This book’s central thesis is simple: Veganism and anarchism are, and should always be thought of as, the exact same thing. Not just similar, or almost synonyms, or parallel movements.
From the author: "This short book presents my view of veganarchism. It is not necessarily “right” any more than any other conception of veganarchism could be considered correct. In fact, this book spends a good amount of time discussing other works I see as portraits of veganarchism(s). All are equally legitimate and there is much more room for others. The texts I discuss are where I got my primary inspiration to write my, this, version of veganarchism. In this vein, my laying out of (a) veganarchism is not and cannot be “right,” but I may be off the mark in more than one location. Where people suspect or see such a straying from the path, I welcome dialogue and supportive critique so that we might walk the veganarchic path together, even if our paths never meet or even lead in different directions."
I was very curious to read Nathan Poirer’s tiny book because I liked some of his previous work. And I do agree with some of the ideas in this book. Maybe even most?? But some of the arguments just aren’t there, the first chapter is just a repetition of the thesis - if I didn’t already agree with veganarchism, I doubt it would have been convincing. As for the third chapter, the arguments for human extinction are extremely weak. Although I agree that humans should not be considered an exceptional species and thus immune to extinction, this doesn’t lead to the fact that we should desire or seek extinction. Although I agree that we shouldn’t be pro-natalists, this doesn’t naturally lead to the kind of anti-natalism that Poirer argues for. And although Poirer underlines that veganarchism is a theory-of-everything and necessarily open, I disagree that this willful “undefinability” is a way to possibly cover everything, as if everything can fall into place easily if we are against all oppression everywhere all the time. As if it’s this easy. It flattens the work, which is full of contradictions.
"veganism without anarchy is not vegan and anarchism without veganism is not anarchy."
if i did not know about veganism or anarchism or if i didn't agree that they are intertwined, this is definitely not the book to read that will inform you.
badly written as in hardly readable, averages about two quoted references per sentence. also this dude argues that being on earth as a human being is essentially wrong. argues for anti natalism as an end goal that will lead to human extinction and that will do to bring about veganarchy on earth. and this part hardly has any references and finally becomes a bit readable but the arguments for it are quite weak. he is as he states "pushing limits" and stands firmly on this point. i do not see it as "pushing limits". it's hardly even a point haha. i do agree with most statements, but do not agree with this nonsense hence the rating and review.
** he sums it up okay at the end.
for what i expected this book to be, i frankly do not recommend it.
* ,,Animals are not food, experimental objects, entertainment, lower forms of life, etc.'' * ,,vegarchism represent a rejection of the society that raised me''