Inside D.C.
HSUS ain’t “moderate”
Does anyone honestly believe the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) is a “moderate” organization in philosophy or action? Well, in a piece written December 6 for Congressional Quarterly (CQ), a major Capitol Hill publication, the headline reads: “Pacelle: Projecting a Moderate Face on Animal Rights.” At least CQ got the “animal rights” part correct.
The CQ article, written by Phil Brasher, editor of CQ’s “Executive Briefing” on agriculture and food topics and the former DC ag editor for the Des Moines Register, details HSUS’ expansion of its Humane Society International programs against livestock and poultry production first in India – Wayne Pacelle, HSUS president, traveled to kick off the effort, complete with a speech by the Dalai Lama – with the idea of moving across the globe – next stop Brazil and Russia – to remind the world only free-roaming animals should be eaten, and the implicit message a vegetarian diet is great, but a vegan diet, such as Pacelle’s, is better.
The article goes on to extol Pacelle’s leadership of HSUS – “Under Pacelle’s leadership, the Humane Society has used a powerful combination of ballot initiatives, social media, undercover videotaping and corporate arm-twisting to force some of the biggest players in the meat industry to end farming practices the producers maintain are sound and ethical.” Examples given are the group’s anti-sow stall campaign and the unholy and short-sighted alliance of HSUS and the United Egg Producers (UEP) to seek federal regulation of egg layer environs.
“Moderate” is a relative adjective, its meaning dependent on what you consider extreme to begin with and what you’re comparing. In this case, CQ is comparing HSUS’ public face to that of PETA, the self-described media whore of the animal rights movement. If PETA’s actions are the benchmark, then Attila the Hun could be considered moderate by comparison.
Telling Congress and anyone else who reads CQ HSUS is “moderate” plays to the public’s misperception of what HSUS is, and unwittingly undermines the efforts of animal agriculture to out HSUS as the world’s largest animal rights – not welfare or “protection” – organization. This then plays to the politicians’ and the food executives’ desperate need to hear there is no danger now or later to playing let’s make a deal with HSUS.
It must be asked: What’s “moderate” about gaining access under false pretenses to private property in order to videotape without permission for as long as it takes to find something you can sell to the media to prove your political point? What’s “moderate” about timing the release of said videotape to your best media advantage? What’s “moderate” about taking the tax-deductible charitable contributions of your members to underwrite millions of dollars in multiple state ballot referenda? What’s “moderate” about propagandizing across social media? What’s “moderate” about corporate and political “blackmail?”
Choosing to negotiate with groups like HSUS to avoid corporate or political “arm-twisting” – I call it “blackmail” using the dictionary definition “to force or coerce into a particular action” – is proof of the truth in the Benjamin Franklin axiom “If you lie down with dogs, you will get up fleas.” There’s no such thing as a free lunch; eventually you’ll have to a pay a price.
And if the tactics don’t turn you off to this form of “moderation,” perhaps the hubris of HSUS might. Nearly 850 million of the world’s population are chronically hungry, and one third of those – roughly the population of the U.S. – lives in India, says the Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. And if 80% of Indians are Hindu – who don’t eat beef for religious reasons and most eschew poultry and fish for dharmic, karmic and other spiritual reasons – then the CQ’s explanation of why India is the HSUS target makes sense: “Meanwhile, Pacelle, as the India trip shows, sees no end to his group’s influence…He is particularly interested in expanding to countries where sufficient money can be raised (emphasis added) to support operations. India is one of those.” Or maybe it’s simply because PETA has an Indian office in Mumbai, the same Indian city where HSUS is opening its new digs.
-
-
This is a wonderful article that should be shared as much as possible. The general public needs to know exactly what HSUS is, and it is NOT the animal sheltering society that most people believe it to be. Please continue to write these articles and share them with your friends. HSUS is no friend to animals of any kind, and anyone who enjoys meat, or has a pet, or watches a circus, needs to know that HSUS is NOT on their side.
-
The most important word in the article to me was “projecting.” Meaning it is clear that hsus is not moderate but is putting on a mask to make their message more acceptable to the masses.
Great article! Good work!