The role of anti-terrorism legislation in radicalizing animal rights activists

Since I’ve finally finished my counter terrorism class I can now put up my paper on the above subject.  Given the complete lack of open source data I don’t think it does more than raise some (I hope, interesting) questions. I can’t help but think that ‘get tough’ policies and hysterical rhetoric about animal rights/environmental groups is ultimately going to have two negative consequences.  It’s going to scare legitimate activists into silence (which might be seen as an ultimate positive by elements who like to whittle democracy down to a once every four year event – every two years if your a senior citizen) and it’s going to attract and further radicalize a smaller subset of people that 1) are already convinced the government is an evil Leviathan swallowing up individual freedoms and 2) thrive on playing the martyr.

To paraphrase our old friend Niccolo:  Suppression legislation like this relies too much on the power of the lion and not enough on the slyness of the fox.  They have mistaken snares and traps for signs of wolves and besides, it’s a lot more fun to be the lion who can roar and threaten with impunity.  But, “Those who choose only to be a lion do not really understand.”

I’d be interested in anyone’s comments, ideas or feedback.

Anyway, here’s the paper.  Enjoy.


2 responses to “The role of anti-terrorism legislation in radicalizing animal rights activists

  1. The people who are in view in the animal rights movement are just the tip of the iceburg. The legit activist you are talking about have no business telling farmers or the public how to take care of animals. The activist’s have thrown out billions of dollars of animal science and tossed in there own feelings of the matter. Most of what the activists are saying are void of any study whats so ever. You are aware thar the ar movement has allready started telling the public that farmers are harming plants? This also has no scientific backing. Whoever controls the food controls the world.

    • Well, I’ll admit the AR movement has its share of know nothing knuckleheads (yes, I’m looking at you, PETA). So, yes. I know there are all sorts of goofy things said in the name of animal rights. Just like there are climate change deniers or people who think that the Gulf oil spill is ‘natural’.

      To say that people shouldn’t be able to engage in the conversation about animal welfare if they aren’t farmers or scientists, however just isn’t right. There are serious arguments (both moral and scientific) for improving animal welfare. One shouldn’t discount the whole movement just because of a small group of people abuse the truth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s