Earth Liberation Front (ELF)/Animal Liberation Front (ALF)

Author(s):  
Justin Schupp
Author(s):  
Ю. І. Калюжна

The article attempts to analyze theoretically the socio-political phenomenon of «environmental terrorism». Complex of global environmental problems (pollution of air, water, soil, common planetary temperature increase, greenhouse effect, destruction of the ozone layer, large-scale floods, droughts, hurricanes, reduction of biological diversity, scarcity of natural resources, rapid demographic growth, cities crisis, environmental refugees, anthropogenic (man-made) garbage collapse, etc.) correlates with the radicalization of environmental views and the rhetoric of peaceful meetings and pickets of government institutions, corporations and international organizations are being replaced by firing from firearms, laying bombs, arson, namely terrorist acts. In today’s world conditions, in the fight for environmental issues solutions, for the right of every person to a clean environment and a fair distribution of resources, environmental views are transformed increasingly into extremism and radicalism, and thus, eco-activists cross the border and become eco-terrorists. The author of the article emphasizes that in the modern scientific space there is a significant lack of research material on the issues of environmental terrorism, which significantly complicates theoretical studying and the search for methodological tools for understanding this socio-political phenomenon. In his search for the keys to understanding of «environmental terrorism», the author turns to the evolution of the environmental movement (which has been developing along two main directions: the institutionalization of the environmental movement and the politicization of the environmental movement) and notes that at some stage of the evolutionary development of the ecological movement, divergences arise in the form of extremism and radicalism of environmental movements, which became the basis of environmental terrorism. Theoretical analysis of the activities of environmental terrorist organizations, including the Deep Green Resistance, the Huntingdon Society for the Suppression of Cruelty to Animals (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty), the Animal Liberation Front (Animal Liberation Front) and the Earth Liberation Front (Earth Liberation Front), also Earth Above All, Sea Shepherds and others, allows to assert that the increasing feelings of anxiety, helplessness and inevitability of ecological catastrophe on a planetary scale, total disappointment in political institutes and activities of international environmental organizations, «false news and rumors, pseudoscientific beliefs, turned into myths, mad populism, outdated and new group phobias, extremism and all this in hysterically transformational communities is turned into a theoretical basis and a trigger for violence» and becomes «nutritious» substance for the environmental terrorism.


2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 184-190
Author(s):  
John Sorenson
Keyword(s):  

An interview with Ronnie Lee, one of the founding members of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF).


2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Lunney

How people coexist and interact with animals has become an intensely debated issue in recent times, particularly with the rise of the animal protection movement following the publication of Peter Singer’s book Animal Liberation in 1975. This paper discusses some shortcomings of the philosophical positions taken in this complex debate. Singer has helped put animals on a new footing as a group that cannot morally be ignored, but his focus is mainly on individual, familiar animals that are used or abused by humans. The argument of this paper is that the ethics of managing wildlife hinges on a broader view of animals, and their contexts, than is apparent from Singer’s text. Wildlife managers aim to conserve populations of a wide range of species, and their habitats, but some mechanisms for achieving these aims, such as research and the control of invasive animals, are frequently opposed by elements of the animal protection movement. We need to adapt our attitude to animals, particularly wildlife, away from the traditional legacy of a few familiar species to embrace an ethic that is more ecological and relevant to Australian contexts. The case argued here has been to see the critical role of context — geographical, ecological, historical, relational — as a basis for a degree of reconciliation between conservation-oriented wildlife managers and the rising interest in the ethics of animal use. There is much to be gained for zoologists, wildlife managers and conservation biologists by framing key elements of their case in ethical arguments. Conversely, the challenge for those in the animal protection movement is to expand their philosophical ideas to include the ethical imperative of the conservation of populations of wildlife.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Cole ◽  
Karen Morgan
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall E. Otto
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document