Editorial: Change vs. “movement”

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, November 1992:

Our mail box has been full of letters either presuming or attacking our presumed
position with respect to the animal rights movement. Animal rights philosopher Tom Regan
among others welcomed our contribution to the movement; New York activist Dawn
Hernandez jumped on us for “movement-bashing”; and on the letters page, opposite,
Michael Gurwitz proposes that we should rename the movement, whatever it happens to be.
As we see it, though, the “movement” is largely history. A movement is the take-
off phase of a theme in social evolution, when a cause has relatively few supporters, and
must provoke confrontation to draw notice––often taking rhetorically extreme and practical-
ly impossible positions for the same reasons that an infant shrieks. The primary aim of the
animal rights movement was restoring animals to public awareness, after nearly a century
of slipping interest in humane concerns. Public opinion polls, political response (pro and
con), and a few striking camapign successes all showed that this was achieved by 1988, as
sociologist Bill Moyer of the Social Movement Empowerment Project pointed out in 1989
to a gathering of “movement” leaders convened by ANIMAL PEOPLE publisher Kim
Bartlett and Priscilla Feral of Friends of Animals.

Read more

Editorials: Welcome to ANIMAL PEOPLE!

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 1992:

With your substantial help and patience, we’re here, just six weeks after offi-
cial incorporation, ten weeks after announcing our intent to publish.
At that, we’re a week later than we’d hoped to be. Vital equipment failed and
had to be replaced on warranty; learning to use new software took longer than expect-
ed; the delay meant we had a lot more news to write up; and we can’t yet afford the
second Mac system we’ll need to avoid pre-deadline bottlenecks.
We’re paying no salaries so far. Although we could easily distribute 100,000
copies if we could afford to have that many printed and sent to distribution points, our
initial press run is a fraction of that size; we’ll get there when we can. Because our
start-up capital consisted of only good credit and a contribution from our first sub-
scriber, Mary Melville, we’ve had to contact other potential subscribers in small incre-
ments, a circumstance offset by your overwhelmingly positive response. In fact,
you’ve given us a rate of return on subscription appeals that direct mail marketing
experts swear is impossible.

Read more

Editorials: For leadership, look in the mirror

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 1992:

ANIMAL PEOPLE subscribers have been quick to endorse our belief that
the most meaningful form of helping animals is tangibly helping animals. We’ve
promised to focus upon individual and community initiatives, together with hands-on
care—the things each of us can do by ourselves or in small groups to collectively make
an immense difference. After over two decades of animal and habitat protection work
at all levels and in most regions of North America, we have come to the inescapable
conclusion that most of the progress on most issues has come about not because of
national campaigns, but rather through one-on-one persuasion, often in the virtual
absence of national campaigns. The number of homeless dogs and cats euthanized in
pounds and shelters is down from over 20 million per year a decade ago to under eight
million now as result of the unending efforts and experiments of local humane societies.

Read more

1 22 23 24