Egg Industry Shill Plays The Race & Class Cards On Prop. 2

by: Living Liberally

Fri Oct 24, 2008 at 14:30



The industrial egg industry has truly lost its collective head over the prospect of Californians passing Proposition 2, the legislation that would give farm animals the luxury of stretching their limbs.

Julie Buckner, the Californians for Safe Food spokesperson who went on Oprah to claim that Proposition 2 would destroy California's egg industry, is trying a really tacky new tack, according to today's New York Times.

Living Liberally :: Egg Industry Shill Plays The Race & Class Cards On Prop. 2
Buckner told the Times that Winfrey's implied support for the measure "only codified her sense that the ballot measure is being pushed by "wealthy, narrow-minded elitists" who do not understand its real-world consequences."

She went on to dis the Humane Society, who's sponsoring Proposition 2, for being funded, apparently, by diamond-encrusted dog-loving dilettantes:

"This is an organization raising money from upper-middle-class white women writing $100 checks," she said."

As opposed, I guess, to the salt of the earth Agribiz bigwigs who are funding the fight against Proposition 2. Read Carol Ness's great post on Grist about the egg industry's desperation to derail Proposition 2 and you'll understand why Buckner and her partners in slime are so anxious to frame the issue of animal welfare as some kind of anti-populist cause with dire consequences for your average egg-lovin' Joe and Jane Six Pack.

But this battle on behalf of our farm animals isn't about the rich--if I may get biblical for a moment, it's about the rich in spirit,--as opposed to those who are hellbent on callous consumption and ill-gotten profits. Buckner and co. would have you believe that compassion for our fellow creatures is a luxury only the wealthy can afford. But doesn't a culture that can't figure out how to feed itself without resorting to torture impoverish us all?


Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
One wonders (0.00 / 0)
if Californian producers will be able to compete with producers in states without such laws?

Thus democracy is exposed again; the people may vote for the law, but will buy the cheapest eggs at the store without investigating the source. Were 50% + 1 of egg purchasers to refuse to buy eggs produced in such a way, it would have much more transforming effects on our way of agriculture.

One wonders if a referendum prohibiting those partaking of public school funds from playing video games or basketball before their homework was done would pass? With or without "the race card"?


Maybe . . . (0.00 / 0)
But over two thirds of the opposition's funds are coming from out-of-state producers. If they really thought this would push production out-of-state, they'd be supporting this law!

Agribusiness knows that animal welfare improvements in California will spread throughout the country.


[ Parent ]
One Powerful Video (0.00 / 0)
California is often a trend-setter, so passing this proposition could lead to improvements elsewhere.  

Of note, four states already have as law what Californians will be voting on.    


I've given to two organization fighting in favor of this law. (0.00 / 0)
I'm neither upper class or a woman.

USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox