I believe that the case for Animal Liberation is logically
cogent,andcannotberefuted;butthetaskofoverthrowing
speciesisminpracticeisaformidableone.Wehaveseenthat
speciesism has historical roots that go deep into the
consciousness of Western society. We have seen that the
eliminationofspeciesistpracticeswouldthreatenthevested
interests of the giant agribusiness corporations, and the
professional associations of research workers and
veterinarians. When necessary, these corporations and
organizations are prepared to spend millions of dollars in
defense of their interests, and the public will then be
bombarded with advertisements denying allegations of
cruelty. Moreover the public has—or thinks it has—an
interest in the continuance of
thespeciesistpracticeofraisingandkillinganimalsforfood
andthis makespeoplereadytoacceptreassurancesthat,in
thisrespectatleast,thereislittlecruelty.Aswehaveseen,
peoplearealsoreadytoacceptfallaciousformsofreasoning,
of thetypewe haveexaminedin this chapter, which they
wouldneverentertainforamomentwereitnotforthefact
that these fallacies appear to justify their preferred diet.
Against theseancientprejudices, powerful vested interests,
andingrainedhabits,doestheAnimalLiberationmovement
haveanychanceatall?Otherthanreasonandmorality,does
ithave anythingin its favor?Adecade ago there was no
concretebasisforhopethatitsargumentscouldprevail,other
than confidence in the ultimate victory of reason and
morality.Sincethenthemovementhasseendramaticgrowth
inthenumberofitssupporters,itspublicvisibility,andmost
important,thelistofgainsmadeforanimals.Tenyearsago
the Animal Liberation movement was widely seen as
crackpot, and the membership of groups with a genuinely