For the Animals, Intersectionality is a One-Way Street


Intersectionality is the study of intersections between different disenfranchised groups or groups of minorities; specifically, the study of the interactions of multiple systems of oppression or discrimination. This feminist sociological theory was first highlighted by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989. Intersectionality is a methodology of studying “the relationships among multiple dimensions and modalities of social relationships and subject formations”. The theory suggests that—and seeks to examine how—various biological, social and cultural categories such as gender, race, class, ability, sexual orientation, speciesism, and other axes of identity interact on multiple and often simultaneous levels, contributing to systematic injustice and social inequality. Intersectionality holds that the classical conceptualizations of oppression within society, such as racism, sexism, homophobia, and belief-based bigotry including nationalism and speciesism, do not act independently of one another; instead, these forms of oppression interrelate, creating a system of oppression that reflects the “intersection” of multiple forms of discrimination



Feminists, anti-discrimination activists, and social and economic just advocates, have generally embraced the theory of intersectionality (or intersectionalism) as descriptive of the state of multiple forms societal oppression.

Many view broad coalitions of the oppressed as key to opposing social Injustices, and intersectionality suggests that alliances and cooperation between various affected interests could create such a broad coalition.

While the theory of intersectionality includes acknowledgement of speciesism among the many other forms of discrimination, recognition of the role of speciesism in oppression of animals has been ignored by the vast majority of the left.

Logic would dictate that a coalition of oppressed groups, embracing support for one another’s interests, would be a powerful political engine. And not just in voting, but in legislative agendas, in demos, in cross-posting, in social media, in cross-blogging, in public solidarity.

For much of the left, such an approach may be productive.

But for the animal movement, intersectionalism is a one-way street.

And it leads to a dead end.

Blacks, Hispanics, women, LGBTs, etc, are all oppressed in one way or another. Their basic human rights are frequently denied them. Blacks are shot down in the streets, Hispanics are rounded up and deported, women are still fighting for equal pay and workplace respect, for reproductive freedom and an end to patriarchy, LGBTs have no legal protection against bigotry in the workplace or the marketplace.

Yet most of those people in turn abuse, exploit, and oppress animals.

People who are oppressed by others generally react negatively when their own oppression of animals is discussed.

To the observer, there is a certain justice when one who denies rights to others finds his own rights violated. But most who complain of oppression seem oblivious to the harm they do in turn. Most see the specks in the others eyes but are unaware of the beams in their own.

In a previous article, If You Oppress Animals, Why Should Anyone Care if Someone is Oppressing You?, I asserted that being oppressed does not entitle one to sympathy if they, too, are oppressing others, including animals. This article seeks to enlighten those who are unaware of the oppression for which they are responsible.

To end oppression, cruelty, and the violations of the rights of others requires an understanding of what we do to others, to both people and animals.

As to animals, the horrors visited upon them by even the most benign meateater or dairy consumer makes any oppression suffered by humans to be almost laughable.

What group of oppressed humans is slaughtered at the rate of six million per hour?

What group of oppressed humans is born into slavery? Raped when of age to conceive? Has their newborns torn from them at birth and murdered? Are then slaughtered when unable any longer to produce milk?

What group of oppressed humans has their babies ground up alive?

What group of humans is boiled or dismembered alive?

Even being shot down in the streets by racist police seems humane compared to what animals endure.

Being deported, earning less money, or being fired are relatively harmless affronts, compared with being the victims of institutionalized genocide.

Oppressing others is unforgivable. We are conditioned to consider it understandable. Even acceptable.

What is not understandable or acceptable is the continued oppression of animals when ignorance can no longer be offered as an excuse.

The animals do not care how unjustly you have been treated as you murder them.

Nor do I.

Broad political coalitions might be able to effect minor advances in animal protection, but they cannot do much to diminish the horrors suffered by animals trapped in the food system.

Only ending capitalism presents the possibility of banning animal agriculture, and capitalism cannot be defeated politically.

The value of intersectionality would only accrue to the animals and to animal activists were such a broad coalition of the left united to effect socialist revolution.

Saving animals is not a goal of socialism. Saving animals is a by-product of socialism. Saving animals is not a bit intentional, but is a function of socialist economics.

Capitalism rewards exploiting animals, rewards raising and murdering them. Capitalism bestows profits upon those who increase production and consumption of anything. Including animals.

Socialism removes profits from the equation.

Socialists are no more sensitive to the plights of animals than are other people. But socialism as a system destroys fewer animals than does capitalism. This simple fact should militate for every animal activist, every animal lover, every rescuer, every compassionate human being, every vegan, to become a socialist revolutionary.

As long as there are profits to be made on the enslavement, exploitation, and murder of animals, enslavement, exploitation and murder will continue.

Profits are responsible for almost all the animal cruelty on Earth. Businesses are protected in committing their horrors by governments and the law.

Efforts to promote compassion and veganism cannot change human nature or human behavior.

Only the force of government can protect animals.

And the only governments which might be disposed to protecting animals are socialist governments. Human rights and social justice are basic elements of socialism. Animal Rights are more likely to be embraced by socialist governments than by capitalist ones.

But even socialist governments indifferent to animals would be far more humane than are capitalist governments.

My support of socialism is directly related to the mechanical effect of economics on animal production, exploitation, and consumption. Socialist societies murder and consume half the animals, per capita, as do capitalist societies. The combined effect of removing profit from production, centrally planned and regulated industry, bureaucratic inefficiency, etc, means fewer animals are bred, murdered, and butchered. On a global scale, socialism would mean 30 BILLION fewer animals dying each year on slaughterhouse floors than are murdered now. It would mean one and a quarter TRILLION fewer sea creatures killed each year.

And this would be under socialist societies which did not care a whit about animals.

The effect of socialist economics alone would save more lives than thirty thousand of our current animal movements.

I arrive at that figure because over the last 50 years the animal movement has been responsible for saving the lives of a mere million or so animals per year. To have the same effect on reducing animal murder as socialism would have, we would need to be 30,000 times bigger than we are as a movement. Each and every animal activist, rescuer, adopter, transporter, donor, crossposter, emailer, protester, letter writer, phone caller, voter, would need to be multiplied by 30,000!

Capitalist apologists observe that the left is as indifferent to animal suffering as is the right. That is somehow supposed to militate for capitalism? Capitalism is the most evil force ever unleashed by humans. It institutionalizes the basest of human behaviors and instincts, and suppresses the essence of all that is admirable in our species.

The future of humanity, if there is to be one, must be a socialist future. Not because socialism is a more moral system than is capitalism (which it is), but because capitalism will eventually destroy the environment, extinguishing humans, animals, oceans, rivers, rainforests, and the very air we all breathe.

Advocates for animals must join in broad coalitions with advocates for social and economic justice in working toward social revolution.

We must end the economic and legal systems which fuel and protect the Animal Holocaust.

It may come about by violent revolution or through political action. But the Animal Holocaust will never end through private action or recruiting vegans and activists. Our current course of action is ineffective, counter-productive, and doomed to failure.

Socialism is the only hope for animals, short of human extinction.



Amory 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 is to advertise!



10 thoughts on “For the Animals, Intersectionality is a One-Way Street

  1. Human extinction sounds about right if they animals are to get a break. Intersectionality is a scam for animal activists. We are expected to help all the other social justice warriors and then get told that we are offending them if we compare animal oppression or suffering to that of human beings. The oppressed turn out to be good oppressors themselves. Count me out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • There can be a compromise.

      Animals raised under industrial farming conditions are merely units. If raised on a smaller scale with the emphasis on quality of life prior to slaughter then meat eaters can still get their protein.

      People need to try the taste difference between organically reared animals and mass produced animals. We have our own chickens and the difference between our eggs and the supermarket ones is incomparable. I am happy to pay a bit more for an animal I know has had a better life.


      • A better life is not necessarily a life worth living. Whether industrial farming or smaller scale, the end is always the same: undeserved death.

        I do hope your chickens survive past the point when they are spent laying eggs.

        Liked by 2 people

      • There is no such thing as humane slaughter of animals. Murder is always terrifying and painful to the victims. And the life of the victim is as valuable as is the life of the murderer or the consumer. In my opinion, even more so. Meat eaters just hire someone else to do their killing.

        Liked by 1 person

      • We used to kill a few of our chickens but I found it so disheartening and laborious plucking them that we stopped.

        I believe that most people would shy away from killing their own meat, preferring to buy it in plastic foil in a supermarket where they are not reminded that it actually came from a live animal. However, I think it unlikely the whole world will go vegetarian – and even less likely vegan – so the more humane/organic methods of raising animals should be ENFORCED BY LAW if possible i.e. no feedlots, no battery-raised chickens, no pig pens (in the UK all pigs now have to be allowed to roam outdoors) etc.


  2. I agree and support Socialism. It’s a good start, toward reconciling our efforts of animal rights with human rights. Capitalism is the worship and dependence of 💰. It cares for no one, but seeks profit over people and animals. Socialism, which must come through political Revolution, is the only sustainable form of responsible government, for the citizens, the animal kingdom and sea creatures alike. I equate Capitalism with death. Capitalists appear alive, but are zombie dead, leaving a path of blood behind, where they have tread.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Hello Roland,

    I was very interested in this article and it reminds me of this book I read – ‘Sapiens: A Brief HIstory of Humankind’:

    The Israeli author, Yuval Noah Harari, has commented on the dire plight of animals, particularly domesticated animals, since the agricultural revolution, and is a vegan. In a 2015 Guardian article under the title “Industrial farming is one of the worst crimes in history” he called “[t]he fate of industrially farmed animals (…) one of the most pressing ethical questions of our time.” As he states:

    “The fate of industrially farmed animals is one of the most pressing ethical questions of our time. Tens of billions of sentient beings, each with complex sensations and emotions, live and die on a production line.”

    Liked by 2 people

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.