Animal Activists are the Enemies of Human Civilization


Animal activists are the enemies of human civilization. And those who are not, should be.

But for our legal system, there is no difference between killing an animal and killing a person.

There is no difference between raping an animal and raping a person.

There is no difference between making a slave of an animal and making a slave of a person.

The distinction is human law. Humans hold themselves above all other life, and have fashioned legal systems to reflect that view.

But morally, one cannot justify the difference between how humans are treated and how other sentient creatures are treated.

The only difference is that we are of different species.

To humans, it makes no difference how intelligent our victims are. No difference how sensitive our victims are. It makes no difference if an animal loves, grieves, laughs, or cries.

The fact that they are of a different species means compassion and empathy are of no concern or importance.

Yet humans value human life even if the life is a zygote. And humans consider a zygote more valuable than any non-human life.

In all of human history, in every human society, animals have been property to be done with as humans pleased.

The concept that animals have the same rights to life, to freedom from exploitation, from slavery, from abuse and cruelty, as we humans have, is the most revolutionary philosophy ever advanced.

Animal Rights is rejected by every government on Earth. It is at odds with every legal system, all major religions, and most minor ones.

Animal Rights is the enemy of human civilization.

And animal activists are not likely to make much difference in the horrors that humans commit against animals anytime soon.

To put into perspective the enormity of the task that confronts us, consider that humans slaughter 60 billion animals each year in slaughterhouses, which works out to 10,000 per second! And during that same second, while 10,000 creatures have their throats cut and painfully bleed out, some 50,000 sea creatures are killed in nets, dredges, ship’s holds and on long lines.

The modern animal movement has been around for 50 years. In all those years we have managed to save fewer animals than will be murdered in slaughterhouses during the next eight hour work shift.

We recoil in shock and disbelief when we are reminded of the atrocities of the Nazi death camps and the six million Jews murdered by Hitler. That horror occurred over almost a decade. The same number of animals are murdered every hour! A Nazi Holocaust each hour of every day, 365 days per year.

It is almost impossible for people to wrap their heads around the magnitude of the killing. Over a billion animals are killed every week.

How much is a billion?

A billion is a thousand million.

A billion seconds ago. Ronald Reagan was elected president. A billion minutes ago, Jesus was preaching,

A billion days ago (2,7million years ago), humans had not yet evolved from our ape-like ancestors in Africa.

A billion months ago (82 million year ago) dinosaurs ruled the Earth.

A billion years ago, the first multi-celled organisms appeared on Earth.

A billion dead animals ago was last week.

Human civilization is the enemy of animals. Humans trod lightly on the Earth when we were hunter-gatherers, feeding mostly upon fruits, berries, insects and carrion. As society became agricultural, humans increased the per capita killings and consumption of animals.The industrial age increased it exponentially. Capitalist society now thrives on the blood and body parts of the Earthlings we rape, breed, enslave and murder.

Only by ending capitalism can we start to free the animals.

Everything we do as activists must be aimed at the long term goal of social revolution.



Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

Natasha Sainsbury, of Good Karma Graphic Design, has joined Armory of the Revolution as Editor, and is responsible for the transformation of the blog’s appearance. Visit and follow her blog V Kind.

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.

There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty.

If you support the Amory’s work and mission, please help us grow.

Just $3 per month will allow us to advertise!



14 thoughts on “Animal Activists are the Enemies of Human Civilization

  1. When the human race shall be sacrificed upon the alter of death (i.e., World War III which will happen in a few years or less), do not mourn–it is not the death of civilization–the human race died a long, long time ago.


  2. Perhaps, the author of this blog ought to differentiate between an “animal activist” and an “animal activist who doesn’t eat animals.” The town I live in is fraught with animal activists who advocate for the canine. I don’t know if there are more realtors, taqueria operators, or canine rescuers in my town. Most animal activists love eating farmed animals. Most animal activists advocate primarily for their preferred animal. The term “animal activist” is so ambiguous and imprecise it ought to be discarded, because it seems to define nothing in particular.

    I will use the term “animal activist who doesn’t eat animals and ….”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Many people are hypocrites who have only limited vision. We must be grateful for what little they do, but open their eyes further than their current small tribal view.


    • When I refer to animal activists I refer to vegan animal activists.The others are protecting this or that animal because they are fluffy ,cuddly or whatever or “out of compassion”.Animal rights are a question of ethics,not compassion.


  3. Those who could be persuaded by the exposure of the cruelty inflicted on our non-human cousins have now joined the ethically right side of the argument. Those who have not joined us are either incapable of judging (children, the mentally weak), or are simply demons in human form. Some even appear to be decent, friendly people – then you see them with a bacon sandwich when, just a week ago, you showed them pictures of the slaughter house. What can we do? It seems to me that the only thing to do is to take their choices away – burn the slaughter houses to the ground, outlaw all killing and teach children to value all life. We could end this in a generation.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Inogen,

      You must understand there are many humans who believe their moral agency is primarily a matter of human consideration, though some humans have elected to extend their moral concern to preferred species.

      I often say to myself, “imagine if ….” Or I might say to myself, “re-imagine this as ….” This disposition of mind has allowed me to entertain many new narratives about the way life on earth ought to be, though I realize many of us aren’t cognitively predisposed in this way.

      I assure you there aren’t two members of another species sitting around having a conversation about how to liberate all animals and make the world a less violent, more peaceful place. Think about the burden of this fact on our species (yes, it is a responsibility). I don’t think enough people realize our technologies can liberate us from the tradition of mass animal killing. Still, many people live outside the influence of those technologies that might relieve us from this heinous arrangement.

      It isn’t enough to say some people are “demons in human form.”

      How many humans ought to exist on the planet?

      How many non-human animals ought to be owned by each human?

      Who decides which animals ought to be owned by humans?

      Do we continue to abominate (genetically-alter) species by making them more docile so they can continue to be our “companions”?

      Should there be a limit to the number of automobiles any one human can own?

      We are prejudicial. We will always control the lives of particular species within our human culture. What about those species outside this boundary? Do they lose out on health care because they don’t fit the profile?

      I think there is this delusion with many animal liberators about a peaceable kingdom once humans stop eating animals.

      Pathetic man has fabricated a “companion” from another species to the detriment of many others for his mental solace.


      • ‘Owned’? You cannot ‘own’ an animal – you can meet one, you can befriend one, you can invite him/her into your home, but ownership does not come into it. As to animal freedom not bringing paradise, no, of course it won’t – how could it? Animals will continue to kill and be killed and of course they are not sitting around agonising over animal rights – they haven’t got the wit to understand and that makes our behaviour even worse – we are preying on the weak.
        How many humans? How many can the planet sustain?
        How many cars? That largely seems to depend on how they are powered.
        No animal should be denied health care; we should leave them alone until we see that they need help. We are far more clever than they are and could make their lives so much easier.
        This will have the knock-on effect of changing what would otherwise have been their evolutionary path but so what? It would alleviate the suffering in the world and that is something to be worked towards.
        I don’t think that I am under any delusions but I do know that things could be much better for all life and I happen to believe that humans have a moral duty to protect those weaker than themselves.


      • Inogen,

        If, as a species (humans), you elect to control another species (canine, for example), you own it. You may use any euphemism other than ownership to describe this arrangement, but this would be an act of delusion on your part.

        The other day, near where I live, once again, animal activists rescued seals and nursed them to health feeding them sardines. Now, the seals where hand-fed sardines from a bucket. Poor sardines, they didn’t fit the profile, so they were gathered, killed, and, well, fed to the seals.

        I am sure many of the portly animal activists who rescued the seals congratulated themselves on work well done with bovine burgers in the evening.

        Has another species ever invited you into her home? No, you would probably say we have been invading their homes.

        We purposely abominate the canine for ownership. Some people say they can’t live in the wild because of this abomination, but I think this is a lie. Many of these toy-sized canines people carry in their arms or have on their laps while driving are nothing more than beanie babies with a faint pulse. There really is no true purpose in their lives other than soothing the prejudicial human who thinks he loves animals or nature because he has taken possession of one.

        If you don’t own your animal, let him procure his own food for a couple of weeks (and, remember, your canine isn’t a disabled person, right?).

        As I type this, I listen to a neighbor’s dog barking across the street. No, the dog isn’t owned, but he sure spends all his hours enclosed in a yard. I don’t think he comes and goes.


      • I quite agree with you about the fish and the burgers – I have been vegan for 3 years simply because it is not fair to torture and kill others for the sake of my taste-buds. It is a huge problem – would we have let the seals die?
        You are right, no other species has invited me into his/her home, but other animals do not have the time to develop empathy for others, as we have.
        Before you say it, I am well aware that that time has been bought by enslaving others so that we can sit around and luxuriate in our big brains. We cannot change the past, but we can learn from it and try to redress some of the wrongs that have been done.
        As to the ‘purpose’ of a domesticated canine – what is the purpose of a human life?
        I have 2 dogs at present, and 2 cats. They have a vegan diet (yes, even the cats – taurine from seaweed) and are happy and healthy. They are shut in the house while I go to work. They hate it when I go out and I hate leaving them, but without me or someone like me, they would not even be alive.
        I did not take these dogs from the wild, nor I buy them – they are rescued; I had 6 a couple of summers ago, having rescued 3 from the horrors of Romania. I don’t know how I would cope without them.
        Yes, what a moral dilemma.
        However, animals in captivity (including we wage-slave humans) are protected and live longer than those in the wild. Does that make it ‘right’? Who can judge? What are the ABSOLUTE answers?
        Breeding animals when so many are dying through human selfishness is wrong and these people should be in jail.
        The only thing that I am convinced of, and, again, there are no absolutes, is that deliberate cruelty is wrong.
        ‘Do unto others’, no matter what the species.


      • Inogen,

        I want you to either “lie down” or “sit” and “be quiet,” while I say a few things.

        Imagine living with another species who gave you commands like this all day. Well, I think the canine doesn’t mind because his autonomy is adolescent and he has nothing else to do with his life but respond to you.

        I don’t say this with disrespect, Mr. Roland, but I have read an article (actually, a few) about changing our psychology about animal ownership, so we may feel better about ourselves as companions to the animals we possess and they–the animals–may experience us as good companions rather than abusive owners.

        Why play the game, though? Why not end the farce of animal ownership all together? Why not demolish the colossal infrastructure created specifically for the privileged, pampered canine? (Remember, the rainforests continue to be destroyed as more and more entrepreneurial humans build million dollar resorts and spas for their “best friends.”)

        Well, one, there is too much money to be made with animal ownership. Also, more people, in the future, will be motivated to have their own private zoos. Furthermore, even if canines didn’t require “rescuing,” the propaganda of propagation would continue unabated, because more and more people are moving from the narrative of “owning a pet” to the meta-narrative of “parenting many unwanted canine babies.”

        Still, I admit many canines owned by people are mistreated. For example, we just purchased another house and next door are two canines that incessantly bark any time they detect motion in their backyard world, and these canines remain outdoors 24/7. Yes, this is their world. Enclosed. Barking incessantly at humans who would prefer peace and quiet. Imagine if you started yelling for 30 minutes at 2 a.m. I suspect the police would arrive and you would either go inside or be arrested. With the canine, however, nothing happens. People say barking is what canines do. Well, yes, if they are enclosed and perpetually agitated. (There is a greater truth about canine barking, but people don’t want to hear this.)

        In my neck of the woods, more and more accommodations are being made for canines because it seems people can’t psychologically deal with life unless they are in the presence of a canine (now, we know this animal addiction is similar to one’s belief in god).

        People eat animals because they believe they need to. People own animals because they believe they need to.

        I guess I am not really interested in the pathology of transitioning from an animal owner to an animal companion.

        Only the meek and docile non-human animals inherit our human world–and they multiple–while the “wild” ones are kept at bay and “in balance.”


      • I do want to hear the greater truth about canine barking . . .
        What you say about people thinking that they cannot cope without a dog is interesting – we did domesticate them a long time ago. This means that we changed them as they changed us – we now have a symbiotic relationship I suppose.
        What is WRONG with seeing non-humans as companions? We can help them, after all, when we are not using them in unspeakable ways.
        People who do not want to interact with other species do not need to do so, those who do want to should do so, as long as the animals are not abused. We are all on this planet together and it would be very odd if we did not influence each other.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.