Interview with Gary Yourofsky

October 21, 2002
Topic: Ethical Vegetarianism, Tactics, Concerns
Method: Personal

VeganVanguard.com: First off, what are your thoughts on individuals who follow a vegetarian lifestyle based mainly on health concerns as opposed to more ethical concerns?

GY: I, of course, hope and wish everybody will be vegetarian or vegan for ethical reasons, but I’m willing to take what ever reason that people have as long as people are not torturing and killing animals and taking part in exploitation I’m fine. I have a sense of humor like everyone else, and me and my vegan friends we always joke about “we don’t understand those health based vegans and vegetarians their kind of weird people.” You know on a serious note whatever makes somebody stop eating animals is fine with me. In fact during my speech I know I focused probably 45 minutes on ethics, maybe five minutes on health and a couple of minutes on the environment. There are three reasons (for) why people should be vegan, ethics, health, and the environment. One of those reasons has to make sense to people. So if it’s health, its health, I’ll take it. You know from a compassion, from a purity standpoint, from a benevolent standpoint, I think we should stop doing it for ethical reasons. It’s wrong it’s unjust, it’s horrible, it’s an atrocity, its mean and it’s vicious and it’s violent and it makes no sense to continue doing this. So I guess all people come to that realization at some point.

VeganVanguard.com: Given the diverse variety of animal rights crusades activists can choose from to carry out. Do you feel that such a diversified front is advantages to the movement or do you think that at sometimes resources may be stretched too thin, as in too many issues for one person.

GY: I think diversity is great, that the realm of tactics, using the whole spectrum is important because who knows what one tactic is going to work. You know I’ve been condemned as a convicted ALF activist because I broke the law and freed animals. But whose to say that breaking down the walls of the “torture chambers” [slaughterhouses and confinements] isn’t the way to go, whose to say that protesting isn’t the way to go, whose to say that educating isn’t the way to go, or advertising, or writing your congressman, or trying to pass laws. There’s so many different routes to take I think it’s important everybody chooses a certain route that they feel comfortable with but they don’t condemn others for taking a different route.

I’ll be honest, I used to condemn people for taking a soft approach, for trying to write their congressman or pass laws. Now I’m to the point to where I just understand we have tactical differences. Its important to use them all, there needs to be an Animal Liberation Front like there needs to be a PETA, there needs to be a In Defense of Animal like there needs to be a Humane Society. You need a diversity out there to reach different people and who knows what issue is going to take someone into the ultimate goal of veganism. Is it going to be a dog and cat issue, is it going to be an issue with the fur industry (with) foxes being anally electrocuted, is it going to be the circus animals being beating? You don’t know which issue brings people into (the animal rights movement), because I ran those ads that you saw (during the speech) in Detroit. The best one was that circus ad; the one minute one, not the undercover footage but the one minute circus ad. We ran that sixty-nine times in a one month period on UPN Detroit and not only were people swearing off ever going to another circus again, but people called me back again to say “I’m going vegetarian” or “I’m now going vegan” from what they saw on the elephants. So of course I sent out information about everything and when I had them on the phone when they called I said “you think that’s horrible you want to see what they do to cows and pigs and chickens in slaughter houses” and they’re like “Oh my God what.” So the circus issue brought people into the vegan issue.

I think it’s important but I do understand because at times I’m thinking “Well what if we all just focused on circuses. Every single activist and every single group put tall their resources and all their pennies and all their dollars right into abolishing circuses?” You know what? I betcha we’d abolish them. Or (all our efforts) right into something else. I don’t know if that’s even feasible to get everyone to focus on one issue and drop everything else, but I understand where you’re coming from because I think a lot about tactics because I want this stuff to end in my lifetime. I don’t want it to continue. Unfortunately I think its going to continue long after I’m gone. I think all the time about what if we all just did circuses, then we all hit rodeos, then we hit the fur industry, and then we all hit veganism. I think maybe that’s what we should be doing but I don’t know. I don’t know if that’s the answer. It might be though, it’s never been tried, but I see the diversity thing for sure you can reach lots of people with different things.

VeganVanguard.com: My next question deals with anti-animal rights groups…

GY: (jokingly) People first? As if people weren’t first.

VeganVanguard.com: Many of the groups often defend, or rather they choose not to defend the ethical notion of exploiting animals and they tend to focus instead on what they’ve coined as the terrorist or know-nothing activist. They kind of try to vilify the activist and they don’t really touch on the ethical issues of it (animal rights). Why do you think this is, do you think they are hiding from it or do they not understand the true ethical concern?

GY: Like the hunting community claiming that we’re terrorists or something like that or the vivisectionists?

VeganVanguard.com: Sure, the hunting community or the slaughterhouses that may have their delivery trucks burnt [arson].

GY: I think it’s a huge case of denial. I even think it’s more than denial, I think it’s a huge case of mendacity; (of) lying, complete and utter lies because if they condemn themselves (then) now they’re out of business, now they don’t make money. Obviously they’re not getting the ethical reason for animal freedom on purpose. Or they aren’t, like most people, thinking logically and clearly about it. I’m hard pressed to understand why people don’t get it, especially when I’m done giving a lecture I fully expect every single person to walk out of this room and go vegan. Now, reality is it doesn’t happen. Do I always get people? Absolutely, that’s why I continue this, that’s why PETA has me doing this. Sometimes I get 22 people (to become animal rights advocates). In St. Mary’s College three weeks ago all 22 kids in a journalism class are now trying vegetarianism and they’re now writing papers about animal rights and me. The teacher told me this two days after. Sometimes only two people get it. At Kent State, for whatever reason, only two people out of a crowd of over seventy came up to me and said they were going to do this. Now that doesn’t mean people aren’t doing it because they aren’t telling me, but I like to go on what I’m hearing and what I’m feeling from the body impression. I mean today, I thought it went really well to be honest. I thought it was a great lecture. I don’t think there was any animosity from the crowd or anything, I think it went really well, but when I was at Kent State on September 18th and 19th, there was nothing but animosity in the room.

Anyway, I don’t know why some people get it and why some people don’t. Why they see an ethical reason for this (or) why they don’t. Probably nearly everybody is just simply misinformed or uninformed about the whole issue because they’ve never been told about it, they’ve never been shown what goes on. Like I said before during the Q & A (portion of the speech) there are no classes on slaughter houses and ethical reason. There are Ag classes, but there are no classes on why it’s wrong there are no classes on what circuses do or what vivisections do; everything is completely opposite. People just don’t know (about animal cruelty), but for those who are in the know, for those who are doing the exploitation it’s definitely denial or just not wanting to admit it because you’d be condemning your own.

Actually people are shocked that I befriended Ron Kagan a Detroit zoo director over the years. Ron happens to be a pretty cool guy; he hates circuses and rodeos, fur, hunting, and vivisection. He doesn’t get the vegetarian and veganism stuff and obviously the zoo stuff because I’d be asking him to condemn himself. I’ve befriended him over the years. He speaks publicly and condemns circuses and all those other things but to ask Ron to say “the zoos are animal prisons”, it’s just not going to happen. And why he doesn’t see that is because he thinks he’s doing a great job. Always in complete denial I guess, it’s mixed in and who knows why. I’ll be honest with you; I’m one of the most honest activists out there as I like to say, I’d rather have Ron Kagan of the Detroit zoo than any other person in that industry. I think he’s the world’s preeminent zoologist. I think he’s a really, really nice guy even though I don’t like the fact that he’s the warden of the animal prison in Detroit, I cannot deny that Ron Kagan is a very cool guy. He meets with me whenever I want; he calls me before he goes into meetings with the city council on trying to end pound seizures at the Detroit animal control shelters and selling animals to research labs, or ending the gassing of animals at the DAC where they still gas them. He called me and said, “I just got a meeting with the city council what should I say again.” I think he’s a really cool guy and you’d be hard pressed to find someone in that field that would sit there and talk with me. Remember when I said (in the speech) I don’t go out there to be enemies with anybody. I know I end up being an enemy to a lot of people, but I’d like to make Ron see the light and make Stone Apple Valley see the light. I’m trying to get Ron interested in setting up some animal rights lectures at the zoo if you can believe that. I’m even preparing for my hardcore friends (when they say) “what you’re lecturing at the zoo Gary?” “I’d lecture at the Stone Apple Valley slaughterhouse if they’d let me. What do you want me to the local health food store and lecture? What do you mean, that’s where I want to be that would be an awesome crowd.” They’re there because they want to see me. I think it would be a great crowd.

VeganVanguard.com: Some people have expressed concern, possible paranoia, about the rights of humans and how they feel (those rights are) becoming secondary to (the rights of) animals and that there is (an increasing amount of) pressure on their daily lives from animal rights activists. And I just wonder what your response to that would be.

GY: Poppycock. For anyone to think that their right to be free or do things in a benevolent, compassionate way, that their rights would be taken away is nonsense. I would ask that animals are treated as equals. Why can’t we have the same consideration for all animals like we do for each other like we should do for each other? Why must we get back to your own dog and cat, anybody would do anything for their own dog and cat they might even do anything for their neighbor’s dog and cat if they know them. What about the dog and cat at the shelter? We’re disassociated from these other animals and obviously we don’t care about them and we turn a blind eye. You know, we’re not in contact with most human beings on this planet but most logical, kind people completely oppose any form of human exploitation, of human slavery or human atrocities. That’s all we ask is for people to view animals as equals not as more important not as less important. That’s the problem now we think that they’re less important. So I think that’s complete and utter nonsense that they want to be scared about their rights being taken over. Was there another part to that question?

VeganVanguard.com: No, I think that’s it. Thank you for your time

|  |  | 
|  |  |  | 

Posted/Updated: 7/27/03