ANIMAL WARFARE: ‘Militant Animal Rights Activity: Terrorism, Extremism or Something Else?’
The adoption of the label 'eco-terrorism' and the labeling of militant animal rights actors as domestic terrorists in the U.S. occurred over a relative short period of time. It has resulted in the mainstreaming of the term within both the U.S. intelligence and legislative communities, and has allowed for the harsher sentencing of activists.
RACHEL MONAGHAN: Since the early 1970s, the United Kingdom (U.K.) has experienced political violence undertaken by militant animal rights actors. This violence has included the use of car bombs and incendiary devices, which are more akin to the tactics of a terrorist campaign. Similar acts in the United States have been described as “eco-terrorism” yet this label has not gained traction in the U.K. This article is concerned with the labeling of militant animal rights actions in the U.K. and explores the labels that have been applied by the print media, notably The Guardian to the actions of those animal rights actors who have utilized or espoused illegal and violent tactics in the pursuit of their cause. Moreover, the article takes a more in-depth look at the labeling of the group Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) in its campaign against Huntingdon Life Sciences and its business partners. How actions are labeled can have repercussions in shaping the public debate and policy implications.
The vast majority of animal rights actors worldwide engage in legal and peaceful tactics such as marches, protests, letter writing, email or online petitions as well as public information stalls. However, a very small number of individuals and groups have engaged in illegal actions in order to pursue their agenda—this is referred to in this article as militant animal rights actions. Moreover, some militant animal rights actors have used political violence including arson attacks, car bombs and incendiary devices. Such acts have been labeled as “eco-terrorism” in the United States (U.S.) where the actions of militant animal rights actors and radical environmentalists are taken together under this umbrella term.
Hirsch-Hoefler and Mudde define eco-terrorism as a “strategy that employs the threat or use of force or violence to instill fear in (a subset of) the population with the ultimate aim of […] the ending of environmental destruction and animal rights abuse” [emphasis in original]. Moreover, Sumner and Weidman found in their research that there has been a growing acceptance of the term in the U.S. amongst journalists and their sources and within government. Similarly, Wagner found that newspapers have increasingly framed ecotage, that is to say those illegal acts such as vandalism, arson and threats undertaken by activists to protect nature (including animals), whilst not posing a threat of harm to humans, as terrorism.5 Indeed, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) was added to the domestic terrorism list by the FBI in 1987 following an arson attack on the University of California, Davis, Animal Diagnostics Laboratory, which destroyed a building and 20 vehicles, causing $5.1 million in damage…
This adoption of the label eco-terrorism and the labeling of militant animal rights actors as domestic terrorists in the U.S. occurred over a relative short period and has resulted in the mainstreaming of the term within both the U.S. intelligence and legislative communities. Moreover, it led to the introduction of specific legislation targeting eco-terrorism at the state and federal level and allowed for the harsher sentencing of activists convicted of arson and vandalism in the name of animal rights and the environment..
As acknowledged elsewhere “the news is not an objective presentation of political reality, but an interpretation of events and issues from the perspective of reporters, editors, and selected sources.” The framing and labeling of an event or an actor in a specific way promotes a particular interpretation of events and affects readers’ perception of that event or actor. As Wagner points out the labeling of an event or actor as terrorism involves not only a “powerful rhetorical technique” but also creates “an irreversible frame.” Moreover, “newspapers remain pivotal in setting the public policy agendas around crime and criminal justice.” Within the U.S., the labeling of militant animal rights activity as “eco-terrorism” has resulted in the introduction of specific legislation resulting in the harsher sentencing of such activists convicted of arson and vandalism. In the U.K., counter-terrorism police included a number of animal rights groups including the ALF and SPEAK on a list of extremist ideologies. The list also included Extinction Rebellion, a nonviolent environmental protest group. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEOS: