Animal Rights Quotes by Alice Walker and Others

Supporters of the animal rights movement and their opponents often use quotes to bolster their arguments. Unfortunately, some of these quotes are taken out of context, misattributed, or otherwise incorrectly used. Famous quotes about animal rights, from Paul McCartney to the Bible, are explored and explained here. Alice Walker One quote taken out of context is attributed to writer Alice Walker. Its a beautiful quote clearly about animal rights: The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites or women for men. Its one of the most famous quotes bandied about in the animal rights movement. The fact that it is attributed to the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Color Purple, a book that inspired a  movie by the same name, as well as a Broadway musical, makes it all the more credible and poignant. The problem is the quote is taken out of context, and Walker wasnt expressing her own views. The source of the quote is Walkers preface to Marjorie Spiegels 1988 book, The Dreaded Comparison. In fact, the very next sentence is This is the gist of Ms. Spiegels cogent, humane and astute argument, and it is sound. So Walker was simply summarizing someone elses views, not her own. Its easy to see how something like this spreads. Its a great sentiment, coming from a Pulitzer Prize-winning author. And technically, Alice Walker did write it. Adolf Hitler Critics of the animal rights movement, and specifically the aspect of it that involves vegetarianism, are quick to point out that Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian. Buzz such as this is a phenomenon of the internet age where misinformation spreads like wildfire if said information furthers one’s agenda. This rumor allegedly started because in his article in Psychology Today writer Hal Hertzog  reported that Hitler was overheard telling a female companion who ordered sausage while they were on a date: â€Å"I didn’t think you wanted to devour a dead corpse†¦the flesh of dead animals. Cadavers!† Subsequent inquiry and research have proven that Hitler was not a vegetarian, a fact clearly indicated in a 1964 Gourmet Cooking School  Cookbook written by Dione Lucas, who spoke openly about Herr Hitler’s favorite meat dishes. So much for anti-animal rights people trying to demonstrate a link between vegetarians and the world’s most evil bastard. Other Quotes About Animal Rights Paul McCartney was a vegan who famously and openly discussed his vegan lifestyle. He actually did say: â€Å"You can judge a mans true character by the way he treats his fellow animals.† Paul and his late wife Linda McCartney were both proponents of animal rights. Linda wrote in her book Lindas Kitchen: Simple and Inspiring Recipes for Meals Without Meat wrote: â€Å"If slaughterhouses had glass walls, the whole world would be vegetarian.†Ã‚   Writer Ralph Waldo Emerson also spoke of slaughterhouses, saying: â€Å"You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity.†Ã‚   Other quotes about animals and vegetarianism have been borrowed from other social movements. The context of these quotes is not directly related to animal rights, but the message is applied to the argument in favor of animal rights. Dr. Martin Luther King said: â€Å"Lifes most persistent and urgent question is, What are you doing for others?† There are other quotes related to social movements that are attributed to Dr. King and used for animal rights. This includes: Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Animal rights critics are also famous for citing biblical references to support their claim that people are supposed to use animals any way they desire, including eating them. This often used argument stems from Genesis 1:26-28:   Let us make  man  in Our image, according to Our likeness; and ...let them have  dominion over  the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air.   Some theologians have suggested that the word â€Å"dominion† was translated incorrectly and should actually be â€Å"stewardship.† Though Susan B. Anthony  likely was not responding to the use of the Bible to oppose animal rights, she did say: â€Å"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.†Ã‚   While there is no evidence to support the idea that King or Anthony were vegetarians, their words are universal. Is there any harm in commissioning their moving words to inspire a kinder world? -Edited and updated by Michelle A. Rivera

Analysis Of Albert Camuss The Stranger - 1070 Words

â€Å"The Stranger† by Albert Camus is a thought provoking novel that questions morality, society, justice, religion, and individuality. Camus creates a man that goes against society’s idea of the â€Å"normal† moral standards, making Meursault a stranger in his world. Meursault’s lack of emotion and sympathy towards others is what makes this novel so intriguing. The morbidity expressed by his character makes the book hard to read but also difficult to put down. A majority of people today as well as in Meursault’s time know that lying is wrong, but it is better than dying as a consequence of one’s actions. However, Camus creates a man that is a foil to this idea, and Meursault is made an outsider due to his difference in moral standards, bringing†¦show more content†¦This realization demonstrates the lack of control that people have over time, and by association, death. The reader assumes that since Salamano and his dog grow old together, they may die together. Close to Meursault’s execution, the chaplain asks, â€Å"But if you don’t die today, you’ll die tomorrow, or the next day. And then the same question will arise. How will you face that terrifying ordeal?† (Camus 117). Death, unpredictable and uncontrollable, will occur when it wishes, and through his indifference to time, Meursault asserts that getting upset over something known to be inevitable provides as useless. Meursault doesn’t care about anything enough to stay alive. The question is brought up: Is he depressed? He can’t be, because if he were, then he would have to care about something enough to be depressed about it. We’ve all had periods in life where we’ve felt down and didn’t care one way or the other for the world around us, but the degree of Meursault’s view on life is extreme. He feels nothing for anyone, not even himself. The inability to feel, care, and remorse is not relatable and is inhumane to the normal society. The reader can’t help but try to understand some of the reasoning he has because it is so obscure to us. The meaninglessness he feels towards one’s actions draws the reader’s interest, causing us to be more understanding of Meursault’s morbid perspective on life. The message brilliantly conveyed by Camus makes sense and holds weight. The story is aShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Albert Camuss The Stran ger1027 Words   |  5 PagesIn The Stranger, the admirable short novel translated in English, Albert Camus expresses the tragedy of integrity as a modern man can sense it. Meursault, the protagonist, projects Camus philosophy of absurdism, an extension of existentialism, by exploring the seemingly random meaninglessness of life. Thus, Mersalt is the epitome of a absurd man and acts accordingly throughout the progression of the novel. The story is centered around three deaths: that of his mother, the arab, and his own. In eachRead MoreLiterary Analysis: How Meursault Is Indifferent in the Stranger, by Albert Camus874 Words   |  4 PagesLiterary analysis: How Meursault is indifferent in The Stranger, by Albert Camus Although Meursault is the title character and narrator of Albert Camus’ short novel The Stranger, he is also a somewhat flat character. His apparent indifferent demeanor may be a convenience to Camus, who mainly wanted to display his ideas of absurdism. And as a flat character, Meursault is not fully delineated: he lacks deep thought and significant change. His purpose is that of a first-person narrator whose actionsRead MoreHuman Relations in Camus Novel, The Outsider, from an Existentialist View2123 Words   |  9 Pagesmovements across time. The human relations with God, love, society, death etc†¦ are relations that human make to live his life. I study in this paper the human relations in The Outsider novel by Albert Camus from an existentialist view. I want to study Meursault relations who is the main character in Albert Camus’s novel The Outsider , Meursault is being executed because he kills an arab person, but the main reason is that he does not cry at hi s mother’ funeral and lives his life as there is nothingRead MoreThe Individual Versus His Environment in The Stranger and Grendel1674 Words   |  7 Pages The Individual Versus His Environment in The Stranger and Grendel Due to the multifaceted nature of literature, analysis thereof is prone to generalization. One of the most grievous generalizations oft encountered involves failing to distinguish between a character and the novel it inhabits. Take John Gardener’s Grendel and Albert Camus’s The Stranger, for instance. It’s far too easy, when analyzing for dominant ideologies, to slap them both with the label of existentialism and be done withRead MoreLiterary Analysis Of The Stranger 2900 Words   |  12 Pages Curtis Poindexter Professor Slattum English M01B 11 December 2014 Literary Analysis: The Stranger The novel The Stranger is a first-person account of the life of M. Meursault from the time of his mother s death up to a time evidently just before his execution for the murder of an Arab. It was written by Albert Camus in 1942. Meursault however, is not your typical hero of a story; rather an antihero. He is neither good nor bad, and harbors no emotion. He goes through his life with a preconceived

Changes in Soviet Values Free Essays

Changes in Soviet Values Films in the Soviet Union during Stalin’s rule were primarily made for propaganda purposes. Some of the most famous films at the time were â€Å"Chapaev,† â€Å"Circus,† and â€Å"Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears,† which were all were aimed at describing Soviet Values during and after Stalin’s rule. The film â€Å"Chapaev† was produced in 1934 and was set during the Russian Civil War, and like â€Å"Circus,† which was produced two years later, they both reflected Soviet ideals of Stalin’s rule. We will write a custom essay sample on Changes in Soviet Values or any similar topic only for you Order Now â€Å"Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears† was produced in 1980, and it showed the changes in Soviet values after Stalin’s reign in the 1950’s and 1970’s. Even though each of these propaganda films is set in different time periods, each one illustrates the changing social values of that time. The movie â€Å"Chapaev† was directed by the Vasilyev brothers and was produced in 1934. The movie depicts the story of a soldier made commander named Vasily Ivanovich Chapaev, who led the Red Army to victory in the Russian Civil War. The main theme portrayed in â€Å"Chapaev† is the idea of â€Å"social realism,† and to show this the producers tell the story of the Soviet principals of equality within society, and the growth of the party. In one scene of the movie, Chapaev’s men loot local farmers, and Chapaev’s newly appointed commissar arrests the men involved and return the livestock. Initially, Chapaev was angry with his new commissar for arresting his men, as he feels he was undermining Chapaev’s power, but he learned to agree with him because the peasants supported him upon the safe return of their livestock. Chapaev’s new commissar explained to him that the entire war was being fought for the peasants, and by stealing from them it was hurting their image. This scene shows the equality within society that the Bolsheviks party was going for, and therefore the party gained more support. This scene in particular was propaganda because in war, armies do steal from farms, that’s just a fact, but when they return the livestock it makes the Bolshevik party look patriotic and respectful. In this movie Chapaev is portrayed as a flawless example of what a Soviet man should be like. He is a man who believes in every man being equal and in order for a party to strive it has to be focused on the needs of the group not just the individual. In Soviet History Chapaev is considered a hero and rightly so, his stand against theft and sacrifice for the war effort makes him an ideal Soviet man. The movie â€Å"Circus† was directed by Grigori Aleksandrov and was produced in 1936. Similar to the movie â€Å"Chapaev,† the theme in â€Å"Circus† is focused on equality in the society and the growth of the party. The movie depicts the story of Orlova, an American circus artist who is forced to flee the racism in America after giving birth to a black baby. Orlova ends up in Russia and start her circus career there, and she becomes a huge star. In fear of being exposed, Orlova stays in the circus and works for her cruel German boss von Kneishitz. Von Kneishitz is the only person in Moscow who knows about her black baby, but he is also the only person in Russia who cares that her baby is black. The movie climaxes with the revealing of her baby to her beloved audience, but in contrary to what Kneishitz thought would happen, the audience shows the baby love by passing him around and singing a lullaby to him. When Marion asks the Ring Master to explain everyone’s reaction, he says, â€Å"In our country, we absolutely love children. You may have a child of any color here: black, white, red, or even striped like a zebra or polka-dotted. Whatever’s your pleasure! † It cannot be denied that this movie is a propaganda film. It portrays that everyone is equal in the Soviet Union and that everyone is antiracist. In fact, in the 1930’s Jews were highly discriminated against, as proof through public anti-Semitism. Therefore, we see the films impression of racial equality as false. The movie â€Å"Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears,† (â€Å"Moscow† for short) was directed by Vladimir Menshov and was produced in 1980. The movie begins in the 1950’s and goes until the 1970’s. Although this film accurately shows a change in Soviet ideals, it is important to note that â€Å"Moscow† does have some levels of propaganda. For example, Katerina’s lover, Gosha, is seen as the ideal model citizen, especially when Katerina and Gosha talk about how Gosha is perfect and flawless. It need not be said that nobody is perfect, but the films portrays Gosha as the ideal citizen. This time period was significant in Soviet history because it showed a transition in Soviet values. This movie shows how traditional values in the Soviet Union became modernized as time progressed in the post Stalin era. During the 1970’s, the Soviet Union became neo-traditionalist, in the sense that they held on to their old values while attaining new ones. For example, we get a clear understanding of how Russia was adjusting to time with the development of Tonya, Ludmilla, and Katerina’s live styles. Of all the three main women in the play, Tonya is the best example of a traditional Soviet lifestyle. She marries at a young age and settles for a domestic life with a man that makes a respectable living. Katerina, on the other hand, marries at a much older age but to a man named Gosha who exhibits traditional Soviet values as well. For example, after Gosha gets in a fight, Katerina forbids him from ever fighting again, and Gosha agrees, but tells Katerina if she ever yells at him again he will leave her. Later in the same conversation, Gosha tells Katerina that it goes against his values that a woman makes more money than a man. This shows that there are still traces of traditional Soviet values in 1970 Russia. Tonya and Gosha both show that there are links to traditional soviet values even though its thirty years after Stalin’s reign. In contrast to the way Tonya and Gosha live, the lives of Ludmilla and Katerina give us examples of how Soviet values changed and modernized over time. For example, in the beginning of the film, signs of change in Soviet values are apparent. Early in the film, Katerina and Ludmilla go to the French Film Festival to admire the rich and famous. Ludmilla admits to Katerina how she thinks one of the female actresses is beautiful, and how she would love to live the life of her. This shows how people, especially women, were being exposed to materialism in Russia, and it was socially acceptable to aspire to be rich and famous. Katerina also shows a change in Soviet values for women. She is the head of a corporation after a series of floor promotions, and she lives in a nice apartment providing for her family. This is a perfect example of Soviet values changing from the idea that women in the Soviet Union didn’t have rights or power, to the modernized Soviet values where women were powerful. In conclusion, the movies â€Å"Chapaev,† â€Å"Circus,† and â€Å"Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears† are all largely applauded films that show the history and progression of changing Soviet values. â€Å"Chapaev† and â€Å"Circus† were both produced under Stalin’s reign, and they both contain some amount of Soviet propaganda as well as accurate references to Soviet values. They portray the traditional Soviet ideals of equality and unity of the Bolshevik party and how they were foremost in Soviet society. On a different note, â€Å"Moscow† takes place in a much later time, and proves that some Stalin era Soviet ideals were kept, but the attempt for modernization brought a necessary change in the ways people lived. As a result of the two sets of values portrayed through Gosha and Tonya, and Ludmilla and Katerina respectively, we see that Soviet ideals eventually became neo-traditionalistic. The shift in Soviet ideals occurred because Stalin’s long and influential reign came to an end. After such a long time of repression, it can be argued that this change was inevitable. How to cite Changes in Soviet Values, Papers