4 Findings
4.2 Welfare, Kindness, and Rights
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Taiwan have experienced an important expansion and transformation within public discourses, an area where civil society actors, particularly NGOs, have played a crucial role.
4.2 Welfare, Kindness, and Rights
An earlier example of socio-political organization around ideas of animal protection in Taiwan can be traced back to the 1960s with the foundation of the “Livestock Protection Association of the Republic of China” (Zhōnghuá mínguó bǎohù shēngchù xiéhuì - 中華民國保 護牲畜協會) in order to address the welfare and management of farm animals. Mirroring the expansion of conservation consciousness in the island, the association was later renamed “Animal Protection Association of the Republic of China” (APA) (Zhōnghuá mínguó bǎohù dòngwù xiéhuì - 中華民國保護動物協會) in 1992, and expanded the scope of its work to stray animal welfare issues in Taiwan in 1988 (APA, 2007; Chung, 2014). Since then, animal protection rationales in Taiwan have come to incorporate concepts arising from the animal ethics and legal philosophical arguments that have been advanced in the West since the 1970s. Although values such as mercy and kindness to animals are not entirely new to societies that share Confucian and Buddhist traditions, it was not until the introduction of modern animal ethics that the idea of animal rights entered the discourse of animal advocacy groups (Ho, 2015: 61). As a result, the translation of Animal Rights literature such as Animal Liberation (Singer, 1975) and The Case for Animal Rights (Regan, 1983) to Chinese by organizations such as the Life Conservationist Association (LCA) has been pivotal to the spread of current animal advocacy rationales and the drive toward expanding efforts to address animal abuse in other areas such as sport, food industry, and entertainment (Ho, 2016: 65-66). Furthermore, the LCA’s incorporation of the concepts of animal rights and animal welfare into its discourse is of particular relevance to understand the cultural dimensions in the development of Taiwan’s APM. This is because while the LCA is not a religious
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
organization per-se, its supporters are mainly constituted by religious practitioners of a predominantly Buddhist background and academic experts (Ho, 2016: 70). Its founder Cho Wei’s is a Buddhist nun who first began her animal activism efforts with a campaign to stop the practice of hook fishing as a past time activity in 1992. She argued that killing fish for fun was disrespectful to the lives of fishes. Her approach combining Buddhist teachings of compassion and kindness with western ethics and a skillful use of legal mechanisms lead to the LCAs success in providing a voice to animals in Taiwan. A highlight of which was the organizations effective campaigning for an Animal Protection Law, which ultimately passed in 1998 (Wang, 2012). From here, the convergence of Buddhist beliefs and animal ethics in Taiwan is also significant for two reasons:
First, because it has provided a distinctive normative context in which animal advocacy has emerged. This is illustrated by the topics discussed during the 2014 International Conference on
“Animal Liberation, Animal Rights, and Equal Ecological Rights: Dialogues between Eastern and Western Philosophies and Religions”, organized through the collaboration between academia, the LCA, and religious groups. Similarly, the founding of the Taiwan Animal Protection Party demonstrated a wide membership base among which Buddhist organizations provided important support (Chen, 2016; Willhoft, 2016). Consequently, according to a PETA Asia-Pacific Corporate Liaison: “It’s actually easier to promote Animal Rights in Asia, because of the religious (Buddhism) influence” (Appendix: B4). Second, a central aspect of Taiwan’s current animal protection debates is based on the difference between the concepts of kindness to animals and the welfare of animals. While certain religious and cultural norms might facilitate the spread of animal advocacy rationales, in other instances they can also hinder efforts to address less desirable aspects of human-natural relations. The conflict that arises from such conceptual disagreements in the treatment of animals is perhaps best demonstrated by the controversy surrounding practices such
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
as “mercy releases” (fàngshēng - 放生). The ritual freeing of animals back into the wild has been a considerably widespread activity in Taiwan and across Asia in line with the predominantly Buddhist tenets of doing “good deeds” and cultivating compassion (Liu-Severinhaus and Chi, 1999: 301; Agoramoorthy and Hsu, 2007). However, in recent years these activities have come under increased criticism due to its various negative effects. In particular, the impact of releasing non-native species into a new ecosystem, the mishandling of animals, and the vicious circle that arises from capturing animals for the purpose of re-release (Ettoday, 2013; Ho, 2015). On this front, major changes have developed through the efforts of animal advocacy groups and the advent of Buddhism Modernism. In a nutshell, this approach to Buddhism is characterized by demythologization, that is, the modernization of cosmology and the move away from the emphasis on belief and dogma usually associated to religious practice. Furthermore, it is also distinctive due to an element of activism that stresses social service, democracy, and equality. (Bechert, 1994, cited in McMahan, 2009: 7-8). According to Cheng (2013: 10) it is in this context the LCA has played a key role as a modern environmentalist response to the issues arising from traditional practices such as “mercy releases” (fàngshēng - 放生) and in shaping modern animal welfare advocacy in Taiwan. The transformation of norms concerning the treatment of animals in this sense is better described by the words of Chu Tseng-hung Director of the Environment and Animal Society of Taiwan (EAST), and former Secretary General of the LCA:
“The ideas of animal welfare or even animal rights I think it definitely comes from the west. We did have animal protection groups before, but when they talk about animal protection I think their idea is to be kind to animals or to love animals, but kindness or love for animals doesn’t really mean the welfare or animal rights.” (Appendix: B1).
Beyond simple conceptual differences, the introduction of animal ethics has had deeper implications for animal advocacy rationales advanced by civil society actors.
‧
Table 6 Comparison between Western and East Asian Animal Advocacy
Source: Author. (Based on Weller, 2006; Ho, 2016. APA, 2007; Appendix: B1) The rise of new lifestyles surrounding these principles not only indicates the important shift in socio-natural values, but also demonstrates the changing dynamics of social mobilization in Taiwan.
4.3 “Going Vegan”
Keeping the above mentioned aspects in mind, there is more recent element arising from the processes of cultural globalization currently shaping the further development of Taiwan’s APM that requires further attention. This refers to the growing trend of people who are identifying as
‘vegan’. According to the Vegan Society (2017), veganism is defined as:
"A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing
Western
Values Welfare vs. Rights Kindness vs. Welfare vs. Rights
Eco-Cultural
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans, animals and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."
Therefore, veganism can be understood as the intersection between a Lifestyle Movement and a Social Movement as it embodies both a key tactic and a goal of many modern animal advocates. In particular, those who are engaged in promoting the idea of ‘animal equality’ as a move toward ‘post-citizenship’ based on a new moral perspective to human-animal relations (Lowe and Ginsberg, 2002; Cherry, 2006; Haenfler, Johnson, and Jones, 2012). This approach to animal advocacy is one of the most radical and characterized by nontraditional forms of activism.
It entails the adoption of a variety of individual and collective behaviors, most prominently the active promotion of a plant-based diet without dairy, eggs, and other animal derived products including honey (Cherry, 2006; Sneijder and Molder, 2009). The dietary aspect here is of particular relevance because from the perspective of more radical animal rights activists, the consumption of animal flesh is “is the most extensive and institutionalized form of violence against animals”
(Adams, 1990, cited in Munro, 2005). From here, while there are various degrees of veganism, the most engaged vegan animal rights advocates will also avoid products tested on animals or that contain animal ingredients, opt for synthetic alternatives to fur and leather, and participate in the boycott of activities that involve animal exploitation in various industries from cosmetics to animal performances in circuses or zoos. In other words, they seek to resist speciesism and transform the system through their consumption choices (Giraud, 2015). As a result, the practice of veganism as an individual and collective approach to animal activism has been characteristic of committed animal activists in the Unites States, the UK, and Australia (Munro, 2005). What is more, international organizations like PETA (2016), Mercy for Animals (2016), and The Humane Society (2016) promote “going vegan” as a way to save animals. Similarly, some conservation
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
groups like Sea Shepherds, which focuses on Marine life conservation and prominent for its radical tactics to disrupt Japanese whale hunting boats is also known for its vegan crew (Shapiro, 2010).
Albeit a relatively new development, veganism in Taiwan has expanded rapidly. On one hand, the emergence of this lifestyle movement is illustrated by the increasing number of vegan restaurants, bakeries, and shops that have opened in recent years (Chang, 2016; Ter, 2017). This development has attracted some international recognition. Most notably, the Taiwanese emerging vegan scene was awarded with Asia’s first two titles of “outstanding restaurants” featured in Australian-based website Vegans Are Cool list in 2015. In addition, Taipei was selected “Most Vegan-Friendly City in Asia” by PETA in 2016 (Cheung, 2015; Lee, 2016). On the other hand, vegan discourses now also feature in the Taiwanese animal advocacy landscape. This is demonstrated by the spread of activities and events around the promotion of veganism and animal rights. Among such, university clubs, vegan conventions, lifestyle fairs, public lectures, demonstrations, and movie screenings to raise awareness of the impact of meat based diets on millions of lives and the planet are currently being held on a regular basis (Appendix: A).
Furthermore, such developments are the result of the efforts of a variety of civil society groups at different levels of organization, from NGOs such as the Taiwan Animal Equality Association (TAEA), to grassroots networks such as Vegan 30 Days, comprised of students, professionals, mothers, and other volunteers taking to both social media and the streets to actively promote veganism (Appendix: A1, A2, B2, C1; TAEA 2016). Furthermore, as TAEA Director notes:
“If we learn that animals should not be used… It’s related to diets, being vegan or vegetarian for example. Which also touches upon concern for the earth, the environment, and care for the suffering animals. If we want to go have fun, choosing not to go to the Zoo or to so called Nature Farms, these actions demonstrate that we want these animals to live free in the wild. All of this, whether you want to have fun, consume, ride an elephant, go to the circus with performances with horse or bears.” (Appendix: B2).
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The adoption of vegan identities in the country is also significant due to the syncretization and overlap of veganism and Buddhist modernism in Taiwan. As mentioned in the previous section, ideas of animal welfare and animal rights resonate with Buddhist teachings on kindness and compassion to animals. Given that committed Buddhists usually practice strict vegetarianism (quán sù - 全素), the introduction of veganism has given rise to terms such as chún sù (純素) or wéi gēn (維根) to differentiate the rationale behind dietary and consumption choices. along these lines, while the former might retain a religious connotation, the latter is usually used to emphasize on non-religious veganism. Nevertheless, regardless of the ideological or theological differences between these various groups, they have come to share the goals of reducing animal suffering and helping the environment as ethical vegans (Shū shí zhǔyì zhě - 蔬食主義者). The convergence of these approaches can be observed in the collaboration between sectors. For example, the Vegan Youth Convention that took place in November 28th, 2016, featured a variety of young activists and entrepreneurs with vastly different backgrounds, from representatives of religious youth organizations, to a fashion designer and a Vegan YouTube Channel host (Appendix: A3, C1).
Similarly, Taiwanese online vegan networks such as Vegan 30 days and Vegan Volunteer on Facebook, and Line groups “Mercy is the Biggest Force” (Cíbēi shì zuìdà de lìliàng - 慈悲是最 大的力量) and “Vegan 30 Days Experience Group” (Sùshí 30 tiān de jīngyàn - 純素 30 天體驗 ) demonstrate a diverse membership, from practitioners of Buddhist Humanism to trendy vegan youth (Appendix: C1 and C3). As TSPCA Director observed:
“I think people go vegan or vegetarian for a variety of reasons, whether as part of a religion or to protect the environment or to better one’s health. I think some people stop eating meat to help animals as well. So the expansion [of veganism] I believe is due to the increase in information that people are getting, the more we know, the better or informed choices we can make”.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
From here, considering the trajectory of animal advocacy rationales in Taiwan so far, it is now pertinent to examine how these developments are related to the rise of a NSM in the country.