A tale of two conferences

[Guest guest]

Editorial

 

A Tale of Two conferences

 

 

 

*The Asia for Animals conference at Bali during 27th to 29th August provided

an excellent forum for networking and discussion. There were presentations

made on a wide variety of topics by speakers from different organizations.

Particularly enlightening was the zoo session where Rob Laidlaw from

Zoocheck Canada, Louis Ng from Animal Concerns Research and Education

Society of Singapore and Tony Greenwood talked about their views on animals

in captivity. However the focus was improvement of zoo conditions and not

the abolition of the zoo concept. A visit to Bali Zoo provided many useful

points for checking zoos. There were useful presentations made on rescue of

wild animals in emergency situations too. Jill Robinson of Animals Asia

Foundation explained the difficulties in rescuing animals and attending to

pets during the recent earthquake in China. Jonathan Cracknell of London Zoo

provided several insightful perspectives on elephants in captivity. The

conference also tackled the issue of wildlife trade in Asia and how laws

could effectively deal with the menace. There were also sessions on how to

effectively liaise with governmental agencies to extract the maximum benefit

for animals. The conference also uniquely highlighted peripheral issues

concerning animal welfare such as the psychological impact on human beings

working for the welfare of non human creatures. The conference provided a

very useful platform for exchanging views with people having wide ranging

opinions. The conference however was principally focused on animal welfare

rather than rights. This was reflected in the endorsement of the humane

slaughter initiative in Egypt by an Islamic cleric. Perhaps the most

noteworthy aspect of the conference was the screening of the film

'Earthlings' directed by Shaun Monson. The film revealed haunting images of

animals being abused in slaughterhouses, zoos, laboratories, zoos and sport.

It was a great opportunity to meet and interact with Mr Monson. The

conference served vegetarian food although no resolutions were passed to

promote vegetarianism. There was a candlelight vigil for animals held at

Sanur Beach. The meeting also brought together a number of representatives

of Indian animal welfare organizations to talk about a Federation of Indian

Animal Welfare Organisations. The conference was extremely educational but

lacked a component on veganism and stopped short of condemning animal

slaughter for meat. Nevertheless it provided a useful pointer for future

animal welfare and certainly animal rights conferences. The conference

illuminated the stark diffferences between animal welfare and animal rights.

*

 

The International Vegetarian Congress celebrated their Centenary at Dresden,

Germany, from July – 2nd August 2008.

 

Mrs. Annemarie Hanni – an ardent animal lover from Zurich, Switzerland,

sponsored my trip, and suggested I give a talk on the metaphysical and

psychological utility of a vegetarian diet.

 

There were five talks held simultaneously, four times a day. Some were very

popular. There were over 650 delegates from all over the world. The Indian

community came from London, the USA, and India – maybe about 10 in all.

 

I was the only one to speak on this topic. Other speakers (Indian and

others) focused on the aspects of health, environment, Christian theology,

history etc.

 

Since I had said that I did not require and back-up for a power-point

presentation, I was allotted the Elbe room. It had a capacity for an audient

of 150, but no mike! Thus I was rather relieved that the audience was

limited to about 50 people, so I did not have to yell at them – to shout

about spiritual aspects would have been absurd!!

 

I had joined the field of animal welfare by the blessings of my Guru, Swami

Akhandanand Saraswati. To me, it was a miracle of sorts. I felt that my

Guruji was telling me that he is with me and all will be well!

 

All was well. There was an instantaneous rapport with the audience and I

could sense that the speech planned well in advance, was coming alive as I

spoke, and touching the hearts of each person. 50 is a small number, but if

even 5 people get the spiritual aspect of our religion in the right

perspective, it will have a greater far-reaching effect on many more lives.

I attach a cope of the speech for those who are interested.

 

Mrs. Hanni also arranged for a talk at Zurich, where 3 people were

particularly hostile to the concept of vegetarianism. I gave them the

thoughts of our religion – to live in a way that causes least harm to any –

and it was a sign of their being convinced, that they gathered up a

substantial donation for the animal welfare work at the end of the talk!

 

In my opinion, however, the vegetarian movement lack dynamism, and is

ineffective because the meat lobby is so much more efficient in promoting

their cause. I have spoken and sent emails to several important people,

giving my suggestions. I feel that an umbrella group should be set up under

a dynamic and committed leader, which has the principles common to all those

who believe in vegetarianism, ahinsa, environmental protection and a healthy

diet for all.

 

We are ineffective because we are scattered. If we came under one umbrella

globally, we would be speaking from a position of strength and be taken more

seriously.

 

Those who eat meat react with animosity as soon as they hear the word

'vegetarian'. We need to alter the nomenclature and use a catchy name or

title that appeals to all.

 

Instead of having conferences that are attended by people who are already

convinced – and sending newsletters to members who are already convinced –

we should invest in mass advertising in places of public transport. If

people see strong messages about how they harm their health, harm the

environment and contribute to world hunger with every mouthful of meat, they

will begin to alter their diet voluntarily. When we try to talk to them,

they become defensive. Smoking became politically incorrect because of mass

publicity – the same should be used to oppose a non-vegetarian diet. Instead

of harping on cruelty to animals, we should harp on the other harm caused by

meat production.

 

 

 

-------------------------------

Ghosh and Poornima Toolsidass