Archive for April 28, 2012

Vivisection is fraud; “biomedical research” is sadism masked as “science”; and animal experimentation yields but a surrealist collage of meaningless data to pimp for the true numbers measured in profit and durrencies that float Big Pharma and the global vivisection-industrial complex far above the regulative power of the state and the norms of accountability.

Bullfighting involves a gang of puerile cowards in pink and purple tights playing at being “men.”

Hunters are dickless eunuchs who compensate for cruel shortcomings of nature and a deep inferiority complex by killing innocent animals in a perverse spectacle and rigged game dignified as a “sport.”

And now, for the last two decades or so, an increasing number of intellectually impoverished and morally bereft troglodytes are joining the worst protoplasmic scum of humanity in sordid kinship, in a profane bond of base bloodletting disguised as metaphysics, deep thinking, and spiritual depth.

Assholes posing as artists seek to transcend their inner vacuity through exercising the pathetic human will to power over animals and sublimating their bloodlust into rarified concepts with alleged enlightening effect. For these narcissistic lunatics think that clichéd concepts +  acts of torturing and killing animals = profound “art.”

They pretend that the heinous evil of their demented acts is either non-existent (the aesthetic trumps the moral) or is inapplicable to them as artists. These “higher types” arrogate to themselves the authority for a “teleological suspension of the ethical” (Kierkegaard); bound by rules but their own, these mavericks must sail “beyond good and evil” (Nietzsche), as do, but instead of blazing toward endless horizons and blue seas they run aground on sandbars of bodies rising out of  a cove of blood. “Animal artists” — these pompous posers, these putrid specimens of feculent humanity — are as insecure, weak, power-hungry, misguided, demented, and fraudulent as their bastard brethren weilding scalpels, swords, and guns.

It is time to call this “work” what it is – utter shit and pernicious crap that reeks of arrogance and ignorance.  “Ars Animalis” is the antithesis of anything remotely related to the beautiful rather than the ugly, to the sublime rather than to the sewer.

Apparently, this outrageous stunt below is real; as a sheep’s life might depend on the outcome of a democratic vote, here is one ballot you might want to sign. In my view, the “artists” should be locked into the guillotine and the sheep allowed to ram it until the blade drops on their fat jowels and pernicious heads which wouldl look more appealing in a crimson-colored basket than on their repellent Homo rapiens bodies.

Wait, sorry, that is not democratic, and thus vulgar, barbarian, and uncivilized. So, after voting for the sheep, let’s have a popular assembly and forum on whether the “artists” — Iman Rezai and Rouven Materne — should be allowed to live …. or … (the guillitine is too easy, too weak in impact and dramatic effect) be pushed from the tallest building in the world onto a street-sized canvas, to make the most beautiful painting ever beheld by human eyes.



Thursday, April 26, 2012

13.7 Billion Years

Ars Animalis | Die Guillotine

German artists will behead a sheep with a guillotine, unless you say no. You have 21 days left to vote.
[Animals were there at the beginning of art. But how did we get from Chauvet to “Dogs Playing Poker” and beyond? That’s one of the questions 13.7 will be asking with this month’s series, “Ars Animalis“—art of the animals.] Two students from the Berlin University of the Arts are crowdsourcing the conclusion of a performance piece entitled Die Guillotine (The Guillotine) that features said guillotine and (at least for now) a live sheep.

On their website, the artists, Iman Rezai and Rouven Materne, ask visitors a single question: “Soll dieses Schaf getötet werden?” (“Should this sheep be killed?”)

“The guillotine is the most compact reflection of our society,” says Materne in the German-only video, adding that the intentionally provocative work is a “criticism of current morality.”

As of this writing, the online poll has 147,473 respondents answering yes and 289,0463 voting no. Voters have the next 21 days to decide the fate of the helpless sheep.

Animal cruelty in art and culture is not new. One could point to a wide array of cultural events connected to the torture of animals. Bullfighting comes to mind, or any of a number of culture-specific rituals throughout history involving the death of animals, even human sacrifice.

More recently, at the Trapholt Art Museum in Kolding, Denmark, in 2003, the artist Marco Evaristti put live goldfish in blenders, inviting visitors to press the “on” button to kill the fish.

This theme, in fact, was an early one on 13.7 Billion Years. On March 14, 2008, just a few days after this blog was launched, the post was about the artist Guillermo Vargas Habacuc, who supposedly captured an abandoned street dog, tied him up in an art gallery and left him there to die of hunger and thirst while visitors watched his slow death.

Is this art?
Should live animals be used in art?
Does Die Guillotine make a point? If so, what is it?
Will the fate of the sheep say something about society?

Add your comments here.






Giornale Di Brescia
Saturday, April 28, 2012

They have broken through or climbed over the gates networks. They made their way inside the farm and opened the cages, taking away puppies, pregnant and all the little dog beagle who managed to find. It ‘s over a raid in the breeding of dogs to search for the event organized by Occupy Green Hill to ask – again – the closure of the ownership structure of the American Marshall.

The procession started from the parking lot of PalaGeorge, was attended by about 1000 people came from all over North Italy and also from the center. By way of the Craft sepentone deflected Instead of going towards Via San Zeno, the main road leading farm where he was deployed the cordon of police, groups of protesters have cut through the fields and the lanes, coming close to the fences.

From then on, the situation has become confused with groups of demonstrators who tried to open gates in the perimeter and teams of mobile riot police and police deployed to contain them. On the side of the gates, however, the protesters have opened a breach in the fence and broke into the farm, going into the sheds and taking away at least thirty dogs.

At the end of the day, the police had arrested 12 people from the local police station Montichiari were transferred to Desenzano. Some protesters said they had suffered violence by some officials.

Video here and here and here

Facebook Page

Occupy for Animals:

Green Hill 2001 is a company located in Montichiari (Brescia), which breeds beagle dogs to vivisection labs. From this farm, more than 250 dogs each month end in the enclosures, in the hands of vivisection and operating tables.Dogs are born to die and sentenced to suffer.

After the collapse of the other Italian breeder of laboratory beagle dogs, the Morini Stefano di San Polo d’Enza, it is likely that Green Hill has had a greater demand, expanding and becoming one of the main breeding dogs in the European market research animals.

Inside the Green Hill 5 huts are locked up to 2500 adult dogs, plus several litters. A lager made of animal shelters closed, aseptic, without open spaces without natural light or air. Rows and rows of cages with artificial lighting and ventilation system are the environment in which these dogs grow before being loaded onto a truck and shipped to laboratories in hell.

Among the clients of Green Hill, there are university laboratories, pharmaceutical companies and renowned trial centers as the notorious Huntingdon Life Sciences in England, the largest laboratory animal torture in Europe.

Those who derive profit from this pain?

For some years now Green Hill was acquired by an American firm called Marshall Farms Inc. Marshall is a name infamous throughout the world as it is the largest “factory” dog lab exists. The Marshall beagle is actually a standard variety.

Marshall’s dogs are shipped by air all over the world, but with the purchase of Green Hill as the European headquarters and the construction of a huge farm in China, Marshall is pursuing a plan of expansion and market monopoly.

In this must also be seen that the expansion project includes the construction of other shelters in Montichiari, to arrive at Green Hill have 5,000 dogs on the farm, which would become the largest breeding beagle dogs in Europe.

For a price from 450 to 900 € you can buy dogs of all ages. Who is willing to pay more can also buy a pregnant mother.

Green Hill Farm and Marshall also offer its customers on demand surgical treatments, including the cutting or removal of the vocal cords of some glands.

For Green Hill and Marshall Farm animals are just merchandise, objects to breed and sell, without the slightest scruple about pain and suffering – mental and physical – that they will suffer.

Where is Green Hill?

Green Hill 2001
Via Colle San Zeno 6
25018 Montichiari (BS)

Tel: 030 9961244
030 962061
030 9651902
Fax: 030 9659420




There was a similar daytime (dusk) liberation at Regal Rabbits farm in England, a bold and successful mass liberation action done by 75 people, as documented in Behind the Mask:

Slingshot, Issue #107

By Legion

For many radicals in the united states, creating an alternative subculture or lifestyle is the preferred choice of resistance to the effects of capitalism.* From greed to over consumption, from destruction of the environment to worker exploitation, a solution will occur with a simple process of alternative consumption or lifestyle. Daily consumers are convinced that where they spend their dollar counts in supporting various causes, or in not supporting others. I maintain this as a liberal (or, more precisely, the left wing of capital) option. Dropout culture, freeganism, veganism, bike culture and other personal boycotts of products still remain as supposedly essential to any resistance.**

The intention of these personal boycotts is to create resistance by not participating in the capitalist system. However, I believe this to be similar to other liberal concepts of change. Change is not something structural and based on generalized revolt, rather it is a result of conscientious consumption of alternative-looking products. Whether found in a dumpster or bought at a liberally conscious store, the same process is at work; consumption based on our current economy. You cannot buy capitalism away or garden it away — just as you can’t dumpster it out of existence, ride away from it on a bicycle, or compost it. Revolutionary change must be a qualitative shift in economic organization through generalized revolutionary consciousness and action, through revolutionary praxis.

All of these different ways of surviving within capitalism are not to be glorified or denounced. They are just ways to free up resources or relief of self-induced guilt. We need to use any resources we have and/or acquire to create resistance without limiting ourselves with consumer ethics (or lack of). These lifestyles can never be revolutionary because they rely on capitalism for their own existence.

Additionally, by focusing on alternative consumption habits within capitalism, one puts the blame of the problem on people who have no control of how those products are produced. Those who are simply trying to survive in this fucked up economic system and who couldn’t care less if they purchase X amount of product A or Y amount of product B. When we make judgments on others for their lack of cliquish boycotting, we are doing the work of capital to keep us divided in our resistance and focused on our consumption. This self-inflicted guilt is pacifying any real resistance beyond the constraints of ethical consumption. It is to the advantage of power and capital to have the blame diverted onto the working class, who have to buy fucked up products because they get shit for pay. It is important to live without guilt in personal consumption because the only choices we have are defined by capitalism. Until we bring some kind of revolutionary change, we will have no other choices. To think we have a choice is delusional.

Not only is boycotting non revolutionary, it is counter-revolutionary. It does nothing except obscure the many problems we face as it is structurally connected to an underlying whole. Due to a lack of theoretical commitment, our social confusion about what constitutes being radical and/or pro-revolutionary leads to our implicit assumption that we can have a consumer-driven revolution. There is no anti-capitalist negation in that sentiment and as such, it can only confuse potential militants away from revolutionary understanding. There are only two ways out of capitalism — revolution or death.

One may respond that a result of lifestyle boycotts is that you don’t have to work as much and, hence, are not producing the surplus necessary for capital reproduction. This is a problem because one does not take this position from a bird’s eye view. Not working is an impossibility for most people. Only a select minority can survive without working. This is not practical anti-capitalism, it is just temporary survival for a minority, with no threat to the whole problem of capital. Unless it is generalizeable (such as the case of generalized abandonment of work), it does not have the potential to cause structural change. Additionally, the surplus thrown out is nowhere near enough in volume to feed, clothe, or house the entirety of people. Most necessities must be produced, as they don’t materialize in dumpsters. That is why it will not sustain any type of revolt. This reality is often ignored by people in all likelihood because they secretly or unconsciously wish to keep the surplus for themselves, while living off the system and contributing less than average.

If this is the case, not only is alternative consumption misguided, it is actively co-opting any sort of actual resistance into a liberal understanding of the world, and potentially making the most militant of us into passive critics. This backs up our claim that alternative consumption and boycotting are not revolutionary and/or pro-revolutionary. They lead us into passivity with the system because we have found a nice escape. Just as the addict is able to coexist with daily misery, the radical is able to coexist with capital.

This passivity seems to have leeched into our lives where we reproduce the same behaviors and repeat the same seemingly-radical slogans while showing nothing of substance. Our easy survival off surplus production then contributes to our complicit apathy of the world. We forget in our privilege what we are against because we have no material connection to our suffering and exploitation, hence, the lack of need for struggle. Our very boycotting-as-struggle results in a boycott of struggle leading to pathetic notions of waiting for the “end” in whatever manifestation. To take the stance that pushing for anti-capitalist resistance and anti-hierarchical struggle is of no importance while waiting for the revolution and/or Armageddon and/or peak oil and/or global disaster and/or 2012, is a very privileged stance. We who are in prison, who are being deported, who are being shot, starving, suffering from mental illness, domestic violence, rent, bombs, torture, debt, assimilation, gentrification, rape, assault, houselessness, enslavement, etc. cannot simply wait idle for things to get better. To be passive to our oppression is to allow our world and its entire constituency — including ourselves, to be exploited, while apathetically waiting for some hypothetical end which may never come. None of us are free until all of us are free.

In conclusion, the best personal boycott that you can do is to kill yourself, and that won’t change anything.

In Death and Suffering,

We are Legion for we are everywhere.

*For my purposes, I define capitalism as a specific stage in a commodity-producing society characterized by exploitation of those who work for wage-labor by the purchaser of their labor-power (or capitalist) selling the workers product/service for more than their wage. This mode of exploitation is the form of social surplus production/appropriation in capitalism. That surplus produced by the workers self-expands through re-investment in machines, factories, or other financial assets, taking over new industries and countries providing the system with the need for competition and perpetual growth. Everything else falls into place in attempts to maintain this from the existence of the state to contain revolutionary class conflict or brutally expand markets to the non-capitalist world through warfare to financiers simply moving around money while skimming off extra into their pockets. This is the current economic system of united states and the rest of the colonized world. This means I define capitalism as based off of work. It is necessary to add that I do not define capitalism as mere greed or the profit motive as many do. These are merely bad manners in which capitalism expresses itself.

**For this article, we will define important terms as follows in order to avoid arguing semantics and confusing, implicit assumptions.

Freeganism – The practice of buying less for whatever reason as a response against the harmful effects of capitalism through some subversive means such as primarily dumpster diving, minor theft, road kill diets, squatting, charities, alternative “green” transportation (biking, vegetable oil fuel, train hopping)

Dropout culture – Not wanting to participate in the ‘system’ and, consequently, buying less or looking for other means of survival ‘outside’ the ‘system’.

Veganism – Boycotting animal products and by-products for ethical, dietary, environmental, or any other reason.

%d bloggers like this: