Nottingham Uni: The Veggie's Friend (Interview)

The University of Nottingham was recently voted the Number 1 "Most Vegetarian-Friendly UK University," in a poll conducted by Peta2, the youth wing of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). In achieving first place, Nottingham beat Glasgow University, which has Vegan Society accreditation, into second place.

According to Peta2, the university has been "working alongside Vegsoc – Nottingham University Vegetarian and Vegan Society." Alex Claridge, the society's social security was kind enough to answer a few questions about what the group have actually been doing.

Links: Nottingham University | Peta2 | VegSoc

Q: What's your response to the university's success in the Peta2 poll?

AC: We’re delighted with the result, and incredibly proud of the accolade both as a society and more widely as a university. Although there have been previous animal ethics societies at the uni, this is our first year as ‘vegsoc’and, already, we’ve achieved a very great deal – although that isn’t to say there isn’t more to do! Recogition from PETA is really just the icing on the (vegan!) cake for everyone who has been involved in the society this year, and an affirmation that whatever we’ve done this far is working.

Q:What is your personal experience of being vegetarian on campus?

AC: It is probably more accurate to answer this one in terms of vegetarian and then vegan. As a vegetarian on campus, you can be sure that there will be options for you daily and usually a good selection. For vegans, Nottingham Uni is certainly better than many Universities; we’re currently going through the motions to finalise Vegan Society accreditation, and we hope to be the first English Uni and the second in the UK. In practice, this means that there will always be vegan options, which is a fantastic starting point, and beyond that we’re committed to ensuring that there will be a variety of exciting and great-tasting vegan friendly options.

Q: What have you been doing to encourage the university to become more vegetarian friendly?

AC: In terms of catering, the University have needed little encouragement! I think more and more people are recognising that vegetarian and vegan lifestyles have much to offer and attract a wide variety of people from all walks of life – including both students and lecturers! Perhaps we’ve hastened the process, by offering advice, feedback and the framework for development but our progress in terms of vegan and veggie catering has very much been a co-operative effort on behalf of both our society and the university. We went to the University with solutions rather than problems; I think it is important to be positive in whatever your goal – the emphasis is on what we can do, not what we can’t.

Q: What else do you hope to get from the uni?

AC: We don’t really see our work as a case of what we can ‘get’ from the University – we are after all technically part of the same institution! Rather, we hope that we can fulfil our role as a representative group for vegetarians and vegans at the University to the very best of our abilities. We hope to continue developing food at the University in the same direction to cement the University as truly a leader in terms of veggie and vegan catering. Likewise, we are always glad to tackle issues that might be raised by individual members.

We’re also hoping to expand our sphere of influence and involvement, beyond its current realm of food, to include other issues of concern at the university. We’re acutely aware that Nottingham, for all its achievements in some areas, doesn’t have the best reputation for its involvement in vivisection. We would certainly like to encourage a more open dialogue and discussion about the role of vivisection in the University’s research and teaching, and also open up the floor for feedback and discussion with the student population. Hopefully, this is something that the University will feel able to work with us on – it would be fantastic to boast of a University that is truly leading the way in all areas for vegetarians, vegans and animal-lovers alike.

Q: What other activities has the society been involved
 in?

AC: We maintain a busy social programme, including fortnightly meals out and a weekly bar night at the wonderful alley café. We’re developing a discount card for our members to get top offers at restaurants and stores around the city, and we’re currently administering a campus wide survey to get the first comprehensive impression of veggie/vegan numbers on campus and to tailor our work with the University over coming months to student feedback and needs. Over the summer vacation period we’re hoping to produce a essential guide to veggie Nottingham to distribute to new students in September. Members are also working on a compendium of great veggie and vegan recipes to offer online. We like to be kept busy!

Q: The group recently changed it's name from Animal Ethics Society to Vegetarian and Vegan Society. Can you say someting about the thinking behind this change and what it has meant in terms of your activities?

AC: The name change was, in many ways, one of practicality rather than any deeper meaning! The society is generally known as vegsoc - with the official title more one for forms and paperwork. Vegsoc is considerably easier to say, write and brand than Animal Ethics for a start. The society does have a different approach to the previous Animal Ethics society, although I would argue our aims are much the same - broadly speaking, we're in it for the animals. From the outset, our focus has been on showing the fun side of vegetarianism and veganism and dispelling any myths that people may have. We totally re-branded the society, and we've enjoyed a busy social schedule and met lots of new members along the way.

There are a million and one ways you could run a society under the banner of vegetarianism, but our particular take is that by creating a friendly, accessible, and relaxed atmosphere for would-be members and the curious we're doing our bit to take vegetarianism, and particularly veganism, to the masses. Recently, we've had a week of meals and vegan buffets and we had, at times, 50% non-vegetarians dining with us - non-vegetarians who chose to come to our events, on the basis of great food, and a good time. Veggies for the world, albeit one meal at a time! That isn't to say we don't have members who are interested in the academic, philosophical or campaigning side of things - certainly, we're glad to talk to anyone about the 'more serious' side of animal ethics - but there is no reason you can't have fun in the process. No egos, no attitudes, no nonsense - let the good (veg) times roll.

Q: As a society you've lobbied university authorities. You've also hosted former ALF-member Keith Mann an advocate of property destruction. Can you say something about the benefits of these very different campaigning methods?

AC: It was our pleasure to receive Keith, and we’d be interested in hosting similar talks in the future. The event itself offered our members and the local community alike a fantastic opportunity to watch ‘Behind the Mask’, an award-winning documentary considering the animal rights movement as a whole and also, the much-publicised Animal Liberation Front. Keith’s broad experience of the animal rights movement, and integral role in the documentary made him a fantastic speaker to introduce the film and also talk about his much-acclaimed book From Dusk ‘Til Dawn.

As a society we are strictly peaceful and campaign entirely within legal means for progress and change. Our approach is drastically different from that of direct action, however we also feel it is important to foster a wider awareness of the animal rights movement as a whole – both on an academic and a practical level. Detractors are keen to blurry the lines of distinction, or tarnish the animal rights movement as ‘extremist’ which is, I hasten to add, almost always unfounded. There is nothing extreme about opposing animal cruelty, and the issues at hand enjoy support from an ever-increasing and incredibly diverse cross-section of the general public. The best defence therefore, from would-be detractors, is to know your facts!

Something (via) for you to enjoy before you go off and hunt your Christmas turkey in the wilds of suburbia.

"'[T]errorist' is a word so debased and loaded by political use that, if it has any meaning at all, it is counterproductive. There is no such objective thing as a terrorist. A criminal is a person who has been convicted of a crime. We can examine a person’s records and make an unemotional determination of whether or not they are a criminal. But a terrorist is, in practice, a person who fights for a cause we do not believe in using methods that we do not approve of. Calling someone a terrorist is a value judgement." - Nature

Are YOU an animal rights extremist? Apparently I am.

First they came for the animal rights activists...

Yesterday, thirty people were arrested for alleged involvement in "extremism" in dawn raids carried out across the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands. Predictably the media are lapping it up, providing extensive quotations from the police, with minimal analysis. This time, however, it isn't Muslims they're after, but animal rights activists. This ought to be worrying and not just for people involved in animal rights activism.

NETCU is the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit established to facilitate the policing of "domestic extremism." Now, in an era of international terrorism and post-7/7 this might not seem so unreasonable, but pay careful attention to the definition of domestic extremism they use:

Domestic extremism is the term used to describe any unlawful or recognisably anti-social act carried out as part of an 'extreme campaign'.

It is often associated with campaigns focused around a single issue, such as animal rights.

Violence, you will note, does not figure here, mere illegality is sufficient. If you think that this is merely me being paranoid, I urge you to consider their definition of a "lock on":

A 'lock on' is when a domestic extremist fastens him/herself onto an object to cause an obstruction or disruption using a padlock in combination with arm tubes to make it difficult for the police to remove the individual, the object or both.

Lock ons usually involve several domestic extremists and can involved the use of multiple arm tubes, barrels, vehicles, clamps, D-locks in combination and at more than one location.

"Domestic extremists" appears to be the new term for what used to be known as "activists" or "campaigners," but those terms presumably lack the required shock value. It should be clear that the term has nothing whatsoever to do with violence. It is, after all, pretty difficult to be violent when you're fastened to somebody or something. (As if to underline the point, the front page of their website utilises a picture of the Clown Army.) It's certainly a definition which incorporates myself. How long then before the police are turning up at my house at 5.30 in the morning, and how long before anybody sees me again?

Going off on a slight tangent for a moment, NETCU have been particularly interested in animal rights activism (although they've been spotted on anti-GM demos). Of course, they claim to be "impartial." Tellingly, however, a perusal of their links page reveals a number of explicitly pro-vivisection organisations, but not a single animal rights group. As NETCU Watch ruefully note, not even the RSPCA merit a mention. Whatever one's opinion on vivisection (I'm sceptical about its value, but not actively involved in opposing it) this ought to raise a number of difficult questions. Personally, I find it difficult to avoid the conclusion that it is essentially a political police force set up to render activism ineffective.

NETCU, of course, is merely one element within the state's repressive arsenal, which has blossomed (if you'll excuse the confused metaphors) under New Labour: surveillance cameras are now ubiquitous; unauthorised protests in Parliament Square are illegal; solidarity with armed resistance groups is a criminal offence; Asbos can ban activists from whole areas; ID cards are on the way; and so on and so forth. Typically, the mainstream media seem happy to toe the line on all this. Stopping things getting any worse is going to be up to us. We'll just have to hope they don't arrest us all before we manage it.

Cinema Verite

With the Broadway, Screen Room, Savoy, Showcase and UGC, Nottingham isn't short of cinemas. But if you're looking for underground activist documentaries, you'll have to try elsewhere, namely the Scroat, which takes place (more or less) weekly at the Sumac Centre. They show a wide range of videos, often with speakers who are actively involved in the issues covered. There's even food provided beforehand and a bar to provide fuel for post-film discussions.

Last night's offering was Jill's Film, about the life and death of Jill Phipps. Jill was an animal rights activist killed during protests against live animal exports twelve years ago today (February 1). Clearly the film was, on one level, about animal rights. The focus, however, wasn't so much on the philosophical, ethical and strategic questions that this raises, but on Jill's own life and how she had come to be involved in the animal liberation movement.

Put together and edited by one of her friends and with extensive comments from her mother (who was also involved in campaigning) the film made no pretense about offering an objective account, instead offering an insight into Jill from the perspective of those who knew and loved her. Sure, it probably wouldn't get past the gatekeepers on the TV, but that wasn't its intent.

Propaganda films can come across as didactic which is often off-putting, even where you broadly agree with the points being made. Jill's Film isn't without such moments and there are a few occasions where the resort to cliche ("Fur coats are worn by beautiful animals and ugly people") struck me as pointless and unconvincing sloganeering, but for the most part the film avoids this and is much the stronger for doing so. We follow Jill from her childhood, through the punk scene, into anti-fascism and onto the nascent 1980s animal rights movement. We learn about some of her early experiences, her break from activism after her son was born and her ill-fated return in the hope of stopping live animal exports from Coventry Airport.

While I've been a vegetarian for sometime and peripherally involved in animal rights activity, it's not something I've ever felt able to throw myself into for various reasons. In part this is because the situation seems so hopeless given the sheer scale of animal abuse and the largely disinterested response of most people. Most people don't seem to care about the huge numbers of humans being brutalised, starved and killed across the world; what chance is there that they're going to give a damn about other species? For me, one of the weaknesses of the film (at least from a propagandist perspective) was that it compounded this feeling of powerlessness. Sure the clips of pigs being kicked, sheep having the throats slit while they're still alive and chickens confined to tiny cages are horrific, but by emphasising the immense scale of the problem my response isn't anger (which can lead to action), but depression (which doesn't).

This needn't be the case. Live animal exports were and remain a weak point in the system. The nature of the beast is that it presents relatively easy targets (as lorries have to get onto boats or load their "cargo" into planes and typically have to follow predictable routes to do so) and generates huge opposition from across the political spectrum (as was clear from the video). To be fair, the guy responsible for the film (whose name escapes me) made this point after the film showing.

Long story short: if you get the chance (and you can download it for free so you all have) watch it. If nothing else, it'll go someway to dispelling some of the more ridiculous characterisations of animal rights activist which appear in the media.