Rise of the Neo Luddite – The Best Laid Plans of Mice and Men

 We have failed in the education of my generation. We are failing in the education of the next generation. Our parents have an excuse. They grew up in a period where science was by rote, where it was treated as canon and religion. The bible of education, questioning was not encouraged as much as rote memory. That was the old way and this is the new. The ultimate irony of the age of information is that it is also the age of misinformation. Even the greatest invention of mankind (In My Humble Opinion), the internet has been subverted for this. I think we live in such an age of wonder that we have forgotten what the internet is. It is the largest source of information that exists in the universe to our knowledge.  It has seen rise to great sources of information such as Wikipedia and great sources of misinformation such as Natural News or Mercola. It has fought great injustice by forming groups such as Anonymous who have taken on Scientology. It has brought light to the dark.
But it has also let darkness fester where we can see it. And nowhere is it more seen in the Technophile Luddite. Admittedly an oxymoron but this is a real market of individuals. Apple used to sell technology based on how intuitive for new users and how simple it was taking out of the consumer the idea of customisation and the use of the product as a lifestyle choice rather than a competitor (face it Apple fans, it isn’t doing anything a much cheaper Windows/Linux powered PC cannot bar looking pretty). Science has exceeded the average man’s grasp because we have been slack at teaching in schools. It is filled with stereotypes such as the uncool science geek rather than the reality that most people need to be well adjusted to work in science.
No more is this more evident with the rise of the Animal Liberation movement and the whole Vegan Culture. It encompasses a varying mix of three different entities. Animal Rights (AKA PETA and the ALF), Nutritionists (As opposed to the dietician) and Alternative Medicine (Well known purveyors of woo). 

Not to be confused with this man who is a well known purveyor of bullet based ballet

Recently Camille Marino had a discussion with other Animal Lib/Rights members a transcript of which can be seen on her lovely and charming website which is filled with interesting ideas that can lead to a productive and well functioning society where the best laid plans of Mice and Men come to fruition. And the best way to deal with her plans is to dissect her arguments. Rhetoric aside, I think the best way to deal with her movement is to locate the weak points of her argument and shred them mercilessly. We should not take such a threat to our students lying down. It is only a matter of time before one of them (and indeed myself as a member of the medical student community) are targeted by them for personal attacks and it is only a matter of time before they go too far and one of us ends up like Dr. George Tiller (who was murdered after years of threats on doctors who provided late term abortions). Camille has called for deaths and has made threats. We should not ignore them. 

If we had Prep Schools for Pedophiles where students learned the proper art of grooming children in order to successfully kidnap, molest, rape, and murder them, who thinks that mainstream society would allow this “academic curriculum” to continue unimpeded?

No one would allow this curriculum to exist. This is a straw man argument of the most ludicrous calibre because it assumes that there is a benefit to molesting and killing children. There isn’t one. It merely produces very unhappy children as we have seen across the globe. Comparing Animal Experimentation to the Molesting of Children is an insult to the children who have suffered under the hands of paedophiles and to the memories of children murdered. 

In actuality, we have Prep Schools for Industrial Animal Abusers – they’re called universities. And, thus far, we’ve allowed their production lines to churn out sadistic animal tormentors and sociopathic serial killers with reckless abandon! 

We allow the enemy to recruit young people, strip them of their morality, compassion, and integrity and indoctrinate them into their industrial horror show. We only turn our attention to them after they are fully-entrenched professional murderers who are protected in the enemies’ fortified compounds. This is a losing proposition! 

It’s time to start eliminating the students while they are vulnerable. THIS is where every single one of us can start realizing quantifiable gains and victories… each success creates the momentum we need to propel us toward our greatest victory yet – the complete obliteration of the vivisection complex! 

Personally, I want to see the terrorists in bloody white coats buried alive in their dungeons. Is there anybody else here who wants to see the torture industry implode on itself in our lifetimes?

We are portrayed as immoral monsters if we experiment on animals. Our teachers are portrayed as sinister Machiavellian doom lords who enslave animals to produce monsters to do our bidding. (Maybe just Dr. P. Z. Myers. I am sure he has a cyborg giant squid army somewhere…) 

As  drawn by Ethically Challenged

That may be the case or it may not be. I can only speak for myself on this matter. I am sure that there are biologists who gain a pleasure out of experimentation. But I am sure I am the norm and felt deep discomfort with experimentation but realised what I had to do and why
I had to do it.
Camille is calling for us to be targeted and indeed we will be. The next year’s intake of students will be faced by down by her followers. We need to protect them. I would advocate for them to be taught some Facebook safety (Camille has recommended and indeed boasted about tracking us down via the methodology of the internet). Harassment should not be tolerated and should be persecuted to the full extent of the law. In addition we must educate animal handling from an earlier age. We should teach our children where our food comes from and what it looks like.

Okay, the first thing we need to come to terms with is that, with very few exceptions, activists are NOT scientists.  We can mimic some facts here and there and impress each other, perhaps, but the enemy is laughing at us.  THIS is their territory. These are their rules. There is nothing left for us to discuss, debate, or negotiate. 

It is self evident that the atrocities committed against animals in laboratories must end. It is our job to stop it, not debate it with the enemy.  The time for civil discourse has expired!

If students stand up and begin to say “NO! We will not torture animals in the name of science anymore!,” science curriculums will adapt. Academia and the sciences will be forced to evolve. This is the 21st century. If they won’t evolve of their own accord, then we must leave them no choice in the matter.

Of course they are not scientists bar a few. And they know it. Possibly because I have been bugging her about what alternatives she suggest we use and the best she could come up with was a blasé remark about experimenting on the dregs of society (I had to quietly point out that she insulted Jews and Romani and the various Slavs and Black people and the mentally retarded who were used in human experiments particularly during the 1920s to 1950s.) And that we do experiment on humans. It’s part of drug testing and ironically the people who often agree to be tested on are the poor and the desperate.
If students said “that they wouldn’t torture animals anymore” the teachers and indeed their curriculum won’t adapt. I hope it won’t adapt. Ideology must not dictate what science does or else we are not teaching science but applied politics/theology. We would live in a world of Communist Russia where Lysenkoism was taught rather than the bourgeoisie evolution.
The curriculum will grind on with the student not learning the importance of a lesson. In the end it will harm the student’s future career. I know, I have a fear of cockroaches and refused to dissect one in high school and when exams came around I had no clue and didn’t score so well. I will fully admit that I suffered due to my fear. If I had sucked it up and done the damn dissection I would be better off as I would have had a better score and maybe (just maybe) enough to have gotten into a uni back home and not have to study 6 days a week and spend 12 hours a day at uni. The punishment is not to the system but to me.
Academia and Science won’t evolve if you halt experimentation. They will stagnate as the experimentation on animals is the way that we have understood how living systems function. Without that only botany will improve while our understanding of zoology and human biology will stagnate. We have improved experimentation to the point where we are using fewer animals not due to threats from animal liberation but because we are devising clever systems that require fewer animals to produce a quantifiable result. Without experimentation the clever systems will not be incomplete. Incomplete experimentation is dangerous particularly in terms of the production of medication.

Much to my surprise, several vivisectors were compelled to confess their crimes on NIO and two initiated email dialogues with me this past week. While animal abusers will get no absolution from me, there was one glaring common denominator in each of their diatribes and it is hugely important for us to understand this: 

Student vivisectors are plagued with guilt! They are at the crossroads between choosing compassion or sadism. They know that they are torturing an innocent animal but their sociopathic professors encourage them to do so. 

And most naïve young adults do not have the courage to take a stand – not against their professors and not against us!Psychological warfare deployed on the most vulnerable students in the most vulnerable vivisection demographic may hold the master key to our success.

I have no guilt that I have experimented and witnessed experiments on animals. I sleep quite soundly with meat in my stomach.
Compassion for animals is fine, but not at the cost of compassion to humans. The animal liberation movement see the cruelty but not the effect. They don’t see the lives improved by the experiments.
If you are receiving emails from students confessing crimes, then I will ask that these students realise why they learn on animals. Because it’s practical and logical. You can look at a million models and billion diagrams and not one will compare  to the real thing. I have beautiful textbooks on anatomy and not one has compared to physically seeing the organs being pulled from a cadaver and later from a body. The texture tells you a lot. The grainy feel of a smoker’s lung or the hardness of liver cirrhosis cannot be taught by a model. So we dissect humans. Likewise biologists dissect animals. A vet cannot learn his trade without animals. He would not be a very good vet. 

Once we isolate matriculated biology students – and I am encouraging everyone to intercede no later than their junior year – we can have a profound effect on their futures. First, we need to empower them – inform them that they have the ability to make the right choice. A
ppeal to their consciences and emotions. Appeal to their intellect. If a student still aspires to become a professional animal abuser, then s/he should be deemed an enemy combatant and, thereby, forfeits all rights.

 This is an abject threat. It’s no different from saying recant or suffer. And we remember those words to this very day. The day we recant is the day everyone else suffers. The right choice is the stagnation of science, the wrong choice is the productivity of biology saving lives. They aren’t appealing to our intellect, they are trying to scare us into submission. Make us fear for our lives so that we abandon the pursuit of knowledge.

But it does move.

  • We don’t need large groups or elaborate campaigns to achieve our ends – only individual initiative and determination.
  • Enemy students should begin to receive their own home demos.
  • Their neighbors, friends, and communities should be leafleted and warned about their sadistic inclinations.
  • Many students still live at home which makes their parents fully complicit. They should receive demos and visits at their place of employement.
  • The internet is a weapon in the right hands. Email, telephone, fax campaigns can be highly effective at the enemy’s parents’ offices.
  • All public domain information may legally be republished online and in your communities.
Camille lays down the tactics she intends. It’s similar to such groups as Al-Qaeda. Small individual groups operating under a greater banner. A franchise of terror (as opposed to fried chicken). If one group does something insane and fails they can be denounced while if one succeeds they will be lauded as a success for the whole entity. She aims to hit students in their own societies terrorising their families and neighbours an alienating them. Knowing they cannot terrorise a biology lab (So wait, if we hire Sally the Vivisectionist you will protest at a higher rate than before?) beyond what they already do without breaking the law they are forced to move the harassment tactics to friends and family.
This is similar to the Westboro Baptist Church. And using tactics similar to scientologist’s “fair game”. And the problem is public domain. We need to protect our information. Facebook once upon a time was a student driven system for networking of students. Now it’s a place for us to post funny captions of cats. We forget that we give out a lot of information on it. We should encourage students to move their profiles out of public domain and into private.

We are going to Save the Students and stop them from becoming Vivisectors. We know we are going to be most effective in determining the demographic that is the least mind screwed by the enemy, that is they have not picked up a knife yet. We believe juniors fit this description, with a short visit to the youngest students to let them know they can opt out of all dissection even though no one tells them this. If no one obeys, no one’s in charge!Subversion, Subversion, Subversion:

  • To make the students question their loyalty to the professors who are teaching them.
  • To let them know they have power to refuse to cut.
  • To show them their teachers are lying about how they can fill their dreams with out animal experimentation.
  • To expose the sickness and evil that their teachers are masking behind science.
 Since when has scientific curriculum been decided by the students? That would be like me standing up and declaring that I don’t wish to learn Gynaecology because being a vagina doctor is a woman’s job. I would get laughed at. Or worse… Failed if I refused to attend those lessons.
1.      Professors aren’t loyal to you. They are there to teach. If you do not want to be taught then they won’t teach you. However if what you don’t know is important then it will come back to haunt you.
2.      You can refuse to cut. I have refused to dissect a cockroach because I am scared of roaches (yeah… I sat through an autopsy of a decomposing guy and then went out to eat a sandwich while my peers retched and I think roaches are gross). It’s just that you will either lose marks of your final grade either by omission of practical credit or by not learning something

April: How do you determine weak ones

Camille: The weak ones are the isolated alienated science bookworms, Who’s never been out from under their mother’s skirt. You can see them a mile away. 

Gingie: something like, how can we tell who the weak ones are? 

April: right, that’s what i meant 

Sia: I have found weak ones abuse animals

Psst… That’s a movie stereotype. Most biologists are pretty healthy and have to be well balanced. It’s hard to give a lecture if you are isolated and it’s hard to do research if you don’t work well in groups.

Amongst all the scientists, biologists would be the most outdoorsy type (since biologists often have to work outdoors).

Agatha: WE cannot debate science- but maybe have a call for debates? have knowledgeable students debates. other- anything to establish a line and make students choose a side? 

Camille: Absolutely, Aggie 

April: Science is actually debatable, lets not treat it with irrefutable

So let’s debate. We are willing to talk and to explain why we do things this way. However we do know that it’s not us who is making the threats.

I am willing to talk and indeed explain how things work within reason. Camille is not. Camille does not have the solution and is infact part of the problem of animal research. That people born of privilege and no perspective will think that the value of a human being is the same of a lab rat. Knowledge is important and knowing what our juniors and indeed future is in for is vital. 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>