A Lesson from Environmentalists
Recently a couple of prominent activists came to a similar conclusion about the current state of environmental advocacy. Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus, authors of “The Death of Environmentalism,” argue that the environmental movement is rapidly becoming obsolete because it focuses on narrow policies that are easily ignored or overturned depending on the politics of the current administration in Washington, DC. Shellenberger and Nordhaus are also dismayed by the apparent lack of concern that environmentalists have for their slow progress.
The environmental community’s narrow definition of its self-interest leads to a kind of policy literalism that undermines its power… it is hard not to conclude that the environmental movement’s approach to problems and policies hasn’t worked particularly well. And yet there is nothing about the behavior of environmental groups that indicates that we as a community are ready to think differently about our work.
Shellenberger and Nordhaus make an interesting point about the self-defeatism inherent in limiting concern for the environment to a “special interest.” Animal advocacy, on the other hand, has only a fraction of the public attention and policy interest that environmentalism has. It would be a pleasant surprise just to see animal protection on the same list as other “special interests!” But lessons from “The Death of Environmentalism” also apply to animal advocacy, including a need to closely examine the entrenched attitudes and approaches that we use to help animals.
One of the areas that I think should be examined is how we as animal advocates position our goals. Very few people support the idea of a “vegan world,” but nearly everyone agrees with a goal of eventually eliminating animal cruelty and suffering. Resolving that disconnect goes beyond explaining to people that “animal rights” does not mean we’re planning to issue drivers’ licenses to family pets. Frankly, animal advocates also need to soften their tone and limit their expectations. Except in very rare situations, people don’t make abrupt changes (and one could argue that most of the few who do make abrupt changes are already advocates), and effective persuasion requires being able to offer incremental steps.
The second part in a five-part of serialization of The Death of Animal Rights published by the Humane Research Council.
