But being still on the train, I'll write a few more words about my Austrian friend. After our interesting discussion about Hitler and the wedding of misanthropy and love for animals, we discovered that we are both vegetarians. I've been one for about five and a half years, she's been one for a whopping thirteen! She does admit to sometimes tasting flesh, when she doesn't want to be impolite - i.e. if she's invited to dinner and there is only flesh on the menu, instead of making her hosts feel embarrassed, she will prove flexible and have a little bite in the name of proper etiquette. However, her vegetarianism is not directly linked to the animal rights issue. It sort of came naturally when she was growing up in a very rural community. Her father was a doctor - the only doctor around - so people from the area would come to their house when something happened, and he would even perform surgery there. While he did that, he would always bring his daughter in and show her the workings of the human body - this is the meat, this is the muscle, this is the fat, these are the veins. Subsequently, when presented with the animal meat at the dinner table, the girl would start putting two and two together. What a wonderfully clear connection! The similarity between the animal flesh and the human flesh was so vivid in her mind, that eventually she became repulsed by meat and vegetarianism took over. To this day, the sight and smell of meat don't agree with her at all.
Anyhow - back to the demonstrations!
I reached Maastricht after a five hour train ride from Groningen. The plan, according to the Respect voor dieren website, was to meet up at the Central Station and walk from there to three different shops that sell fur. In front of each one, we would do a demo, with banners, posters and leaflet distribution. The protest had been announced to the authorities duly in advance, and no trouble was expected. In fact, there was no real trouble - but, unlike Groningen, there was quite a bit of hassling from the local police. To the best of my knowledge, and from my experience during the weekend, the friendly Groningen police force proved to be an exception from the general rule.
Exiting Central Station I immediately came upon a group of people with Anti-Fur posters and leaflets in a heap. One of them - a young man, dressed all in black like a true anarchist - seemed nice enough so I sat down and we began to talk. He was also from the North, but had traveled here to attend this protest, and spend a few days in the area. He'd never been to Maastricht before. There was another protest on the following day, and he would be sleeping over in one of the local squats. This is a pretty regular way to travel and stay for animal rights activists in Holland. I was offered to stay over as well, but I needed to leave in order to attend my next protest, in Soest, the following day.
As we began speaking, I noticed that a couple sitting across from us had a pet ferret with them. Neither of us had ever seen anyone with a pet ferret before, and it was difficult to keep our eyes off it as we carried on with our conversation. The ferret seemed quite afraid of all the people walking past, crawling inside his owner's coat and hiding behind her back. It seemed somehow fitting to start off an Anti-Fur march in the company of a live ferret.
As me and my fellow activist began talking, I asked the usual questions about how he got into the business and how active he was. He had been a vegetarian who one day decided to check out an anti-circus protest that was close to his town. That was three years ago and he's been active ever since. He, too, had left the ranks of the Anti-Dierproeven Coalitie for similar reasons as the two Utrecht activists I had spoken with before. They were not grassroots enough for him - and he definitely did not like the whole costume gig. I asked him about other organizations, such as the political Party for the Animals, and he shared my doubts about that. It's not an animal rights organization, but rather an animal welfare group - taking up very much a central view on animals, by pushing for better treatment, but no shift in the way of thinking. They're not against animal exploitation - they are simply for "humane" animal exploitation. This opens up two important questions for the animal rights struggle: 1) does it move the public's attention away from the root of the problem? Meaning: does it provide an easy-way-out for the public to extinguish their feelings of guilt about killing animals? and 2) does it create even more of a gap between the animal welfare and animal rights/liberation groups? Meaning: do the grassroots organizations come off as being even more extremist? These are interesting questions and I really can not answer them. Not yet, anyway. But it seems to me that the Party for the Animals can be summed up in the fact that they have a campaign against the castration of male pigs - not to stop the castration, but to make sure they are given the proper anesthetic.
Then, once again, the conversation turned to the neo-nazi groups. I now finally had the name of this strange group - Dieren tegen de Beesten (or For the Animals, Against the Beast - the Beast being the inhumane humans, of course). This guy had heard about them and also seen some of it in action. In his view (which mirrors the general view of the leftist/anarchist groups) these neo-nazis were just trying to buy popularity and sympathy by addressing the cause of animals. They are not vegetarian or vegan, and thus do not oppose the exploitation of animals in general, but rather they are against unnecessary and/or excessive cruelty. Therefore, they show up at demos such as anti-circus protests. Not too long ago there was a clash between right and left-wing animal rights groups. Around five neo-nazis (or "nationalists") of the right-wing group were actually (or were pretending to be) interested in the animal issue, but the majority of the group were there to "beat up some anarchists". On the other side, many of the animal rights people are also part of the anti-fascist movement, so needless to say - a fight ensued. Similar fights have been started at nationalist rallies, where even groups of "football hooligans" have shown up, not with any political agenda, but only to beat up some nazi punks. What an interesting mix of people! (click here to see a video from the neo-nazi/anti-fascist clash in Maastricht earlier this year).
My fellow activist had only once actually been to a protest where neo-nazi animal rights advocates were present. It was a few days after the massive fight broke out at the neo-nazi rally in Maastricht and an anti-circus protest was scheduled. My friend showed up with a small group of people, only to find that the nationalists were already there - and they had a group of very big, very muscular guys who looked like they were just waiting for a chance to take revenge after the attack on the rally, only days before. The anarchists were not ready to go head-on into a struggle with these wrestlers, so they decided to back down and did no protesting that day.
This struggle between the left and right comes as a big surprise to me, but is nevertheless an interesting subject, as it seems to unite the two sides in the issue of animals (if one is ready to believe the sincerity of the neo-nazi activists). These nationalists, my friend told me, are not skinheads. They look pretty regular and seem to be really trying to get some sympathy for their cause. But it's even worse in France, he went on. There the neo-nazis have almost stolen the animal rights cause for themselves, so that many people of the public think that if you are into animal rights you must be a fascist. You will get yelled at in the streets for wearing animal rights propaganda! I would greatly want to talk with one of these nationalist activists and hear their logic for their concern for animals. I can't help but imagine that it will prove faulty and completely at odd ends with their concern for human beings. Indeed, a friend in Rotterdam has offered to hook me up with one of these guys, but warned me that they might not take too kindly to the way I look... I will have to think about it.
But enough about neo-nazis. Back to the fur industry.
The journey began with a walk to the fashion store La Coup d'Or. The visit is briefly shown at the beginning of the video (below), but no real protest took place, as the owner immediately came out to discuss the issue with the protesters. He claimed not to sell any fur any more, thus making the protest pointless. Indeed, spring is not the season for fur - winter and autumn are much more popular - but protesters use this period to try to persuade store owners not to order any more for the coming seasons. This particular owner promised not to order any more fur for his store. But the protesters were not ready to take his words completely at face value. They were prepared for this and presented the owner with a contract, making him promise in writing that he would not order nor sell any more fur. If he broke this promise, they had permission to come and protest loudly in front of his store. I had never heard about this sort of action before, and was happy to learn about it. From now on, the local activists will make regular visit to check out the store and make sure he keeps up his end of the bargain. It seems that the anti-fur campaign had a small victory!
The walk then proceeded to fashion store Max Mara, now with two policemen on bicycles closely following the group's every move. Upon arriving at the store, the police immediately began setting some ground rules for the protest. We were not allowed to protest or give away leaflets in front of the store itself, but were put to the side where we would not be able to directly hassle the Max Mara customers. This is when I first began to realize the Dutch police methods for peaceful demonstrations. As the protesters had let the authorities know in advance, and were not breaking any rules, the police, of course, could not really do anything about the demo. But, seemingly just to remind everyone who is really in charge, the police can make up any rule they want as to how the protest shall take place. The most common of which is to tell everyone to stay put in one place. We weren't even allowed to cross the street! I had put on a poster (3 Good Reasons Not To Buy Fur) which I had hanging around my neck, as well as holding some leaflets, and with my camera in hand, I indeed crossed the street to get a wide shot of the whole demonstration. Immediately the policeman called me to get back to the group. I did so, without any defiance, as I wasn't clear on these rules. Nevertheless, I needed some more shots for the video, so I decided to go back - only this time, I would extract myself from the group by taking off all propaganda. I removed the poster from hanging around my neck, left all the leaflets behind, and crossed the street again - now only in my civilian clothes, just a member of the public, just like anyone else in the street - in order to film. This was not a good idea. When the policeman saw me on the other side, he got very angry and began shouting at me in Dutch. Of course I knew what he was saying, but I tried to explain in English that I wasn't wearing any protest propaganda and was just there to film a little bit. He did not care for my excuses and very explicitly told me that "if you don't go, you will be arrested!" So I went. Unfortunately, I had turned off my camera, so this does not show up on the video below. However, as I am filming the Max Mara logos, it is possible to hear the policeman shout "Hello!", followed by the policewoman's argument with one of the protesters, who tried to defend my right to film in public. I did not venture out of the group again after this and had no more trouble with the police - although, more was still to come after the demo in Soest (see the next post).
Overall, the demonstration was quite successful. Many people took leaflets, it was a busy street and the message was put across quite clearly. We were there probably for around an hour. Fur protests tend to showcase some gruesome imagery of dead animals, or even examples of animals skinned alive, which usually gets a mixed reaction from the public. This protest was not big on hardcore images - most protesters had the nice poster of the three living minks, to remind viewers of how the animals looked alive (and not shock them by showing them dead). One or two protesters had the skinned pictures hanging off them, but generally they were not very visible. That is why it surprised me when a father came walking past with his little boy and immediately grabbed both his eyes and ears to keep him from seeing and hearing the demo. The boy complained and fought his father, who quickly got them past the banners and back into blissful ignorance. This was in direct opposition to the father I had witnessed in Groningen, who sat down with his kids and spoke with them about what they were seeing. Poor little boy.
After finishing the demo, we packed up and decided to take a break. However, the police seemed interested in getting some information about the protesters - in particular, one of the loud ones - and asked for his ID and info. However, the police can't simply ask for your ID in Holland - they need to have a valid reason. So, having seen him rolling a joint, they "suspected" him of carrying drugs (a strange accusation in Holland, of all places...). Of course, a search showed that he was only carrying the legal amount, but by doing this the police now had his name and numbers. This can be seen in the video below.
After a well-earned rest, the protesters carried on to the third, and final, store of the day. An outlet of the Max Mara brand, this one was called "Fur & Fashion". Upon arriving the protest began almost immediately with shouting slogans against the store and its use of fur. This brought out the store manager who, like the owner of the first store, claimed not to sell any fur. This discussion can also be seen on the video. The protesters asked if she would be willing to sign a contract, but as she wasn't the owner, she could not do that. The group seemed a bit unwilling to believe her, but decided to give her the benefit of doubt and leave the store alone for a while. When asked about the store name, the manager said they were planning to change the name and subsequently remove "fur" completely from the store - both the products and the label. This seems also to have been a victory for the protesters, who will keep close watch over the shop and won't hesitate to show up with their megaphones if the manager breaks her promise.
So all in all this was a successful day for the Maastricht ant-fur protesters! It was a great relief to actually experience results. But therein lies a great difference between the anti-experiment protests I had seen the day before, and this sort of protest. Basically, when protesting against vivisection, the direct influence on the culprits is very limited. The doctors and scientists in the labs are unlikely to be affected by the protest. So it is directed to the public, to raise awareness. But the public is really quite powerless in these matters - unless they are directly involved in the business of experimentation or animal breeding. Sure, they can write letters and start a discussion, but they lack their most powerful weapon - the main weapon of any consumer - which is the ability to boycott. It is possible to boycott companies that use animals for experiments (particularly those dealing in cosmetics and such), but boycotting medical labs or university experimentation buildings is a whole different story. With fur products, however, the consumer does wield quite a lot of power. Either you wear fur or you don't. And when dealing with specific stores, showing up in front of them to shout and badmouth the products with pictures of skinned rabbits and minks - well, they all fear bad publicity, and this sort of method really does work. They fear the consumer - as they damn well should - and they fear the boycotts. This is why the Maastricht protests were so successful. Of course, it has to be put in context with the fact that this is not the first demonstration of this sort in Maastricht - far from it. These are regular walks, made by people who are truly active and dedicated to their cause. That is why the store owners know that if they break their agreement, there will be consequences.
In addition, without ever really talking to the public, it was my feeling that the people responded much more positively to this protest, compared to the one in Groningen, which was much more dramatic and aggressive. This was more conventional - banners, some shouting (but not too much) and leaflets.
Finally, before going on to writing about the final protest in Soest, a few more words about the police authority. Recently, the police has been putting more pressure on animal rights demonstrations and doing what they can do get the information of everyone involved in it. As is the norm in the UK, for example, they videotape demonstrations and try to get photos and images of as many people as they can, to put into their filing system. The Maastricht demo was no exception. Since the schedule was announced beforehand, the authorities knew when and where everyone would be. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that at each stop, a man was waiting with a camera, filming everything. Every time someone tried to approach him, he fled the scene. He even filmed the group when they were sitting down and taking a break. At that point, two of the activists managed to catch up with him and asked the purpose of his filming. Just filming the buildings, he said. And when asked about the ear-piece he had on, he simply claimed to be listening to the radio. This mysterious man can be seen at the very end of the video below, where he indeed is seen speaking to a woman who is part of the city guard. Mystery solved.
No comments:
Post a Comment