The whole field is “under-theorized”
By Jon Hochschartner, Species & Class
[J]onathan Bagot, formerly connected to the Revolutionary Communist Party, is now a member of Philly Socialists, a non-sectarian group. He recently agreed to an interview with Species and Class, in which he discussed his views on animal treatment.
Species and Class: How would you describe your economic politics? Are you a socialist? Would you consider yourself a Marxist, anarchist, social democrat or something else? Can you describe what involvement, if any, you’ve had with organized socialist or anarchist left?
Jonathan Bagot: I’ve self-identified as a Maoist over the past 15 years. Back then I gravitated towards the RCP since they were pretty much the only group in town that were close to being on the same page as me and active in the same causes I was concerned with locally. The internet was obviously present back then, but it was nowhere near what it is today. So actually having a local chapter that I could meet up with in my city really helped me connect with like-minded folk since participating in anything online was difficult and pointless — in terms of getting anything accomplished, debates on forums only go so far.
Then when I, and plenty of others, were done with what the RCP had become; Mike Ely founded the Kasama Project. I was at the founding conference, and worked with them for a few years. We tried to build something locally, but it just never came together in my town.
Currently I’m a member of Philly Socialists.
SC: How have your views regarding animals been received on the socialist or anarchist left?
JB: I’ve been vegan and a supporter of animal rights for less time than I’ve considered myself a communist — vegan for about 11 or 12 years now? So it was interesting to see the before and after.
The before never involved vegan or vegetarian food being served at events, it meant meeting at places like McDonalds and animal rights just never being mentioned. Which actually surprised me even while I ate meat. I knew vegetarians outside of these circles, and assumed there would be more animal rights minded people involved with these political groups. Without thinking about it too deeply, it always seemed like a stereotype of the left to be vegetarian.
The after had me feeling like an outsider for being vegan, having to recommend better places to meet, and any ideas of animal rights being dismissed rather quickly. It was less shocking since I noticed previously that most socialists and communists ate meat. But what caught me off guard was how looked down upon vegetarians were for really no valid reason (besides guilt, I have to assume).
And how intelligent, deeply felt arguments would get shrugged aside by people that have spent hours a night studying Das Kapital but seemingly can’t engage with anything that would challenge their desire for meat.
So really I had to go to anarchist events to satisfy that side — both for the vegan food and to engage with people about animal liberation. It was rather frustrating, and still is. People on the left get pretty self-righteous about standing up for humans before animals — then again, in my experience most meat eaters do that, left or right, as if they know what they’re doing is wrong.
SC: Does your organization have any official position on animal exploitation of any kind? If not, is this something you would like to change? If so, how might you do this?
JB: No, they do not. I’ve always respected the fact that the SP-USA had animal rights in their platform — I’m not sure how that plays out into their day to day actions, or even how their general membership feels about, besides looking nice on their website. But it’s more than any other socialist party has done, as far as I’ve seen.
If Philly Socialists ever decided to put together a list of positions like that I would definitely present the idea at a General Assembly. But for now, we really don’t have many “official positions” like most political parties do.
SC: Is there any way in which speciesism is used to further human class exploitation? If so, how?
JB: Anytime something is commodified there will be human class exploitation at some point in the chain. But with speciesism I’ve found it interesting that human class sort of correlates with animal work. To compare someone who works with chickens and pigs versus horses in a similar setting is a bit of a leap in terms of pay and social status, then move on to any animals we don’t eat and it’s a whole other world. Then it’s a huge leap to go to people that work with animals we’d consider even less common (say, in a zoo setting).
Clearly, considering some species less than others (e.g. animals processed into food in a factory, can’t get much lower than that) will align the humans working with them to also be exploited at a higher rate.
SC: How would you respond to the suggestion that personal veganism is an individualistic solution to a systemic problem? Or that insisting on personal veganism as a baseline for animal activism is the equivalent of saying anyone who drives a car can’t be opposed to fossil fuel economies, or anyone who wears Nike can’t be opposed to sweatshops?
JB: The one part about this question that really hits me is the fact that we’re talking about diet. The idea that you’re actually fueling yourself on this awful product, it’s coursing through your system. It’s such an intimate chain of events. Much different than the shoe argument. At least that’s how I feel about it.
Then not only are you fueling yourself on this product that represents everything your fighting against (whether you accept it or not), but you’re then using that energy to do positive political work. It’s so backwards.
And in terms of the boycott angle in general, I’ve always felt that whether being vegan is part of a larger solution or just you wanting to simply remove yourself from an awful system (but remaining in society, as opposed to, say, dropping out of capitalism by moving to a farm somewhere) why would you continue to consume those items? Is every decision you make part of some larger solution? Can’t you just do the right thing and not be driven by some addiction to a taste? Especially these days when simply doing the right thing can be done so easily and affordably.
SC: Is a vegan capitalism possible? Why or why not?
JB: I guess as much as any capitalism is “possible”? There’s so much “green capitalism” these days, I assume veganism can fit into that dynamic.
I know day to day when I deal with fully vegan businesses that they’re not perfect, there’s exploitation down the line at some point. Most likely animals are being exploited three degrees from whatever product I’m purchasing.
It was interesting, just the other day there is this vegan shoe company I follow on Facebook, and they posed a question about sweatshops to their fans. Something like “do you even think about sweatshops? does that matter? or do you only care about animals?” I was surprised to see some of the responses where people honestly never thought about that. So I’d like to think all of that would at least be part of a vegan capitalism.
SC: Jason Hribal has argued animals should be considered part of the proletariat. Bob Torres has said such a definition obscures the difference in revolutionary potential between animal and human laborers, and that animals are in fact superexploited living commodities. Where do you stand in the debate?
JB: I hadn’t read Torres or Hribal until you mentioned it. And I’ll be honest, both view points are very interesting. Though when Jason talked about the service dog industry it seemed like he couldn’t really build the same argument for laying hens. And even his service dog argument sounds like a stretch, compared with my personal experience with dogs. But still interesting and I’d like to check out more of what he has to say beyond the interviews I’ve read.
My thinking is definitely more along the lines of Torres and the super exploited living commodity argument. It’s hard to think of an animal that doesn’t fit into that description. But I haven’t really dug too deep into it, I’ll definitely be checking out Torres’Making a Killing soon.
SC: British socialist Richard Seymour has said the relationship between animals and humans in Marxism is under theorized. Do you agree? If so, what areas are particularly lacking?
JB: I definitely agree. Even the small amount that exists has mostly been under my radar. I’d love to hear some thoughts on animal rights and Marxism in the Third World.