Wool, Wealth, and Walking Out: Why the Animal Industry Is Having a Terrible Week | Rising Anxieties

Uh, don't forget we're podcasts. We're on YouTube. Watch, listen, subscribe to all that.

And, uh, first of all, I just want to talk a little bit, this is a little personal about Our Hen House, but I do want to talk about Marshall BioResources' anxieties rising about us and our, our recent interview with Gretchen Primack and Ella Majors, uh, and they left this comment on YouTube, and I en- I enjoyed it, so I thought you might too. Uh, I love that anybody's worrying about us.

" This is a deceptive activist talking point..."

they don't say what is the deceptive activist talking point. They just left the comment. So I guess they mean everything we said, I don't know. "...meant to spread dangerous disinformation." Uh, also don't indicate what was disinformation. "Members of such groups are facing serious felony charges, including burglary, theft, and criminal damage to property resulting from their behavior elsewhere."

Well, uh, such groups, like, like this is really not very specific. Uh, "Our priority is to keep our employees, animals, and the community safe." Yeah, they really want to keep their animals safe. Uh, "and we urge participants to abide by all instructions from law enforcement, as well as laws such as the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act."

They like to rip that one out, don't they? Just to, uh, just to sound scary. I, I, I would remind you that, uh, that the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act specifically says, specifically has a provision that it is not meant to interfere with people's First Amendment rights. Uh, I've always objected to that provision because you shouldn't have to put it in a statute that it, it's not intended to interfere with people's First Amendment rights, since Congress isn't allowed to interfere with people's First Amendments rights.

But you know, it still, it still is in there. So, uh, you know, maybe you should pay attention to that, Marshall BioResources. We'll be talking more about, about the March to End the Animal Testing and Marshall, uh, later in the week. Uh, but I thought, I, I thought you'd enjoy the, the idea that we had personally raised some anxieties out there.

Um, all right, uh, some anxieties that aren't specifically from us, but from a lot of other people in the animal protection movement, um, from Hordes Dairyman, um, Animal activism is a billion-dollar network. Yeah, I, I hope that's true. I, uh, so they ha-- This is about the chart that the Animal Agriculture Alliance has put together about all of the groups, which, you know, sadly Our Hen House is not on that list, which does make me depressed.

Um, and they say that research from the Animal Agriculture Alliance presents a different story from the one, uh, from the one presented by the industry, which according to them, is that animal activists are presented as passionate individuals fighting for personal causes they believe in. Oh, no, no, no, no.

Their research shows that it's a very different story. "It's a well-funded network of multi-million dollar organizations who are working to eliminate consumer choice by any means necessary." Oh, I wish we had multimillion dollars. We're not one of the multimillion dollars organizations, I can assure you. Uh, and, um that, that, that's kind of the, the main point they're, they're trying to make, that, you know, it doesn't have anything to do with cruelty to animals.

We're just in it for the money. You know, uh, of course, when they put all the, these dollars together, they say 1.07 billion in annual, annual revenue. They're counting every single penny that's donated for any s- every, you know, all animal causes. But still, it seems high. Uh, I hope it's true. The-- oh, no, it's not-- it doesn't seem high because they specifically are referring to Coefficient Giving.

I forgot about all the effective altruism money. It really is a lot of money. Uh, and, and, uh, they're giving, um, oh, it says $26 million to the cause, including 10 million in general support to The Humane League, then, um, Plant-Based Foods Association, Compassion in World Farming USA, and to The Guardian for, um, you know, to promote their, their reporting on journalism on farm animal welfare.

And, um, "since 2016, $143 million has been allocated for cage-free reforms, $99.7 million for broiler chicken welfare, $45 million for fish welfare, and $48 million to support alternatives." You know, you may or may not think that's money well spent, but let's face it, it's not our money and we don't control it. Are you shocked that, that one of the main things they're spending money in is lobbying?

I mean, if they're spending that much money on lobbying, they, they, uh, God knows what they're doing with it. Those are some pretty expensive lunches. Um, also the other tactics, however, aside from lobbying, that are used by the animal activists most commonly are vandalism, animal liberation, and trespass. You know, a little bit more my style.

Um, as these groups persist, it says, "It's important that each of us in the farm and food community are doing our part to increase transparency about what actually happens on the farm. If we don't tell our stories, who are we letting tell their version for us?" Uh, yeah. Right. I'm not even gonna comment on that.

Oh my God. They're so full of it. Uh, from The New Scientist: Why is it time to restate the case for the importance of research on animals? Uh, I'll tell you why, because a lot of people are seriously questioning it. Recent progress, it goes on to say, alternatives to animal testing is hugely welcome. Yeah.

I, I'm-- well, you know, maybe it is. I don't know. "But talk of phasing out animal research completely is misleading and could even be dangerous to scientists." Uh, whereas animal research, I guess, is dangerous to animals. Um, you know, talk of phasing it out, it may be misleading from your perspective, but it's not from mine.

Uh, I think it's getting damn near possible. They don't like that, though. "All of a sudden Governments have begun to talk about something that once seemed impossible, the end of animal testing." Uh, yeah, actually, that's true. "The coming of age of technological alternatives to some kinds of animal research is to be celebrated.

But some of these talk of phasing out animal testing when the truth is that animal testing cannot and will not be ended entirely." Uh, who put you in charge of the world? Like, like, yes, it can, and yes, it will. Well, I don't know whether it will. You know, I, I don't control the future, unlike them. They seem to think that they control the way everything will happen.

"There will always be a need for certain kinds of animal research to ask fundamental biological questions and ensure drug safety. If we send out the message that animal testing can be phased out, we risk painting the scientists who continue it as willfully causing harm to animals and could take us back to those dark and violent times."

Uh, talking about how animal activists are, like, gonna go out and, you know, murder the scientists, which, you know, like, never happened. Uh, you know, what they're saying is that the same old story, we have to do animal research, and there are things we can find out if we do animal research and, and therefore it's not gonna go away.

Well, you know, there are other considerations into whether, like, something will resolve your curiosity about something, even if that's important. I mean, let's face it, it would be really, really useful to do research on humans. You know, we could, we, we could do research on the terminally ill, uh, against their will, or we could do research on prisoners, or we could do research on, you know, ethnic groups that we don't like.

We could do all those things. We would find out lots of useful information, but we don't do it because it would be wrong. So that can en-- the question of whether something is right or wrong can enter into whether we're going to do it. Not only-- the, it's not-- They act as if the only question is whether we can find out useful information.

Now, that question has dramatically reduced, but they're saying it's not zero. Uh, so what? It still might dawn on people that what we're doing is immoral, and I bet there are other ways to find out things. I bet if you really, really tried, Mr. Scientist, you could figure something out. Uh, but no, they say, "Let's be clear-eyed.

The push to reduce animal testing where safe and possible is truly welcome, but the end of animal testing as a whole remains impossible." Uh, yeah, they th- they just think they're in charge. Uh, maybe they're starting to figure out that maybe they're not?

Workers walk out after fourth death at Smithfield meat plant.

This is really sad. This is, uh, uh, I think it's in Illinois, this plant. It's the, um, the fourth worker who has been killed. It didn't say in, in how long. This is from, uh, Plant Based News. And, and, uh, the thing that really upset these workers, I think... I mean, obviously what upset them is that this guy who-- Patum Mupinda, the 44-year-old maintenance employee, and I, I-- it was-- it's not clear how he had been killed.

It was in a, quote, "workplace incident." That's what they were told. Uh, and, and so people went into work, and, uh, and management just said, "Okay, w- you know, just start working like it's all fine, like let's go." And they were pretty upset, and a lot of people walked out. Management is saying that they let them walk out, but, you know, that doesn't sound like, uh, what had happened.

They quote some worker here as, uh, "I got sick to my stomach, and I just didn't feel right as a person being there. That's kind of disgraceful, not only to the employee who had passed, but to all employees of the company and to his friends and family. No respect, making the employees work after that had happened, like he was just a number."

Uh, in the US, apparently there are approximately two amputations per week in slaughterhouses. Uh, so they are not only horrible for the animals. Of course, they're, like, beyond horrible for the animals. I mean, they shouldn't exist at all. But it's worth remembering, like, they're horrible in other ways as well.

Um, alright. Perspective from Ag Daily. Why can't ranchers just rebuild the herd? As we all know, beef is very expensive these days, in spite of the fact that, that, uh, the administration, the Trump administration allowed the import of all of these, like, uh, anonymous allegedly beef from Argentina, uh, because there aren't enough dead cows.

You just, you gotta have enough dead cows. So this is from Brandy Buzzard, who she w- she is a rancher. Um, and she says, "People are constantly asking, 'If beef prices are so high, why don't ranchers just raise more cows to meet demand?' Dear readers, if only it were that easy." Uh, she's very, um, she's, she's very into how smart she is.

And, you know, obviously anybody would know that you can't replace cows in a month. Well, apparently President Trump didn't know, but, um, everybody else would know that. They-- It takes a long time for cows to grow. And she points out that the beef cow herd has been shrinking for years, thanks in large part to widespread and prolonged drought across cattle-producing regions.

Then she goes into this whole thing, um, about, you know, "As a ranching family, we have no-- if we have no grass, we're forced to buy expensive hay and supplemental feed," or, you know, like, I don't know where they're getting the hay either if there's this huge drought, "or cut our, cut our herd numbers back." And, uh, and, you know, she goes through this whole thing about how long it takes the calves to grow and, uh, and, and how it would take years before her heifer calves provide a single dollar of return on their investment.

You know, uh, smallest violin right here. Um, and but, but the thing that she kinda glides over, she talks about whether they should kill the cows now and make a lot of money or try to build the herd by keeping the cows and, and breeding them. She's missing the fact that, uh, or not missing the fact, she-- Her assumption is, is that, you know, there's drought now and, and then things will get better.

I mean, she doesn't specifically say that, but she just says the weather is kind of a gamble. Uh, honey, no. No. Like, I know you don't wanna think that climate change exists, but the drought is not gonna disappear. Uh, it's so naive. "The overall takeaway," she says, "is the cow herd has been declining for years, and it will take years to rebuild it."

She's totally going on the assumption that drought is temporary. I'm totally going on the assumption that things have changed. Time to wake up and smell the dead animals. Um- Poultry producers face another spike in feed costs. This is from Watt Poultry, and it's a really very similar theme. Yield prospects have been dampened by drought, fueling supply concerns.

And, uh, this is just talking about how, um, uh, chicken feed apparently has just gotten extremely expensive, and apparently feed accounts for up to 70% of the cost of raising commercial broilers and hens, which is what they call them. And, uh, and, and you know, that, that as a result they're running... Like, why don't these people, why didn't these people know that this was going to happen?

Alright, I'm not gonna dwell on that because I have much more interesting things to talk about, and that's PETA. Forget- This is from The Daily Telegraph in the UK. "Forget fur, the animal rights nuts are coming for your wooly jumper." And I, I assume even if you're not in the UK, you know that a jumper is what we call a sweater.

Isn't a sw- isn't sweater, like, just the worst word? I mean, it's the thing that makes you sweat? Ah, anyway, I, I digress. Um, and this is talking about the PETA protests at, at recent fashion shows about f- about they've moved on from fur because a lot of fashion shows have moved on from fur, and I love the fact that they are immediately jumping in and talking about wool.

I mean, that's how you do it. As soon as they give up on one thing, you jump on the next 'cause, you know, all the animals are suffering. At least that's what I think. It's not what the author of this ar- article thinks. "Winter is on its way, and so like many other people in this country, especially pensioners," you know, we really wanna mention, like, people who don't have a lot of money 'cause, you know, we really care about them.

"You may be feeling worried about the extortionate cost of your heating bills. Still, not to panic. You could always try to keep warm by putting on a nice wooly jumper, can't you?" Apparently wool is the only, the only fabric that can keep you warm. Um, sorry, but no, I'm afraid you can't because a bunch of animal rights activists have apparently decided that wearing wool is every bit as evil as wearing fur.

Uh, you know, you still can. Like, you, you... They just would disapprove of what you're doing, so that's a little odd. Talking, talking about the protests and going on to say, "You may be thinking, but hang on a second, what's wrong with wool? You don't have to kill a sheep in order to shear it. In the eyes of the protesters, however, such an attitude is grossly insensitive because as their placards make clear, sheep suffer."

Like, yeah, they do...why is that an odd thing to say? I guess 'cause you don't want that to be true, or, or sheep are so silly you don't have to care. Um, I don't suppose there's much use in pointing out that, this is my favorite ar- article, if it weren't for farmers, there would be quite a lot fewer sheep in the world.

It's, like, they still are using this... I think I, there was a story last week that I reported on with the same kind of argument, not about sheep, about somebody. Oh, yeah, ducks raised for, for foie gras. Like, if, if, if the, if they weren't bred and force- forcibly bred in order to reproduce, uh, in order to exploit them, they wouldn't exist.

Like, so that's a good reason. You know, I think that was a, that was one of the major arguments for slavery. Um, but anyway. But it also claims that, "farmers ensure that their sheep are well-fed, helped deliver their young, call the vet when they're sick." Yeah, I'm sure sheep are just living the life of Riley.

Um, "which means that sheep enjoy rather better, safer, and longer lives than they would if they were forced to survive in the wild." Like, the alternative is not to release all the animals into the wild. Th- th- this is a silly thing to say. You don't say that. No, the, the alternative is to not to breed them in order to exploit them.

Can we, could somebody explain that to these people? Do these loons genuinely love animals, or do they just hate human beings? All right, don't quote me. Promise you won't quote me, but sometimes I really do hate human beings. But not now. I like all of you. Uh, so there's that. I'm also gonna recommend an article.

This is not a Rising Anxieties article. It's a, it's a actually a video, but this article, the, the article in Current Affairs that I'm looking at, um, uh, has the transcript of the video, but the video is on YouTube, and it's just a discussion based on an article that I already talked about that had been in The New Republic titled How MAGA Stole Animal Rights From the Left, and it, by Aaron Reaganberg and, um, Aster Taylor.

And this, this is just a, an issue that we all have to be on top of because things are changing rapidly vis-a-vis the politics of animal rights. I mean, as we saw in that article about, um, about how concerned they are that the government is becoming interested in, uh, in changing policies on animal testing, and they are freaked out.

And this is a moment that we have to pay attention to. And, you know, it, it's the only bipartisan issue left, and I'm telling you, for the moment, at the moment, as these are, this points out, these are bipartisan at the moment, and the Republicans are owning this, and, like, uh, get on the stick, Democrats.

Not totally. I'm not saying totally, but they better catch up because I know a lot of people on the Democratic side would be all over this issue. It's just that there's a lot going on right now, I guess, and as usual, it doesn't take priority. Well, put it, put it, level up here because the Republicans are noticing that this is a really good issue And, uh, and, you know, if we could make this a really bipartisan issue, it would be the only one in Washington.

The only one. So there are op- there are political opportunities here, and, uh, I love that they, they did this article, and I love that there's now this recording, this discussion about the article on YouTube, so check that out. And, um, you can also l- read it in Current Affairs magazine. All right, I think that, I think that's all I got for you.

Uh, it's gonna be a good week on Our Hen House, so make sure you tune in. And thank you so much for joining me. Don't forget to subscribe, like, and comment, and I will see you next time.

​