Reflecting on Phase 1 of the Ideas Project and Moving Forward

I'm sure that many of you are expecting to hear from me about the Ideas for Change project today, given that the first round of voting ended last night, so I'll comment a bit, starting with some great news:

Alex Hershaft's idea regarding vegan school lunch options ended up second in Agricultural Policy and made it to the second round! Woo-hoo! Big thanks go to the many of you who voted and spread the word!

And now I'm sure you're expecting some words from me on the three ideas posted in the AR category that will move forward too. First, I thank the many of you who submitted and voted and commented on (oh, did you ever comment!) ideas in this first round; the passion and compassion have been inspiring to witness. And I congratulate the individuals and organizations whose ideas are moving forward.

But like many of you, I'm feeling disappointment today too. You may notice that in referencing the winning ideas just now, I wrote "ideas posted in the AR category" rather than "AR ideas." Although I appreciate the intentions behind the winning ideas, I personally did not vote for any of them, for various reasons, whether because they were welfare ideas in which I saw far too many loopholes and goals too weak to make a real difference (even my own welfare idea didn't have my vote--more on that later), because they focused on policies over which the U.S. government and president have no control, because they focused narrowly on only one set of animals when there are billions of other animals suffering just as much or far, far more who I believe deserved to be represented in this chance to present ideas for change too, or for other reasons. (Edit for clarity: I did not oppose these ideas; I simply considered others to be better for the purposes of this project.)

Although, again, I know that the winning ideas and the votes they received were full of good intentions, I was hoping desperately to see at least one idea move forward that was a true animal rights idea rather than a welfare idea or that did not pertain mostly or entirely to only dogs and cats, and I know that many of you hoped the same and did your best to encourage voting. For that, I thank you. And I am sorry for the frustration and disappointment that I know many of you are feeling now that voting has ended.

I also need to clarify, in response to queries about these issues, that there is no more I can do now to have ideas other than the top 3 included in the second round and that I had no control over what ideas were included in the animal rights category in the first place (i.e., there was no approval process).

So what does the project tell us? It tells us that a lot of people do care a great deal about dogs, obviously, and that a lot of people oppose cruelty, but that we still have a long way to go in our efforts to help people see that other animals are just as important, that they think, feel, and suffer in the same ways as dogs and cats. And we have to continue to do the work, both out in the world in general and inside the movement itself, of showing--over and over and over again, if necessary--that eliminating cruelties or the "worst" abuses is not enough. Where there is exploitation, there is cruelty and injustice, and although the winning animal-related ideas in this particular project do not go so far as to seek elimination of animal exploitation in general or even in specific cases, that doesn't change anything for us. Was this a chance to get some public attention and maybe even action brought to some oft-ignored animal rights issues? Yes. Is it disappointing that it didn't happen in the way many of us had hoped it would? Absolutely. But this is just one project, one effort, among many.

So we get frustrated, sad, or even angry for a little bit, and we stew and steam for a couple days, and then we take that energy, and we pipe it back into our work on behalf of the animals who still need our help and our voices. I know that I may not be providing much inspiration for such renewed vigorous commitment to the movement on this New Year's Day, but luckily, I have someone else's words to share today too. Please stay tuned for the next post, a repost of a 2007 New Year's essay from a beautiful writer and dedicated animal advocate, from which the following is extracted:

When the darkness of the world seems overwhelming, unstoppable, crushing, when beings like Celeste, who love life and sing about love are being turned into meat and handbags by the millions every day, when the pain of loving them seems unbearable, the answer is NOT to stop loving, NOT to stop caring, NOT to add to the darkness. The answer is to love more, deeper, wider. To love despite the darkness and the pain. Indeed, to love because of it. To love those who need it most desperately, not only those we happen to like, to love because your love is profoundly, vitally needed, not because it is self-gratifying. To love as though life depended on it. It does.