Vegan Means Attack

Fomenting A Wildfire Against Speciesism and Moral Anthropocentrism

My veganism exists as a nihilist confrontation against the existing moral fabric of anthropocentrism and speciesism. Here on this landmass called “america”, the moral justifications for consuming the flesh and secretions of non-human animals go hand in hand with the industrialization of their enslavement and reduction to commodity status. This is a reflection of capitalist society reducing chaos to order, animal bodies from wild to domesticated, and the marketing of bodies that are socially recognized as mere products for consumption. My veganism is defined not only by an individualist refusal to internalize, validate and reinforce these authoritarian social values, but also by consecutively attacking them as well.

My anarchy rejects speciesist civilization, not from a “return to the hunter-gatherer” perspective, but from a point of constant hostility towards arbitrary hierarchies, authority, and governance that take form pre- or post-civilization. These include the restoration of traditions or cultures that attempt to resurrect anthropocentric, hierarchical values and worldviews. My focus is not a re-establishment of a past existence. My focus is the creation of a joyous life, here and now, through destructive confrontation with any governing elements that attempt to maintain hierarchical power. I am hostile to all who view non-human animals and the wild as mere raw materials for anthropocentric exploitation and consumption.

For real though, it amazes me to see self-proclaimed anarchists fulfill the anthropocentric role of consuming non-human animals - roles assigned to them by capitalism, tradition, and cultures throughout childhood upbringing. Fulfilling the roles of being “Human” and embracing a morality which standardizes the roles of control and domination over the wild. How long does it take for contemporary “anarchists” to notice the battery cages, the open-air prisons of fenced enclosures, the exhibitions of zoos, the concealed brutality of slaughterhouses, the speciesism of consuming some non-human animals but building relationships with others? Or the interconnected ways society views non-human animals as the lowest common denominator to compare those of the oppressed category to? How the fuck does anti-authoritarian praxis stop at the commodification of bodies - human or non-human (but in this case, non-human) - who are objectified to justify their enslavement, murder, and consumption?

As far as prisoner support and prison abolition, where is the acknowledgment of - and the solidarity with - the millions who remain imprisoned in slaughterhouses with death sentences, justified by the mere demand for their mutilated, neatly-packaged corpses? The acknowledgement of their existential struggle against prison and domination is limited by human supremacy. When anarchy fails to include liberated wildness beyond the limited scope of human supremacy, it is mere human-centered reformism which falls short of destroying the very logic of control and domination. Society is death by design. Death and disregard for non-human animals are built into the design of highways, railroads, agriculture, and every other form of structural anthropocentrism. I advocate its total collapse towards the emancipation of the wild. Domestication is a process of internalized self-automation, conditioned with a sense of superiority to wildness which manifests itself institutionally with human-over-animal thinking. I reject this way of thinking along with its assumption that non-human animal bodies are mere food products for hunting and consumption - an assumption that disregards their own individual interests and bodily autonomy. I reject humanism, its authoritarian roles and traditions and its assigned identity which limits my potential to explore my own animality beyond civilized domestication.

There is a war to be waged against society, alongside the non-human animals who refuse domesticated subservience, and who are evicted from their homes due to mass deforestation, human development and technology. Veganism burdened by the millstone of liberalism, fails to critically acknowledge capitalist, industrial civilization itself as the massified, embodiment of anthropocentric domination. Anarchism that fails to challenge speciesism on an individual level reproduces the internalized authoritarian values of human domination. Since speciesism is pervasive in society, it is insulated and well preserved by a comforting normalization - a normalization that aids cultural indoctrination and apathy. Confrontation is necessary in unsettling the socially established comforts and moral order of non-human animal domination. My vegan anarchy embodies solidarity not just with dietary intake, but also armed with attack; attack defined by the material actions of an incendiary desire to destroy the social manifestations of human supremacy.

-Flower Bomb

Wow, exactly what apathetic & malicious humans need, a hard bite jolt. Delivered so well.

Interrelated questions:

1. Do you see agriculture as speciesist in that it displaces wild life? Are all farms human colonized spaces?

2. Are speciesism & anarchy compatible?

3. If 'yes' to 1. and 'no' to 2., does that mean that the only 'true' anarchy is anarcho-primitivism?

May rewilded humans some day meet in a forest gap warmed by sun after earth's ultimate liberation.

Ria

1. Absolutely.

2. Just as much as racism, sexism and any other forms of hierarchical discrimination.

3. A "true" anarchy is one that remains hostile to all socially constructed forms of human domination perpetuated by the logic of control and domination. Some people might call that "anarcho-primitivism", some call it "green anarchy", some call it "anarchy", some call it "anarcho-nihilism" etc. In my opinion, a hostility towards civilization and industrial society is a given when it comes to anarchy since both are the prisons that maintain the continuity of all forms of oppression. They are the very definition of control and domination and I don't see how anarchy could ever be compatible with their existence.

Hahaha, vegans attack, with molar teeth!

That neglects all the supermassive soy, corn and palm industries and their destructive effects on ecosystems, the soils and climate change. Of course a significant part of those industries are used to feed cattle, but also to produce shit tons of food derivatives for humans (tofu and soy proteins being the most used), and biofuels for motor vehicles.

Then we get the problem of mass exploitation (not domestication) of cattle... to answer to real or perceived massive economic demands. If it wouldn't be so massified, and if some green vegan anarchists would go beyond the liberal "consum-action", to find effective means to disrupt and fuck up the cattle industry (beef and chicken, mainly), then it's likely we could see a drop in cattle exploitation and a turn towards other, healthier ways to feed people. But one individual not buying meat at the supermarket? WWhhhoa! It's 2004 all over again.

eh, being that 66% of the American diet is made up of sugar, white flour, and industrial/seed oils, you’d be surprised at how much of industrial mono-cropping does NOT go into to food animal feed. a pretty significant chunk of the domestic soy crop goes toward becoming cooking oil. i think it’s something like 80% of restaurant food in the US is cooked in these highly oxidative, pro-inflammatory substances.

https://lachefnet.wordpress.com/2018/03/25/its-the-soil-biology-stupid/

NONE of us can have healthy food without healthy soil first and foremost.

No one can be vegan without heavy industrial infrastructure. Even then we’re looking at absorbtion rates of important nutrients and vitamins. For DHA that rate is something like 2%. Their b12 deficiencies are quite alarming (84%), as is how long one’s body will leach its own b12 from the liver before a person could notice a problem. I’m not trying to get doxxed for bringing any of this up. It’s to warn that after that 5 year supply of the liver’s own b12 is used up a deficiency will do irreparable harm.

it’s all based on consumer ideology and appeal to emotions.

i mention that and the industrial infrastructure needed for veganism because it presents a perfect opportunity for branding food as intellectual property. and with that comes the blurring between food and pharma.

we’re still not getting to the problem of invasive species without a predator challenging their populations. we could all stop eating meat, but the wild boars mr hearst dropped on the South US are going to keep breeding and breeding (4 litters of 8 each year) and shrinking the habitat of other species.

"It’s to warn that after that 5 year supply of the liver’s own b12 is used up a deficiency will do irreparable harm."

Ive been vegan for about 9 years. I guess my b12 deficiency is doing irreparable harm to me as I speak. Along with all the harm done by the polluted air I breath, the chemicals in the water I drink and the food I eat (before and after going vegan), the damage done to my eyes by artificial lighting, the physical and mental damage from when I was wage-slavin'. People (usually non-vegans) seem to care a whole lot about b12 deficiencies as if all other damage by this industrial society is trivial. Fuck speciesism and fuck civilization.

Did you read the essay? Does it sound like all I care about is consumer activities? I agree with you about bigger targets- and that was my point. But being vegan doesn't just mean *buying* vegan products neither. Don't buy them. Steal that shit. Veganism paired up with illegality is not the same as being an ethical consumer.

What feels so good for me is decomposing civilization in an array of ways, turning its deathway into lifeway. Decompose its food waste products and let my body convert its necrosis into my brain and hands protecting and inviting back return of the wild. Collapse its infrastructures, sap its systems dry. Every and any way, drain the life out of it and return the energy to earth. Before civilization my function would have been seed disperser. Today my role is decomposer. Both ways, my being longs to let life flow from me.

Vegans are the agricultural equivalents of Pol Pots army!

PS it's become sort of like the totalitarian soya bean dictatorship of the compulsory diet constitution!

Then they'd be good for something!

Your digestion would handle my intelligence ;)

directly and indirectly, would you end your predatory dietway? Or is that yet another feeble obvious excuse? A joke perhaps? Very thick denial protecting your mind from the realities, the lives and Earth your mouth's desires have tortured and obliterated?

I am not predatory, I am vegetarian, and I don't believe that having a couple of eggs and an occasional piece of cheese a week is carnivorous, especially if its from free ranging and contented pets. That was only me joking about obsessive food fetishing as if it was ideological zealotry.

Whose eggs are you consuming and whose bodies are you exploiting as ‘pet’?

Mostly human cheese and eggs, presumably!

I'm getting eggs from hens owned by a former girlfriend who I exploited for sexual favours by slaving my ass off in a workshop to by food and a roof for her person until we separated amicably.

*buy* food
CAPTCHA --HenGYG2

for resorting to personal attack. There are much primer targets out there. But you & I still have a disagreement. If you're ever up this way, maybe we could settle it with some bare knuckle boxing. Pump us up for post-civ predatorianism.

Ria

Romano-Greco wrestling with lovers is my preferred form of combat, but my anger can erupt pugalism if confronted by moronic Statists!

*Greco-Roman*

surprising that many anarchists (so-called) are not vegans? Many anarchists (so-called) think anarchy is all about having no rules etc which it certainly isn't. It is so cool that you have spoken up and make no apologies. Could either of you explain to me how someone can be a 'vegan' for twenty years because their mates were vegan as veganism was part of the scene at the time? What the fuck is that about?

The concept of "rules" dictates the existence of an agency to enforce them...My idea of anarchy has less to do with agencies of enforcement and more to do with attacking forms of socially constructed hierarchies that suppress the bodily autonomy and freedom of others (in this case non-human animals).

I think the answer could be as simple as someone only being vegan because it is the popular/cool/trendy thing to do socially, rather than committing to it by their own individual determination. It is easier to join the crowd than stand alone, especially if standing alone incorporates a position that challenges the status quo. People do it all the time in one way or another. For example technological consumerism has this same effect and alters not only our perception of reality but also our social interactions.

the A inside the O is the circled A: anarchy is order not disorder. 'Rules' (aka Order) are necessary so we understand where we stand? The pyramid of domination which Layla AbdelRahim describes needs to disseminated far and wide in a concise way for people to consider.

Personally, I am a fan of chaos: the breaking down of all socially constructed order which attempts to confine and control wildness. Wildness in this case being all living beings, having equal access and opportunity to the full flowering of life and exploration. Social constructs and order contradict anarchy. Anarchy for me isn't a pre-configured system but rather a day to day individual experience of emancipatory interaction with the world. For example civilization and technological industrialization require more and more order to maintain control of those who participate in its functioning. Chaotic negation to that order in the form of individualized attack is anarchy ungoverned and in full bloom.

that's what it's about. These days there's plenty of liberal yuppies who're vegan. The internet's filled with these clickbait articles featuring liberal chicks promoting their vegan diets. Unless someone still lives 20 years ago, you gotta be dumb to think veganism means any sort of radicalism, or anarchy. That's plain ridiculous, and reeks the same old trolling by the two circle-jerkers LeWay and Ria.

perspectives that have become so misshapen by people as to be almost meaningless. The domination aspect is lost. The unnecessary suffering aspect is lost. It was 'brave' of Ria to chat with Aragorn! due to indifference to many aspects of living. He seems to be the uncomfortable person (in his nihilism) I've listened to. He claims John Zerzan is over the hill...why would a nihilist care whether JZ was irrelevant? Indeed, why do nihilists bother try to change the perspectives of others: to try and have people see it all as meaningless and there's no morality etc? ANews also slags off other projects and ANews podcast has a condescending attitude insinuating other projects could do better!

but remains indifferent to changing the 'wrong.' Clearly, you claim to see the 'wrong' and you want to change it, therefore the nihilism doesn't apply, right? Nihilism is another word for indifferent as I understand it or is this yet another perspective which has been high-jacked?

is about not believing that we know or can have the effect we want. active nihilism is about wanting things and just not thinking that anything we do will make those wanted things happen.
not the leftist myth of cause and effect (do a sit in, start a riot, doesn't make the change we want). so that is about our own power, and also the depth of the change we want, and also what makes things happen.
briefly put, to me, nihilism is about humility.

Nihilism for me simply means tearing down every instrument of civilized control, including the mental and physical apparatus, without the guidance or hope of some leftist future utopia. From my perspective, nihilism is ungovernable wildness which is incompatible with the logic of submission. In reference to your own nihilism, I get the effect I want by destroying the mechanics of what prohibits it; in this case my freedom. I am as free as I actively re-possess and defend it, day to day. It sounds like the type of nihilism you are describing is "passive" nihilism, but there is really no right or wrong answer to how you relate to your nihilist feelings.

de Beauvoir was a bourgeois liberal intellectual who was only relevant in the '60s... she was just projecting the apathy of her own caste upon some blurry group.

The truth I think is the opposite of what she said. Nihilists won't see what is wrong, but when they're convinced may act upon it. The bourgie intellectual, on the other hand, will discuss the wrong in their living room, at the university chair or on social media.

Seriously, you two would make a good team. You compliment each other while still offering unique perspectives. Could be a dynamic duo whipping anarchists into anarchy.

Why do people on here think flower bomb and ria are the only vegnarchists out there? Are there not more on here alone? I am also an anti-civ vegan.

I'd love connection with others. Any ideas?

Check your mailbox

Leave sheltered suburuban life. Meet people.

@18:00--
there are plenty of us (non-primitivist anti-civ, anarchist, nihilist, vegans) on here and out there.
many simply don't feel the desire to preach or teach or convince or even really connect.
there's so much to destroy—even this tired conversation we all keep having…

Not preaching or convincing. Just growling and taking aim. Greetings nihilist vegan.

I'd wager that Rfa finds your proselytizing petty and pointless. Are you such a millennial that you mistake this idle passtime of yours for something more?

Look at you coming at people with that condescension. Why do you care what rfa thinks in the first place? That's cool that they are a nihilist vegan and all but if they ain't here to contribute to the topic or connect or stir shit up then this ain't nothing more than idle passtime for them nor you.

here is my contribution:

the thoughtful article, this conversation, the opinions of its participants, their argument, this platform it's discussed on, and even your (armed) intentions to declare yourself to others perhaps to agree are a meaningless, performative contribution to the continued existence of this sick society and all the horrors within it.

less teach, less create, more destroy. more destroy. more destroy. then nothing.

speck of dust.

That was... performative?

^ gets it

Nicely said. I share that feeling as well. I have to admit, writing is indeed a nice passtime activity when layin' low from the law. I won't be on these forums very long. Just tryin' to keep busy inside.

I wish the sentiment of "more destroy" was something people materialized more often than debating on forums. But I am certain we all have our reasons for being glued to computer screens and to this particular thread. And it doesn't really matter who is and isn't destroying. All that matters to me is my own fun found in destroying. I am sure some of ya'll were on here long before I started writing and will be long after.

I AM however excited to see that myself and the few others I roll with ain't the only anti-civ vegan nihilists. Not a whole lot in the states. Plenty in Mexico and Chile tho

Btw my bad to whoever was tryin' to debate rfa, I kinda jumped in cus I saw the whole vegan nihilist thing. I will let others do their thing and get back to writing.

fwiw i do enjoy your writings and your contributions on these forums very much. i do hope they both continue

Thanks, glad you enjoy them! The more trouble I get into the more I feel I should leave some writing behind to give people an idea of what fun there is in just gettin' out and wreckin' shit without the permission or guidance of "the movement" or "the struggle". I run a couple online projects but I myself don't really fuck with social networking sites (I barely use facebook and I just now had to google search what "fwiw" meant) lol.

I agree. SO much to destroy. Including, but not limited to, the ideological justifications that encourage this (speciesist) self-entitlement to the bodies of others.

I don't agree at all. Rfa (Really fucking abhorent) and you (Flower Burnt-out) have introduced into the nihilist non-doctrinal antithesis the element of strugglismo, which goes against the grain of the Abyss and the amor fati that is required to be a true nihilist such as myself.
The tides and tsunamis of fate will not be turned by the passions of aggressions!

Lol who you callin' "burnt-out"? In the few days ive interacted with this site I have seen you all over the place, Le Wayin' on everybody's posts. Are you "burnt-out" from materializing your "Abyss" and "amor fati" in the real world, so then you come here and try to impress us with your "I-know-more-fancy-words-than-you" self-declaration of nihilism? Oh you nihilist beast you! Burn this whole place down and turn our passions of aggressions into subservient followship of your own "strugglismo"!

You caring about my (or rfa's) nihilism is the antithesis of a nihilist who focuses on their own individual project- not comparatively to others ;)

Pages

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
Human?
P
g
b
z
G
Q
q
Enter the code without spaces.