The Hen Report: “Who invited the vegan?” | The Squirrel Who Crossed the Political Divide

Mariann Sullivan: I didn't know he was supposed to introduce himself either.

Jasmin Singer: He wasn't, I just was trying to, you know, keep.

Mariann Sullivan: organize this better.

Jasmin Singer: I was trying to keep things exciting and different and, you know, so that's why I did that. Well, anyhow, any who Mariann are?

Mariann Sullivan: And this is Fox.

Jasmin Singer: Okay. And, uh, and, and if we all introduce our animals, we'll be here for like hours.

Michael Dorf: Right. Mine will wander in the background periodically.

Jasmin Singer: Alright. Well, this week we are delighted to have Michael Dorf back.

He is, of course, a constitutional law scholar and professor at Cornell Law School, and he's here to talk about one of our favorite subjects and one of my dog's favorite subjects, squirrels. Well, I guess a very particular squirrel. So welcome back to The Hen Report, Michael.

Michael Dorf: Thanks. It's a pleasure to be here, although I do have a slight complaint. Um, so, uh, not the last time, but the time before that when I was, uh, part of The Hen Report, uh, you dubbed me your wingman, which I thought was a nice, a nice term, um, better than my proposal of Resident Rooster, which had all sorts of weird connotations.

But, but then, uh, last week you referred to, uh, another guest, uh, as Wingman and I, I felt kind of jealous ho honestly.

Mariann Sullivan: Oh no, it was Jan.

Michael Dorf: Yes, I know. It was, it was a great, it was a great episode. Uh, up until that moment.

Jasmin Singer: Yeah.

Then it all went downhill. Uh, we,

Mariann Sullivan: I had no idea that you thought this was an exclusive, uh, nomenclature.

Jasmin Singer: Practice, we practice wingman polyamory, uh, at Our Hen House, but if we didn't communicate that properly to you, then I think we should probably make a...

Mariann Sullivan: Polyamory is all about communication.

Michael Dorf: Yeah. All right. All right.

Well, I, I, it'll take me a while, but I'll accept it, I guess.

Jasmin Singer: Okay. All right. I'm sorry. You could, you could have like a get together with Jan without us to just, you know, get even ground here. Alright. Well, wingman number one.

Mariann Sullivan: All right. Let's get back to squirrels.

Jasmin Singer: Uh, we will chat with you in just a moment about a squirrel, but before we get to that, I just wanna remind our listeners that the Our Hen House podcasts, uh, are here for your consumption.

Rising Anxieties comes out on Tuesdays, The Hen report on Thursdays, and the long form interview Fridays. And bonus content for flock members comes out on Mondays. We are a podcast and we're on YouTube. Please subscribe and hit like wherever you listen.

I had a funny little thing just right before this. I got a text from my mom and I, I don't think, I think that when my mom listens or watches Our Hen House, she thinks that like we just did that episode, like even if it was from like 2015 or something, she'll, if she like, goes back into the archives, she'll be like, what was that movie? You know? And I'm like, what? That was decades ago that we talked about that. So she was like, I just listened to Our Hen House.

Mariann Sullivan: You're making your mother sound like an idiot!

Jasmin Singer: No, no, no. She's, no, she's lovely.

But she goes, so what was that protein?

Mariann Sullivan: Perfectly intelligent woman.

Jasmin Singer: She goes what was that protein you were talking about? I'm like I what? And so I messaged Vicki, and Vicki knew what she was talking about, so I asked Vicki if she can translate my mother to me from here on out. It was Juicy Marbles, by the way that she was. Michael, have, you tried Juicy Marbles?

Michael Dorf: I have, uh, it's delicious. Um, yeah. Yeah.

I haven't had their new product. I've only ever had the steak. Uh, you know, it, it looks like a sort of filet mignon, uh, in, in its, uh, uh, presentation, but it's quite good. Yeah.

Jasmin Singer: Yeah. It's quite good. Alright, Mariann, should we talk about the squirrel now?

Mariann Sullivan: Yeah I think we should ' cause that's what we're here for. I mean, we're talking about Peanut the squirrel, so we might seem a little late to this party because Peanut the squirrel was in the press quite a bit around the election. But there is more to be said and Michael is the one to say it. Um, probably a lot of you have heard about Peanut the squirrel and also about his companion who got much less press, Fred the Raccoon. Um, but we wanna talk about why this sad story is maybe a much bigger deal than, um, maybe animal activists and other people have given it credit for vis-a-vis people's attitudes towards animals. But before we start, maybe there are some people who. You know, there has been a lot of news since the election.

There's a lot going on, so maybe people actually didn't hear about it or missed some of the details or just don't remember. So, can you just kind of recap for us the story of Peanut and Michael?

Michael Dorf: Sure. So, um, uh, this happened a while back and I actually missed it when it first happened. A fellow named Mark Longo, um, rescued a baby squirrel, um, whom he named Peanut and apparently intended originally to rehabilitate Peanut and then release him into, uh, the wild, or, you know, the areas where squirrel lives, which are sort of near and among people often, uh, but uh, was unsuccessful in the, um, reintroduction process and so kept Peanut, uh, as a pet and um, and then made him into a kind of social media star. And, uh, Peanut had lots of followers across various platforms. They would do little videos and Peanut was apparently quite adorable, could do various tricks and so forth.

Um, uh, but it turned out that, uh, Mr. Longo did not have the license that one needs to have a squirrel as a domestic animal because squirrels are not classified under, uh, New York law. This was in New York State, uh, as, uh, you know, pet animals. Uh, and then, uh, amazingly enough, the Department of Environmental Conservation in New York, uh, sort of, uh, tracked him down.

Uh, and by that time he had also, uh, had another, uh, animal named, uh, Fred the raccoon whom he had rescued under similar circumstances, uh, and had started, uh, a little sanctuary that goes under the name Peanut's Freedom Farm. I'll say a little bit more about that in a moment. Um, but they came in and they seized both, uh, uh, Peanut and Fred and tested them for rabies.

But of course, the only way one can test for rabies is to kill an animal and examine, uh, its brain. And so they...

Mariann Sullivan: I, I think that was disputed, at least when I heard. That there are, there, you can keep them alive,

Michael Dorf: Well do you

Mariann Sullivan: that's much more labor intensive and maybe it involves some danger or whatever. It's a lot harder to do, but it's not, you actually can keep them alive for a certain amount of time.

Michael Dorf: Other thing you can do, of course.

Mariann Sullivan: My understanding.

Michael Dorf: There, there's, there is a very simple way to, uh, test for rabies that doesn't involve killing. What I meant by the only way is like to get a, a sort of, uh, chemical confirmation. The, the much easier way is you keep the animal isolated and you wait to see if, uh, you observe any symptoms of rabies because it doesn't have that long an incubation period.

You know, within a couple of weeks you'll know whether the animal has, has rabies, uh, but they didn't do that. They, um, so they euthanized both of these, uh, animals. Uh, they did not have rabies as it turned out. Uh, it probably was obvious. Um, and, uh, then, um, uh, Mr. Longo went on social media, uh, was understandably distraught, uh, and, uh, alerted his followers to the fate of Peanut and Fred. And there ensued a social media and real life firestorm against the government officials and the agency that had done this, uh, with, you know, the kinds of things that are, uh, somewhat unsavory about what happens when you get a social media mob, uh, riled up.

Here it was, um, it was justified, I think, that the people were upset. Uh, but they did so, you know, they expressed their anger in ways that are of course, inappropriate, like making death threats to, uh, some of the people, um, at the agency. And the result was that this, this agency apparently had to stop doing investigations for something like six months.

Um, the only reason I learned about it was there was a, you know, a story about this in the news recently. Uh, and that's, and that's how I learned about it. Um, I. What, what struck me as interesting and the rea, the thing that I, sort of, the reason I reached out to you about all of this was the kind of demographics of the people who were outraged about Peanut and Fred.

Uh, and you know, I of course haven't done any kind of a, you know, deep dive into it. I don't have the data about it, but just based on what was reported, it sounds like these are people who are not generally. In favor of animal rights. They are almost certainly overwhelmingly not vegan. There seems to be a kind of, um, politically conservative cast to them.

Uh, I'm not sure why that is. I think it's partly accidental that some of the people who had been promoting Peanut happened to be like podcasters and social media influencers who are more popular, uh, on, on the right. But when on the podcast they played some of the, the, you know, the death threats and other things that, that happened, uh, in some of these it was clearly, uh, you could clearly hear people saying things that were associated with the right, with Trump.

Um, yeah. And, and I, I found that fascinating, right? That, uh, here you can get a, a group of people all riled up about a squirrel and a raccoon even as they are, you know, uh, participating in a massive system of oppression of all sorts of other animals. Uh, it, it's not entirely surprising given that people who, you know, have pet dogs and cats will often not draw any connection.

But, you know, squirrels are, are, I guess a lot of people think they're cute. Raccoons can be cute, although people I think have an understandable fear of raccoons 'cause if you see them during the day, so forth, you worry about rabies. Um, but. It did strike me as at least potentially an opportunity for activism that reaches, um, a very wide and, um, you know, uh, somewhat untapped audience.

Jasmin Singer: How so? Like what specifically do you think that animal activists should take note of? Like, what's the best way to latch onto this?

Michael Dorf: So, um, I guess I have a, a, a general thought and a specific thought. The general thought is that it's a reason to be cautious in linking one's activism around animals to other causes. Now, uh, this is a topic I've thought a lot about. I've written a little bit about, uh, and it's a double-edged sword because right?

You know, I think a lot of us in the animal rights movement think of our, uh, cause as a reflection of broader principles of justice that also, uh, affect how we think about, um, uh, race, gender, uh, ethnicity, uh, all sorts of, you know, oppression, uh, of human beings. And so it's, uh, you know, it's often sensible and just natural to make a common cause with these broader social justice movements.

What I'm suggesting though is that there's a sort of sea of people out there. Who aren't on board with those social justice movements, uh, who might nonetheless have feelings about animals that can be leveraged to help, uh, in the quest for justice for animals. So that's the, the broad point.

So far as specifics go, um, I guess I think that, uh, it ought to be possible to, uh, have interventions, kind of similar to what the Non-Human Rights Project does with respect to, uh, you know, chimpanzees and elephants and cetaceans, uh, whereby you, um, you highlight the fate of particular animals. Could be a squirrel. It could be a raccoon, whatever it is.

Uh, and hopefully you get justice for that animal. But even if you don't, right, the Non human Rights Project has ultimately lost all of its habeas corpus cases. Even if you don't, um, win in the particular case, you build broader support and you sort of begin to change people's minds maybe more broadly.

Mariann Sullivan: Yeah, it is pretty ironic that that the right was able to get so much traction on this story by focusing on an individual animal when animal rights activists are constantly trying to get traction on stories and constantly failing. And, uh, and I do, I mean, I do think there's something really important to learn here. I am one of the few people at least that I know of in, in the recent past who I, I I, I don't wanna characterize exactly where you are, but who, who thinks that maybe we need to be a little cautious about, about, uh, always defining all the issues as as something that we all have to agree with all at the same time, because that's just not how people are. And I actually think that animals might be the only issue left, which I shouldn't use the word left, the only issue remaining on which the right and the left there actually are people. It, it doesn't sort clearly between right and left, between red and blue. There are people on both sides, um, of that divide who feel very, very strongly about animals. And, and, and then there are people on, on both sides of many other issues, who, who, you know, just just treat animal issues as, as, kind of irrelevant. And actually, I just wanted to talk a little bit about, I, I'm, I'm assuming, and I don't know this for a fact, that the reason this came to your attention recently was because of this, this story, this NPR story. Um, it was first on WNYC, I think, which obviously is the New York City, uh, channel.

And then it was repeated on the nationally distributed on the media.

Michael Dorf: Yeah, that's right.

Mariann Sullivan: And they did a pretty deep dive. They did a pretty deep dive on the story, probably a deeper dive than anybody's done before, and they focused a lot on the, enormous on, on the enormous attention to this story from right-wing figures, the crazy backlash, which was horrible, including to some people who weren't even involved.

And happened to be named Monica and

like kind of like got blamed for, for doing this to these animals. And um, and I thought the framing of this story was bad. I, I, I did not like it at all. I thought it was very tongue in cheek. I thought it was, did not look closely at what it was that the Department of Environmental Conservation might have done differently to be a little bit more sensitive to the story.

So there you go. That the, I, I find myself sort of on the right wing side of, I mean, assuming that the n that NPR could be used to represent, you know, a more lefty point of view. So I don't know where I'm going with the, with this question. I, I, I just, I just wonder what you think. Maybe if you agree with that about the story, and if so, what should they have talked about?

What should have happened here? Because a part of the reason, the story, I think, caught on with the right was because it was a sense of terrible governmental overreach. look at what, at blue State, in a blue state, these people just doing this horrible thing to these poor people and to these poor animals.

And the animals were, were centerpiece because people actually loved Peanut because he had been on social media, that they actually knew him. So I'm just curious to know, did you, do you also agree that the Department of Environmental Conservation comes off rather poorly here and that this could have been handled a good deal more sensitively?

Michael Dorf: Uh, yes. I mean, I'm, I share the criticism that you and others have leveled against them for their handling of this particular case. Uh. Um, but you're not implying that they came off rather poorly in the story, right? That is in the NPR story, right? It's about these, you know, these, uh, poor government, uh, employees just doing their job, and then they're hit by this social media firestorm.

And in that sense, it sort of connects a little bit to the, you know, all of what's happening to the public sector, to there's Doge and all this other stuff. Uh, and of course I have some sympathy for, for that. And I'm sure that it was very difficult for the particular people involved. And it's, it's not right that anybody, uh, should be, you know, get, should get death threats, uh, so forth.

Uh, but, but Right.

Mariann Sullivan: I wasn't suggesting

Michael Dorf: No, I know. I know you weren't. I know you weren't.

Mariann Sullivan: threats were appropriate,

Michael Dorf: Of course, of course not. Uh.

Mariann Sullivan: That maybe some criticism or, or some, some evaluation is in order here.

Michael Dorf: And, and I don't think the position that you're espousing is right wing, right. That's the whole point, is that it just happened to be that because of how, uh, segmented our social media universes are. This, uh, started resonating within the, you know, the right wing social media universe. And that's sort of cut off from the more left wing social media universe.

But you could as easily see, have seen the same story going through other channels and then it wouldn't have been something on the right. Uh, on the, the broader question though, uh, you know, I guess I think that if we lived in a more rational world, um, and a sort of kinder world, it would be possible to say something like the following without jeopardizing the cause.

Right? I think that oppression of animals is linked in various ways and is a manifestation of the same sorts of injustice that we see, uh, in racial, gender, and other forms of oppression. Actually, I would be able to say that. And then there would be people on the right who care about animals, but you know, for whatever reason have different views about race and gender and so forth, uh, who would say, yeah, I don't share that view, but let's work together on the animal issue. Uh, right, right. But what, what has happened over, you know, the last few decades is that the sort of, um, it's, it's harder to be, to have a la carte, uh, views on contested questions.

Uh, you know, so, so, and that even that, when they begin that way, they tend to, to blend. So just to give another example, a lot of the people who were in the RFK Junior MAHA world, I think started out as kind of crunchy lefties. Um, and, you know, uh, and I know a lot of these people.

Mariann Sullivan: As did he,

Michael Dorf: Right. That's right. Um, they're environmentalists, they're skeptical of, um, uh, corporate profits in, uh, right.

Yeah. I mean, and, and, you know, and some of the points they made are ones I agree with, right? That, you know, pharmaceutical companies are interested in turning a profit and they're not interested in getting you to eat a healthy diet, all these things. Right. Um, but then once RFK Junior gets associated with the Trump administration.

Um, it's very hard for people to say, well, I support this, but not that. Um, even though right, there's no logical reason why they couldn't. They could say, well, yeah, I think it's a good idea to get, you know, um, artificial colors out of foods. But, you know, uh, making it hard for people to get vaccines, that's crazy. Or whatever it is.

Um, and, uh, you know, and, and build coalitions on areas you agree with people and you know, sometimes you'll be in agreement, sometimes you'll be in disagreement. You could be fighting with the same people you're, uh, on one issue that you are working together with on other issues. Like that's the way that politics in a healthy democracy is supposed to work.

Uh, but it's not the way that it tends to work in our current degraded uh, circumstances, uh, which isn't just Trump, right? It's, it, it sort of predates that. Uh, and so it does pose this dilemma that if you want to see your activism on animals as related to your views about social justice more broadly, um.

You can do that and you can forge alliances with people in those other movements, but then you risk alienating other people and so it creates trade offs that ideally oughtn't exist.

Jasmin Singer: Yeah, it's, this is, this is tough. Like there's so much I wanna say here and I'm not entirely sure how to make sense of it, but I know that a lot of our listeners care deeply about intersectionality in, in whatever way that means for them. And you know, people come to a lot of assumptions about folks like who, you know, I walk into a room, I'm, I'm a, a vegan lesbian with tattoos. There's a lot of assumptions that could be made about me. Uh, but I, they're not, they're not accurate. I mean, I, could tell you they're not accurate. Uh, but, you know, that being said, I, I really don't wanna undermine the fact that our listeners care so deeply about this be about animal rights being an extension of a broader worldview.

I think I wanna underline what you're saying here, Michael, which is that, that's perfectly fine if you know people can be true to themselves and, and, and be intersectional in whatever way that means to them. But you are saying that it, it might come at a cost and, and you're not... am I hearing you right?

That you're not saying therefore do it this way or this way. You're just saying understand that it might come at a cost?

Michael Dorf: I mean, I, I mean, I myself think of my views about animals as part of a larger view about justice. Um, so, so those are my views. Um, right. It's not just that there, there's, there are these intersectional people out there. No, I, I have that same view. Um. What I'm identifying is indeed a risk, I think, of a certain kind of activism.

Um, but you know, there are, there are also benefits to that. One of which is that you might bring some people who are with you on the race and gender issues along with you on the animal issues, or, you know, we've, you know, you might, I didn't say you can, uh,

Jasmin Singer: I know. I'm sighing because really, I'm being completely anecdotal here, but I see this over and over again, going one way, and I, I've, I very, very rarely see it going the other way.

Michael Dorf: Well, let me just,

Jasmin Singer: I rarely see being able to bring folks in from other movements to care about animals, ra but people who care about animals can, in, in my anecdotal observation, bring, you know, get, get down with justice.

Michael Dorf: Yeah. So I agree with that. Um, but this is something we've talked about before. I do see a generational change. Um, especially with respect to people who care about environmental issues. Uh, that is right. You know, as recently as, yeah. Yeah. Right. I mean, as recently as just a few years ago, um, there were so many environmentalists who just didn't care about animals at all.

And now, um, they've begun to. And I see it mu much more in, uh, you know, people in their teens and twenties.

Jasmin Singer: Okay, well that's good. I mean, you are, Uh, you work with people, you around that age as a professor, and also that's the age of your kids. So I, I will defer to you there because what I'm seeing in the work that I've been doing in environmental circles, it has not been the same. And it's, it's disheartening, but it could just be, uh, you know, it could be other reasons. Who knows? And I'm

Mariann Sullivan: not, I mean, I'm sorry,

Jasmin Singer: No, please go ahead.

Mariann Sullivan: I, you know, it, I mean, whereas environmental, there are hints of, of that shift over. I just was gonna add, because I just saw it on TV last night. I, I watch Heather Cox Richardson a lot. She's one of the people I really rely on to try to get me through this very difficult time, uh, where our lives and country are falling apart.

And she was on with Joyce Vance, who is another commentator I'm not as familiar with, but I also think is very thoughtful and intelligence. They. A terrific interview. Really great, and towards the end they started talking about Joyce Vance's chickens and, um, and she has pet chickens, which apparently she's known online for, and she, they're very beautiful.

Their whole tone changed to like this like kind of cute little tone, which is exactly the way people talk about animals and animal issues. And of course, neither of them is remotely active and I doubt ever thinks about animal issues. And it just kind of reminds me what you just said, Jasmin. It goes one way.

I, I mean, I think that they know who cares about animal rights. I may not agree with everybody, uh, who cares about animal rights, but they have positions on different things that they've thought about and that they care about, and I respect that.

Jasmin Singer: Can I add to that? I'm sorry. Am I interrupting you now?

Mariann Sullivan: No.

Jasmin Singer: So I, I belong to a book club that's made up of a bunch of theater people and we read a book, uh, I'll, I'll look up the name in a second. But it was a fantastic Ya book about like this, um. know, queer man of color, uh, grew up kind of coming of age and, and it was, it was hard hitting, a really beautiful story. Ya. And, uh, and, and so we're sitting there and, and we start talking about the fact that the person who is hosting the, the book club that day lives right by the zoo. And, uh, she was saying that like there's a path that they put a little window in so that you could see through to the elephants. Like not in the zoo, but just right by her house.

'cause it's sort of above the zoo. And I, and I just jumped in and it was like, that's just really sad. I mean, like, maybe it would be better to visit like Mockingbird Sanctuary or something which is close by or and, and not just stare at animals in captivity. And it was like. The most. And then I go, and then I go, who invited the vegan? You know, like, because I was like, I, I just kind of needed to like pop the bubble or,

Mariann Sullivan: That

Jasmin Singer: but

Mariann Sullivan: That was good.

Jasmin Singer: Yeah. And, and it just like the issues that we were discussing as it relates to the book that we were reading, which I'll, I'll look at my phone in a second to see what it was called 'cause I forget, but it was about like gender issues and race issues and like, you know. And then suddenly nothing. About zoos. And, and the Seneca Park Zoo is one of the worst zoos in the country, by the way. Um, it's terrible. And it's like lauded here. It's just lauded. I digress. Please someone talk.

Mariann Sullivan: Before we move on, unless, unless you wanted to add something, I know you mentioned that you wanted to talk more about the sanctuary, in the Peanut case. Is that true? And I, I didn't wanna get off before you had a chance to do that. 'cause we didn't revisit that.

Michael Dorf: Uh, no. All I wanted to say was that, you know, they mentioned the sanctuary and so I clicked on over to it. I haven't visited the sanctuary, uh, but it, um, it looks lovely. But there's no indication whatsoever that they are doing any kind of, uh, activism or promotion of veganism or opposition to animal agriculture or any of the things that we tend to associate with farm sanctuaries.

Now, this isn't specifically a farm sanctuary, right? So there are other kinds of animals there, but, um, it's, uh, it does sort of suggest that maybe the connection to the right wing social media is not a complete accident. Right. Or the fact that it's, it's social media that's not animal activist social media.

Right. That is, if it were, um, you know, the kinds of, uh, uh, people who, who we think of as in the movement, then they would've been in conversation with that. But this is no, this is, they've set up their sanctuary the way that somebody who had a, you know, a squirrel that they thought was cute, would, would, um, and, uh, you know, uh, I'm glad they're doing that.

Um, and, and it even says that education is part of their mission, but they're educating people about specific things that I don't think of as continuous with the broader, uh, animal rights movements. That's all I wanted to say, say about that.

Mariann Sullivan: Yeah, I mean it's similar to, to what we were both saying about, about, uh, people's blind, uh, both in the, talking about Joyce Vance's chickens and talking about people thinking the zoo is cute. People refuse to see animals as a social issue, as a, as an important issue. And they refuse to see the suffering behind the cute stories. But the cute stories do seem important because people actually care. They really real, they pe. I mean, there are probably some crazy social media people out there, but I think the vast majority of people who were posting about Peanut were furious because this little squirrel had been killed unnecessarily.

I mean, people actually do care. So, I don't know, maybe that's progress that we've made, but, but we are not getting it into a big picture at, uh, at looking how animal advocates should be looking um at these issues and, and, and speaking of the big picture, what do you think about what's going on right now?

Like how can, I mean, things are crazy. We all know that. The world is crazy. There are almost inevitably it assuming going to be big changes, maybe they're going to be very bad. Hopefully they're going to be very good, but so much is being dismantled that there are going to be changes. Have you had any thoughts about how we can work to make the future that we wanna see come true, and not just in fighting authoritarianism, but including animals in, in decency?

Michael Dorf: Uh, yeah, I have thoughts. Um. Not all of them, uh, are optimistic. Um, you know, most of my time, uh, that I spend professionally is devoted to those questions and not having to do specifically with animals because I teach and write about constitutional law. Um, you know, I have a new blog post up today talking about the Supreme Court's decision to allow racial profiling to go forward in Los Angeles and apparently, uh, throughout the country.

Um, you know, i, I, it, it's, uh, it's, it's possible I suppose, uh, that things will get bad enough for enough people that we will see, you know, uh, very radical change. Um, I, that that always presents opportunities, but it presents opportunities sometimes for things to get even worse. Right? You know, there are, there are pl there are plenty of historical examples of revolutions leading to, you know, following the course of the, the French Revolution, right?

So there's this democratic revolution and it's quickly followed by the terror, and then it's followed by backsliding into, uh, Napoleon. Um, and you see that in, you know, repeated in, in lots of places. Uh, so, I guess I, but it's, it's, it's a chaotic, uh, process. Um, so I don't count on that. And I'm not a Trotskyite I don't think, like, well, the worst things get the better because that makes it more possible for revolutionary change.

I guess I think that on the animal side, uh, pretty much what I've thought for a long time, which is that you just have to work on people sort of one at a time. Right. There's, you know, I, I, I'm not against trying to make systemic change. It's just that it's very hard to make systemic change without having the levers of power, which our movement doesn't currently have. To get to the point where we do requires changing hearts and minds of a critical mass.

There are a lot of people working on that. Um, you know, it's something we do in our daily lives. Uh, and then this is something that you've talked about on the podcast, and I think it's in some of the, some of this great reporting on Vox, right? Which is that, uh, it's unrealistic for anybody to think they're going to, uh, solve injustices in the world, in their lifetime, or really in the long run, right?

You can, you can sort of chip away at stuff, but that doesn't mean that one ought to think that the things you do individually don't matter, right? They matter in the same way that, you know, um, one's ethical conduct, uh, in every aspect of life matters, right?

The, so the, the fact that, you know, um, there are, uh, tens of thousands of people, hundreds of thousands of people, uh, being killed in unjust wars all over the world, right? Doesn't mean that I'm gonna say, yeah, what the hell? I should just start killing people myself. Um, the, you know, we have to act with integrity, and I think that's worth something, um, regardless of its impact on the, the broader world. So that's my.

Jasmin Singer: Hmm.

Michael Dorf: My philosophy in

Jasmin Singer: well

Michael Dorf: nutshell.

Jasmin Singer: So the, the book.

Mariann Sullivan: Not cheerful, but well said.

Jasmin Singer: Well, as we said earlier, welcome to Our Hen House. Uh, the, name of the book I was talking about before for anyone who's curious is The Black Flamingo by Dean Ada. And it's, it's a very short read, but it's very good. Alright, before we go, uh, we wanted to mention this reading that's coming up in New York City for folks who are in New York, and it's being organized by the Earth Law Center and it's called The Animals Lawsuit Against Humanity.

It's a live reading and fireside chat. And that is, we'll, we'll, we'll link to it in the show notes, but it's, it's.

We just heard about it. It sounds really

It's on September 24th at the Five Angels Theater on 10th Avenue in New York City. And it says, join us for the premier stage showing of this ancient fable in which animals take humans to court for their poor treatment. Uh, which is I just, man, I wanna go to that so much. Michael, you go to the city a lot. Do you think there's a chance you'll wind up going to this?

Michael Dorf: What's the date again?

Jasmin Singer: the 24th?

Michael Dorf: Of, of this month?

Jasmin Singer: Yeah. September.

Michael Dorf: What kind of, what kind of day is that? That's, that's a Wednesday. That seems extremely unlikely 'cause I teach on that day. Yeah.

Jasmin Singer: And bring the class. Bring the whole class. It's law related. Uh, I, if you, well, if

Michael Dorf: Yeah,

Jasmin Singer: wind up going to this and you're listening right now, let us know. 'cause I'd love to hear about it from someone who was there. So Mariann, is there anything else I'm missing or, uh, anything we wanted to chat with Michael about while we have him, before we let him go?

Mariann Sullivan: Actually wanted to chat with him about his course, but I think that that might have to wait until the,

Jasmin Singer: Okay.

Mariann Sullivan: until our

Michael Dorf: I, I can give you a teaser.

Mariann Sullivan: episode.

Jasmin Singer: Okay.

Mariann Sullivan: Yeah, please.

Michael Dorf: So, um, uh, on Monday of this week, I had, uh, John Adenitire and Raffael Fasel as guests. John was in person and Raffael was kind enough to join us, uh, remotely even though it was pretty late in, uh, the UK. Uh, and they were great. Um, we had a really good two hour conversation. We probably could have gone for another three or four hours.

Uh, the students had good questions. Um, you know, only two of the students are vegan that I know of. Um, so some of the questions were, uh, kind of silly, like, well, why is sentience your criterion and so forth? And, but they had, you know, they took like the question seriously and answered them, and it was, that was terrific.

Uh, so we can talk more about that at some other time. And then I had one other tiny thing I wanted to say, uh,

Jasmin Singer: Yeah.

Michael Dorf: co that comes out of, um, Mariann your Risings Anxieties report for this week. So for those, uh listening to the full suite of the, Our Hen House podcasts. Um, you mentioned, uh, at one point, uh, this defense of what is done to dogs, uh, in laboratories as, well these animals are bred for that. That's what, that, that's their purpose, and you appropriately scoffed at that. So I just wanted to give a plug for my, um, my article, uh, with Sherry Colb, uh, you know, called, If we didn't eat them, they wouldn't exist. Right? Which, in which we take this idea seriously and try to explain, uh, what's wrong with it.

And, and there is something wrong with it. But it turns out that giving a like philosophically rigorous response is more difficult than one might think, but it turns out to be more difficult also for the ways in which people make that kind of argument about terrible human institutions like, uh, slavery.

Mariann Sullivan: I am sure that that is a brilliant deep dive for people into deep dives into these thought processes because, uh, there is nobody better at that than, than you and your late wife, Sherry Colb. So that, let's, let's link to

Jasmin Singer: Yes.

Mariann Sullivan: send us that

Michael Dorf: Uh, I'll do that. Yep.

Mariann Sullivan: that in the show, in the show notes for people who are interested in that deep dive.

And I, yeah, I'm, I, I'm, I'm so glad that you listened and, uh, and, and agreed with me that it is the most offensive thing in the world when somebody says they were born for that, like, who the fuck do you think you are to say that?

Michael Dorf: But that's actually our, that's actually the core of our argument. It's, it's, uh, if we didn't eat them, they wouldn't exist. Colon, who the fuck do you think you are?

Jasmin Singer: On that note, uh, yeah. Do you ever disagree with Mariann? Except for the fact that we called Jan a wingman. Is that the first time, or do you

Michael Dorf: Yeah. No, that's not,

Mariann Sullivan: don't think I was wrong.

Michael Dorf: No, we agree about everything.

Jasmin Singer: Oh, okay. Got it.

Mariann Sullivan: so far,

Jasmin Singer: Noted. Noted. Alright, well thank you Michael Dorf for joining us. Can you just say for our, our audience, the name of your blog and the best way for people to find you?

Michael Dorf: Thanks. It's Dorf on Law. That's one word, D-O-R-F-O-N-L-A-W. It's dorfonlaw.org. Uh, you can follow that on Blue Sky. Um, or I have a Facebook fans page, uh, as well. Or you can just go directly to the blog. You can get, uh, email updates about when I have new posts. I post, uh, new content there pretty much every weekday about, uh, 40 to 50% of it is written by me. Uh, much of it written by my co blogger, Neil Buchanan, who also happens to be vegan, and then a few other folks, uh, blog there as well. I also have a column on, uh, verdict, which is on the Justia at justia.com and that's every two weeks.

Mariann Sullivan: And occasionally, um, more than occasionally one of your articles or Neil's articles is about

Michael Dorf: That's right.

Mariann Sullivan: And I just wanna mention that fairly recently you did an um, a, a, an entry in your blog about a case in Houston involving Faraz Harsini and a co-defendant and I will be interviewing the, I found out about that case from reading your blog, and I'll be interviewing those lawyers for this week's, for this month's Animal Law

Michael Dorf: Oh, that's great. Look forward to hearing that.

Jasmin Singer: Thank you Michael so much and thank you for those of you watching and listening, don't forget to like this episode or leave a comment on YouTube or Apple Podcasts and catch our next episode tomorrow, that's Friday, with activist Adam Durand. It's a great one. You won't wanna miss it. Bye.​