with conspiracy to violate the Animal Enterprise Protection Act, not with animal enterprise terrorism itself. So what people get upset about is really just old-fashioned conspiracy law, which does not require physical harm (e.g., one can be guilty of conspiracy to commit murder without having murdered someone).

So if SHAC hadn’t engaged in nasty, illegal activities, no one could have gone to jail because the AEPA specifically exempts “any lawful disruption that results from lawful public…reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise.” But if people play fast and loose and closely associate themselves with things like harassment, vandalism, and placing people in fear of bodily injury and death, then those “activists” are putting themselves at risk. But I think it’s really important to be clear about the fact that animal advocacy does not equal terrorism under the law.

It is the case, however, that Muslim man = terrorist = indefinite detention without a trial. That is one reason why I think even suggesting that animal activists are–in any way–receiving the brunt of police suppression is just laughable. I think we are making essentially the same point, but I think that if one is going to raise the issue of “police suppression,” it must be done in a broader context, like one in which there is a “war on terror” and a “war on drugs.” A focus only on “activism” (if the question implied that) makes invisible white supremacy.

It is not animal activists who are among the 1 in 100 people in the US who are in prison. There aren’t even 100 animal activists among the 2.3 million people behind bars. We’re talking statistical oblivion here.

Moreover, I don’t see how can this question can even be posed given that the prison industrial complex is the lineal decedent of slavery. Black men are inherently criminalized in this country. The prison population at this point is 40% Black and 20% Hispanic. I just can’t wrap my head around any version of the question why do “animal activists in the USA bear the brunt of police suppression?” It’s a non sequitur.