I especially liked the parts with the personal anecdotes. I agree that welfarist-abolitionist framing is a strategic framing by Francione aimed at persuasion rather than faithfully representing the reality. Many historical abolitionists wouldn’t be classified as abolitionist by Francione’s framing.
I would like to add that insider/outsider status is more related to the tactics than the demandingness of your asks. No matter how small your asks are, if you are doing undercover investigations then it’s pretty difficult to be seen as an insider. On the other hand, some vegan organisations often have much easier time engaging with companies because they don’t do any confrontational campaigns against companies.
That’s a good point about tactics vs. demands. It’s interesting because in theory, we might think that radical tactics could be effectively paired with moderate demands and vice versa. That is, if you’re asking for something most people agree with, more people would support using radical tactics to win it, whereas if you’re asking for a fringe goal, you’d want to avoid alienating people further. Yet this is the opposite of what has happened in (at least) the U.S. animal and environmental movements in the last couple decades. Groups like XR and DxE pair radical demands with radical tactics, while HSUS/THL and the Sierra Club are more moderate on both fronts. But I suppose I’m conflating outside with radical and inside with moderate which isn’t actually what I was trying to say in the post. I’ll need to think about your point a bit more!
I especially liked the parts with the personal anecdotes. I agree that welfarist-abolitionist framing is a strategic framing by Francione aimed at persuasion rather than faithfully representing the reality. Many historical abolitionists wouldn’t be classified as abolitionist by Francione’s framing.
I would like to add that insider/outsider status is more related to the tactics than the demandingness of your asks. No matter how small your asks are, if you are doing undercover investigations then it’s pretty difficult to be seen as an insider. On the other hand, some vegan organisations often have much easier time engaging with companies because they don’t do any confrontational campaigns against companies.
That’s a good point about tactics vs. demands. It’s interesting because in theory, we might think that radical tactics could be effectively paired with moderate demands and vice versa. That is, if you’re asking for something most people agree with, more people would support using radical tactics to win it, whereas if you’re asking for a fringe goal, you’d want to avoid alienating people further. Yet this is the opposite of what has happened in (at least) the U.S. animal and environmental movements in the last couple decades. Groups like XR and DxE pair radical demands with radical tactics, while HSUS/THL and the Sierra Club are more moderate on both fronts. But I suppose I’m conflating outside with radical and inside with moderate which isn’t actually what I was trying to say in the post. I’ll need to think about your point a bit more!