Where Jonathan Safran Foer Gets It Wrong
Print This Post
An article in Salon.com about Eating Animals might persuade many people to read the book and/or reduce or eliminate meat consumption.
But reading through the article with a critical vegan eye, I can see a problem.
Jonathan Safran Foer wrote:
“These little daily choices that we’re so used to thinking are irrelevant are the most important thing we do all day long. An enormous and very destructive force — historically, it’s unprecedented how destructive our farm system is — has taken over America and is starting to take over the world. And unlike so many other horrible systems, this one doesn’t require electing a new government or raising billions of dollars or fighting a war. It can be dismantled just by people making different choices.”
Where he gets it wrong: He’s right to encourage people to think of their daily habits as powerful actions. (Go vegan, do it now!) But JSF is wrong when he goes overboard to suggest that all it will take to “dismantle” factory farming is a change in consumer demand.
I wrote about this topic in a three part series at the Soapbox, but I’ll boil it down for you here, too:
- Reduced consumer demand can and will significantly reduce supply, but…
- Many meat-eaters don’t actually have a true choice. These meat-eaters are children in public schools, patients in hospitals, people in prison, people on assistance, and others who rely on care-givers to supply them with meals. They don’t have a choice in the matter, if they want to live they must eat what’s offered. And what’s offered? Why, it’s cheap, surplus meat, rejected by consumers who have a true choice.
- Many more meat-eaters don’t feel like they have a choice. Even though rice and beans are an excellent, cheap, readily available substitute for meat, current consumers won’t believe or accept that fact. They feel like rejecting factory farming requires spending their whole paychecks to buy faux meats or “humane” meats. They simply can’t imagine life without some kind of meat. For them, beans and rice won’t cut it. Forget fresh veggies from farmer’s markets, they won’t even eat the bean burrito at Taco Bell instead of the Big Mac… they just won’t. Others have the money, but still won’t spend it on vegan options. They feel trapped by habit, taste, tradition, budget, education, culture, time… whatever, but the point is they feel trapped. They don’t feel like they can make an ethical choice.
- Therefore, in order to truly change the inherently cruel, environmentally destructive, and hazardous to human health factory farming system of meat production, we have to work harder. We have to do more. We have to work to allow all humans a truly free choice and/or we have to work to reduce supply through other methods.
Our personal choices are not enough. If you care about animals, the environment, and human health, not only will you go vegan, but you’ll work harder! Our individual consumption choices are the beginning, but they won’t be the end of factory farming.
How will you work harder? It’s entirely up to you, but here are some suggestions >>
I found this post confusing given that this is a “vegan” blog. Why should ethical vegans have any special interest in ending factory farming? Why does the author suggest this?
Isn’t the focus on factory farming one of the obvious points where Foer gets it wrong? That and the fact that he makes an implicit distinction between meat and other animal products?
“Why should ethical vegans have any special interest in ending factory farming?”
a) If you think that veganism necessarily involves ethics, then why qualify the word “vegan with the word “ethical”?
If you don’t think that veganism necessarily involves ethics, then you have your answer: people abstain from using animal products for all kinds of reasons, one of the most compelling being factory farming.
b) Factory farming, as Jonathan Safran Foer points out albeit in a different manner, accounts for the vast majority of animal rights violations.
“Why does the author suggest this?”
The single thing most responsible for animal suffering and death is… drumroll… factory farming.
“Isn’t the focus on factory farming one of the obvious points where Foer gets it wrong?”
In his book he writes (pg 12):
Simply put, you should read the book yourself to find out.
“That and the fact that he makes an implicit distinction between meat and other animal products?”
The book title and much of the discussions certainly do seem to emphasize flesh consumption over using animals’ skin, milk, or other “products.” But interviews include other animal products, like dairy and eggs, for example:
Do I support his specific approach and how he encourages “happy meat”? NO. But I support a lot of what he says and I know he’s creating vegans. People say this book made them go vegan.
Put another way, I agree with him 99%.
Moreover, my article above – my thoughts about true abolition and how it requires more than merely advocating veganism – includes all animal products, not just meat.
I don’t think everyone who is vegan is vegan for ethical reasons, but I don’t think there are valid reasons for being vegan outside of ethical ones. If you do, perhaps you could explain?
“[P]eople abstain from using animal products for all kinds of reasons, one of the most compelling being factory farming.”
How does the institution of factory farming provide anyone with any special reason to go vegan? It seems to me that factory farming might equally provide people with reasons to eat “humane meat,” to reduce their consumption of animals, etc. So, it’s not clear how focusing on factory farming advances veganism at all. Please draw out the connection.
“I support a lot of what he says and I know he’s creating vegans.”
What empirical or conceptual evidence do you have that he’s creating vegans? What reason is he providing for people to go vegan?
And, what of his position do you support? He seems to think there’s a moral difference between meat and other animal products; do you believe this? He also seems focused on the cruelties of factory farming (see the clip you posted) rather than animal use as such. Like I asked above, how does concern with these cruelties provide any special reason for people go vegan?
Thanks for this excellent perspective. Vegan education is more important than anything else but I don’t think it’s realistic to expect it to be enough. There are many forces at work that keep meat cheap (like price supports) and that manipulate consumer demand (like leaving the task of nutrition education with the same organization that supports farmers). There are plenty of things that need to be changed, so I don’t know why anyone would want to limit activism to one singular approach–vegan education.
.-= Ginny Messina´s last blog ..Is Vegetarianism a Useful Gateway to Veganism? =-.
Ginny – Thanks for getting it. Thanks for understanding my point.
Jason – Here’s a quote from the book, pg 34:
Emphasis added.
“it’s not clear how focusing on factory farming advances veganism at all. Please draw out the connection.”
In all but the rarest of cases, factory farming is SYNONYMOUS with non-veganism. Odds are, anyone who eats any kind of animal product is someone who eats factory farmed animal products. If they merely abstained from factory farmed animal products, they’d either be vegan or nearly vegan.
The notion that they’ll all eat “humane” meat is wrong. There simply isn’t enough “humane” meat available for them to eat, nor will there ever be. It’s an impossibility. Factory farming was designed to produce animal products for the masses. Without factory farming, only the privileged few will be able to consume animal products. Thus, the masses will be vegan. Which in turn may provide the critical mass necessary for significant social change to occur regarding animals’ status as rights-bearers.
This line of thinking is nothing short of silly.
I oppose the exploitation of humans. This opposition extends to many forms of exploitation, but I particularly abhor the form of exploitation known as chattle slavery. Were chattle slavery still openly occuring in my locale, I would absolutely have a special interest in ending it, above and beyond my interest in ending other forms of human exploitation.
The same can be said for non-human animal exploitation and factory farming. I oppose the exploitation of non-human animals, and I particularly abhor factory farming. I don’t think a focus on the horrors of factory farming is unwarranted or, as you put it, “getting it wrong.”
My line of thinking is, I believe, far more intuitive to most people than yours. I frankly think Gary Franccione (or whoever else is responsible for the popularity of your sort of argument) has twisted many a vegan’s brain into a preztel.
Hi Eccentric Vegan,
You actually didn’t answer any of my questions. I’ll restate them here for you.
“[P]eople abstain from using animal products for all kinds of reasons, one of the most compelling being factory farming.”
How does the institution of factory farming provide anyone with any special reason to go vegan?
“I support a lot of what he says and I know he’s creating vegans.”
What empirical or conceptual evidence do you have that he’s creating vegans? What reason is he providing for people to go vegan?
The quote you provided from page 34 doesn’t answer either of these questions.
“In all but the rarest of cases, factory farming is SYNONYMOUS with non-veganism. Odds are, anyone who eats any kind of animal product is someone who eats factory farmed animal products. If they merely abstained from factory farmed animal products, they’d either be vegan or nearly vegan.”
What reason is Foer given from abstaining entirely from factory farmed products?
“The notion that they’ll all eat “humane” meat is wrong. There simply isn’t enough “humane” meat available for them to eat, nor will there ever be. It’s an impossibility. Factory farming was designed to produce animal products for the masses. Without factory farming, only the privileged few will be able to consume animal products. Thus, the masses will be vegan. Which in turn may provide the critical mass necessary for significant social change to occur regarding animals’ status as rights-bearers.”
It would be great if you could provide some empirical evidence for any of the claims you make here. Remember people who are led to believe that factory farming (or parts of it) is what’s wrong, they have no special reason not to eat animal products or to find ways of reforming factory farming. Lots of people have been led to believe that battery cages are horrible. These people now eat eggs from “cage-free” factory farms where it’s debatable whether the animals live better lives.
How one goes from not eating factory farmed products to seeing animals as right-bearers needs to be explained. Why not just explain to people why animals are right-bearers from the get-go? Why lead them through a circuitous path that has no conceptual or empirical justification?
In response to Ginny Messina:
“There are plenty of things that need to be changed, so I don’t know why anyone would want to limit activism to one singular approach–vegan education.”
Of course many things will need to change to make veganism easier. I don’t believe I ever said vegan education is the end-all-be-all. Please reread my posts. I restated my questions for the blog poster above. It’s unclear, though, how anybody will accept the kinds of changes necessary for veganism to become easier without people being educated about the ethical reasons for veganism. Perhaps you could explain.
In response to Plump Vegan:
“This line of thinking is nothing short of silly.”
This is a funny response to a question. I was hoping for a substantive reply.
“I oppose the exploitation of humans. This opposition extends to many forms of exploitation, but I particularly abhor the form of exploitation known as chattle slavery. Were chattle slavery still openly occuring in my locale, I would absolutely have a special interest in ending it, above and beyond my interest in ending other forms of human exploitation.”
The parallel you try to draw between chattel slavery and factory farming doesn’t work. Were chattel slavery to exist among humans, were some humans to be considered property, advocating for the protection of their interests outside of not being property wouldn’t get you anywhere. As long as humans are considered property and may be treated as such, their interests in not being exploited in the work place (e.g., not being forced to work overtime without pay) are meaningless. You would be right to focus your advocacy on abolishing slavery.
It’s for a similar reason that we ought to seek to abolish the property status of animals. Their welfare interests cannot be meaningfully protected without that status being abolished. If we take you to be correct that you would have a special interest in ending chattel slavery above and beyond other forms of exploitation, then you similarly have a special interest in abolishing the use.
“The same can be said for non-human animal exploitation and factory farming. I oppose the exploitation of non-human animals, and I particularly abhor factory farming. I don’t think a focus on the horrors of factory farming is unwarranted or, as you put it, “getting it wrong.””
There are both conceptual and empirical reasons for why the focus on factory farming gets it wrong. Conceptually, the focus on factory farming suggests that what’s wrong is the egregious cruelty involved. Because the use of animals is not challenged as such, this account leaves open several possibilities of moral action: eating less factory farmed animal products, reforming factory farming, eating “humane” animal products, etc. And indeed, we not only see some people doing this, we also see people who formerly abstained from eating animal products going back to eating them. We do not see people becoming commited vegans on this account. And why should we? After all, the focus condemnation of factory farming offers us no reason to go vegan.
“My line of thinking is, I believe, far more intuitive to most people than yours.”
That may be true, but what we ought to do is reflect on our intutions and decide whether there’s any merit to them. In this case, your intuition is wrong.
Jason,
a) Factory farming accounts for the vast majority of animal rights violations. Thus, factory farming is a reasonable place for people interested in abolishing animal exploitation to direct their energy.
b) Please consider reading the book yourself rather than asking me to interpret it for you.
c) Please consider trying to understand me rather than trying to find fault with my reasoning or my communication. The phrases “charitable interpretation” or “giving someone the benefit of the doubt” might aid you in that task.
My post above has little to do with the topics of your curiosity. Rather, it has to do with something you said you agree with:
“Of course many things will need to change to make veganism easier.”
d) If you disagree with me or dislike what I do, please stop trying to change me and start trying to change the world. That is, if you think you can do a better job at encouraging people to go and stay vegan, THEN DO IT.
This is not philosophy class. I’m done with that, got my BA and have moved on with life. This is merely one simple article that if you get, you get. If you don’t get it, then go read or do something else.
I am not your spokesperson nor am I the representative for all vegan people or all animals. I am merely one person using her skills to try to make the world a better place. I’m not perfect, I’m not a genius, I’m not an angel, I’m nothing but another human being who is actually, truly, DOING something. I’ve written thousands of blog posts that encourage veganism. I’ve made over a hundred videos that encourage veganism. I’ve passed out thousands of vegan leaflets. And I’ve successfully encouraged countless people to go vegan. Kindly, get off my back!
Regards,
Elaine
Jason, Are you insane? You ask “How does the institution of factory farming provide anyone with any special reason to go vegan?” I am almost speechless that anyone can ask such a question. How can it not? Factory farming is an exercise in environmental unsustainability and unconscionable cruelty. Those facts alone would make any thinking feeling person go Vegan, I can only conclude the majority of humans being neither think nor feel, I don’t see anyone proving me wrong.
How does the knowledge of factory farming convert someone? Well, I was vegetarian for 5 years – first image of a “factory farm” I started on my vegan journey. Am I 100% – 100% of the time? doubtful… But I do make every effort to abstains from all animal products.
Furthermore, the first look at a photo/video of a “factory farm” my husband went from a 3 x a day “meat” man to vegetarian – transitioning to veganism.
Knowledge is power. As soon as we can get the touch issue of “animals as food” settled – the more likely we can proceed to rights based issues. It’s not an ideal scenario – but it does encourage people to think/act on their values…
And as far as “Work hard. Be nice” – am on chapter 4 of Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People”… And yes, it’s often “hard work” just to be “nice” – but if that’s what it takes to get the message heard – I’m able, willing and ready!
.-= Bea Elliott´s last blog ..Eating Animals is Wrong – So is Dairy & Eggs – Go Vegan =-.
“touch issue” should be “touchy” issue… sorry.
.-= Bea Elliott´s last blog ..Eating Animals is Wrong – So is Dairy & Eggs – Go Vegan =-.
Hi Elaine,
I didn’t mean any ill-will in my posts. I just disagree with you. I thought that was an ok thing to post about. This is a public blog after all.
“a) Factory farming accounts for the vast majority of animal rights violations. Thus, factory farming is a reasonable place for people interested in abolishing animal exploitation to direct their energy.”
Farming writ large accounts for more rights violations, so if we’re going by numbers, why not critique that? Moreover, I provided several reasons why focusing on factory farming can be confusing to people at best and provides no reason for people to go vegan.
“b) Please consider reading the book yourself rather than asking me to interpret it for you.”
I don’t believe I was asking you to interpret the book for me. I was merely challenging your support of it. You said you agree with 99% of what Foer says, so that seems like an ok thing to do.
“c) Please consider trying to understand me rather than trying to find fault with my reasoning or my communication. The phrases “charitable interpretation” or “giving someone the benefit of the doubt” might aid you in that task.”
I absolutely am trying to understand you. If you think I’m not being charitable in my readings, please point out where I’m being unfairly harsh.
“My post above has little to do with the topics of your curiosity. Rather, it has to do with something you said you agree with:
“Of course many things will need to change to make veganism easier.””
I disagree with what you wrote and I challenged it directly.
“d) If you disagree with me or dislike what I do, please stop trying to change me and start trying to change the world. That is, if you think you can do a better job at encouraging people to go and stay vegan, THEN DO IT.”
I am trying to do my best to educate others. I don’t see how that makes it improper for me to comment on your public blog. I think you’re presenting misleading and unhelpful information to people, so I’m disagreeing with you. I think that’s fair.
“I am not your spokesperson nor am I the representative for all vegan people or all animals. I am merely one person using her skills to try to make the world a better place. I’m not perfect, I’m not a genius, I’m not an angel, I’m nothing but another human being who is actually, truly, DOING something. I’ve written thousands of blog posts that encourage veganism. I’ve made over a hundred videos that encourage veganism. I’ve passed out thousands of vegan leaflets. And I’ve successfully encouraged countless people to go vegan. Kindly, get off my back!”
Sorry if you thought I was on your back about this. I don’t claim to be perfect either. I do think that it’s important for us to be thoughtful about how we go about our advocacy though, and because I disagree with what you wrote, I posted a comment. I’m not sure why you’re taking so much offense to that.
Hopefully you put as much thought and energy into helping animals as you put into arguing with me.
Steve:
Lots of people who are appalled by factory farming start eating “humane” meat. Being bothered by the cruelties involved in factory farming does not give anyone a reason to stop eating and using animals altogether.
Bea:
I agree that we need to get people to not see animals as food if we’re going to get them legal rights. The problem with focusing on factory farming is that it gives people no reason to be vegan. For them to become vegan, they’d need to see /all/ farming as wrong.
“Lots of people who are appalled by factory farming start eating ‘humane’ meat.”
a) It’s not really that many people. If you want to claim it’s “lots” of people, cite some stats and back them up with credible sources.
b) In my experience, most of the people who say they eat “humane meat” don’t walk the walk. They say one thing about “humane” meat, but really they just eat any old meat.
c) Even Prof. Francione admits there is no empirical proof for his claim that “improving animal welfare makes people feel less uncomfortable about animal exploitation.” He bases his philosophy on his intuition.
So if you’re going to make a slippery slope argument that being anti-factory farming is the same as being pro-”humane” meat and you want to also claim that being pro-”humane” meat is anti-vegan, then you need some proof, particularly because anyone honestly promoting “humane” meat as an alternative to factory farming realizes that “humane” meat is only sustainable for an elite few and it cannot feed the masses, thus anyone honestly promoting “humane” meat alongside abolition of factory farming, should or will encourage veganism since abolition of factory farming requires that either most people be vegan 100% of the time or 100% of people be vegan most of the time.
I don’t personally promote “humane” meat consumption, but I do support anyone – regardless of their ethics – who wants to abolish factory farming. Factory farming is just that bad. It’s the worst of the worst.
I suggest if you have an alternative viewpoint to mine that you consider starting your own vegan website and/or contributing substantive articles to this one. Please see the submission policy here: http://www.vegansoapbox.com/about/#submission
I read the book and for a while I was hesitating to eat meat. I have to admit that it got me very preocupide with how the meat production are treating and feeding the animals we eat and I love.
Nevertheless I was born in a farm and I have to say that, despite the slaughtering, I don´t remember of it as any different. Death is always horrible.
Another thing is that I was so looking forward for his new novel and now it comes with this realistic freak-out because he became a father and wants to make everyone stop eating meat so his sons wont have this option on the menu? C
Well, he obviously will introduce us a new wonderful novel so we can forget this Eating animals on.
I have always supported anyone’s decision to be a vegan and a vegetarian. I have also researched the topic plenty of times trying to come up with the more ethical choice. I just can’t see the effect of me not choosing to buy an already placed in the store piece of meat on one of the largest industries in the world. I can understand if I was in the position to have an influence on many people, running a vegan website for instance, but losing me as a customer will NOT effect the farmers of America. I am positive of that.
Knight – It might feel like your actions are just a drop in a bucket, but it takes every single little drop of water to fill a bucket. Your actions do matter and it does make a difference.