Vivisector David Jentsch’s car burned by dedicated activists March 6, 2009 on Beverly Glen Boulevard in Los Angeles
by The Resistance
For the purpose of this analysis, “business” is defined as any enterprise which exists for the purpose of profiting from the Animal Holocaust. Unlike the Jewish Holocaust which stained Germany during a finite period of war waged by the Nazis, the Animal Holocaust permeates all of society, its purveyors remain largely anonymous, while the scope and depth of atrocities defy quantification.
“War Criminal” is defined as any individual mercenary engaged in said business. For example, in this paradigm, a vivisector is rewarded, both economically and with a façade of respectability, for intentionally and deliberately blinding, poisoning, injecting, mutilating, burning, sickening, maiming, or otherwise torturing their restrained and trembling victims. In the context of war, the concept of what is legal or illegal becomes irrelevant. And just as Josef Mengele was a war criminal in Nazi Germany, we must recognize the crimes of every mercenary engaged in the vile and violent assault on non-human individuals as identical. They are all war criminals engaged in business that shock the conscience …… especially vivisectors.
Absent in history books are any arguments suggesting that Nazi Germany should have been defeated and the Jews liberated through petitions, peaceful and non-confrontational protests, prayer. The reason may be because these ideas are absurd. We wonder how many strongly worded letters were written to Adolf Hitler, politely asking him to mend his ways. We wonder if non-profits sprung up to report human rights violations by Nazis to the Nazi administrators enforcing the Holocaust. Ultimately, however, we wonder why these ineffective courses of action are not only prevalent, but vehemently promotional as the Holy Grail of “strategic” activism when the object is Animal Liberation.
Let’s understand that tactic is neither moral nor immoral and all attempts to debate this issue must be dismissed as irrelevant noise. When negotiating tactics and the strategies within which they are employed, the only constructive discussion we will entertain will resolve solely around effectiveness. But we will not proceed without noting that our community, while adhering to the model discussed above, has repeatedly demonstrated a propensity to criticize progressive activists and condemn revolutionary forms of activism while failing to offer any alternative courses of action. The subject of movement collaborates and how they serve the interests of the enemy is far too extensive to treat here. But our community should begin to recognize that when the mainstream trumpets in moderation to the detriment of the enslaved,our own “movement” becomes a vehicle to promote the interests of institutional abusers. In no uncertain terms, this is a form of collaboration.