BY BRIAN MONTEITH
You know a political campaign is struggling to be heard when it resorts to shock tactics you wouldn’t want your kids to see in order to gain publicity. There’s a lot of such desperation going about, from the doom-mongering antics of Chris Packham covered in these pages here, to the promotion of transgender ideology using drag artists in primary schools, for the simple reason that campaigns generating outrage quickly polarise opinion and create a niche market of followers from which campaigners then build upon.
One of the most pernicious of such campaigns is militant veganism that masquerades as promoting animal welfare. Yet People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) – the epitome of this business model (for when you follow the money, that is what it is) – passes for a respectable organisation looking to save animals from human mistreatment, when it is anything but.
One only needs to look at the behaviour of its co-founder, Ingrid Newkirk (caged in main photo), to understand the real motives of PETA campaigns are regularly less about animal welfare and more about advancing a radical, anti-human ideology by espousing views that are not only controversial but, at times, dangerously extreme.
Yet despite Newkirk’s confrontational approach she and PETA are regularly invited to take part in media panels, political debates, and even corporate consultations – as though they are a legitimate counterpart to more mainstream organisations like the RSPCA.
This is a serious error of judgement. In an interview with The New Yorker, Newkirk was infamously quoted as believing that, “the world would be a better place without humans in it.” Such comments make it clear her worldview extends far beyond animal rights into a profound disdain for humanity itself.
As co-founder, Ingrid Newkirk’s personal beliefs heavily influence PETA’s campaigns, ensuring it pushes a radical agenda by prioritising media stunts over meaningful discourse and using shock value and sensationalism that can undermine worthwhile causes where animals could benefit.
While the group claims to be advocating for the humane treatment of animals, its leadership has repeatedly pushed positions that go far beyond traditional animal welfare concerns, attacking other animal welfare charities, like the RSPCA in the UK and openly comparing animal farming to the Holocaust.
PETA’s modus operandi reflects a deeper dishonesty and institutional contradictions; it claims to provide a ‘voice for the voiceless’, yet euthanises thousands of animals annually; it promotes compassion and education, yet distributes one-sided school materials containing graphic imagery and ideological messaging; it advocates transparency in animal industries, yet operates with minimal oversight and refuses democratic governance. Whichever way one looks at PETA it is the embodiment of hypocrisy and deceit.
Essentially, the more clicks PETA get from being noticed the more money it raises from people who think it is like the RSPCA.
PETA’s hypocrisy becomes even clearer when examining the organisation’s internal practices.
If PETA truly believes in the sanctity of animal life, how can its mass euthanasia of healthy animals in the United States, often within 24 hours of intake, ever be justified? This contradiction calls into question the ethics of an organisation that claims to champion animal protection while engaging in such practices behind closed doors.
Newkirk herself has openly admitted to personally euthanising thousands of animals during her early career working in shelters. “I would just kill the animals myself… I must have killed a thousand of them, sometimes dozens every day,” she said, providing a chilling insight into her direct involvement with the death of countless animals.
Not only has PETA killed some 50,000 animals in its US shelters it also opposes the growing existence of no-kill sanctuaries like those in the US and Germany – because they expose PETA’s killing spree as unnecessary. According to the No Kill Advocacy Center, there is no overpopulation of pets in the United States because less than 1% of the 4,500,000 animals that end up in US shelters are so poorly they need to be euthanised – proving you can save around 99% of the animals. It argues that as the US requires 30 million new pets every year and the number of pets in shelters is only 4.5m there is no need for PETA to euthanise healthy animals.
This disconnect between PETA’s stated mission and its actual practices is not accidental, its most controversial actions do not stem from a rogue activist. Rather, they are the direct consequence of having a founder who has turned shock into strategy – all designed to attract funds for this multi-million pound organisation.
At just 22, Newkirk chose to be sterilised, stating: “I am not only uninterested in having children. I am opposed to having children. Having a purebred human baby is like having a purebred dog; it is nothing but vanity, human vanity.” Her sentiment revealed the ideological absolutism underpinning much of her worldview: rejecting not just human behaviour but humanity itself.
Stating that “even if animal research resulted in a cure for AIDS, we’d be against it”, Newkirk and PETA’s hostility toward animal testing has extended to boycotts of some of the world’s leading medical charities, including the American Red Cross. Despite the undeniable role of animal testing in the development of treatments for cancer, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s, Newkirk and PETA continue to advocate a doctrine that places ideological consistency above tangible human benefit.
Not only has Ingrid Newkirk orchestrated PETA’s campaigns but she has also directly participated in some of the organisation’s most controversial and provocative protests. These include a mock ‘barbecue’ to highlight animal cruelty in the meat industry and an advertising campaign where she was hung naked from a meat hook between the carcasses of slaughtered pigs with the words “We’re All the Same. Go Vegan.”
In Mumbai to promote veganism with PETA India Newkirk was “skinned alive” in protest against the use of cow and buffalo leather for fashion accessories and also lay between two oversized fake-BBQed fish, wearing a costume painted to resemble them. These protests reduced what could have been a serious ethical discussion around animal welfare to little more than sensationalist performances.
As a result of Newkirk’s belief in reducing human contact with animals PETA is against cadaver dogs being used to find missing people, guide and hearing dogs helping the blind and deaf, police dogs helping find drugs or smuggled contraband and drugs and catch criminals. Ultimately, as Newkirk has stated, PETA is against the idea of keeping pets; it is against not just horse racing, but eventing and keeping horses or horse riding.
Ingrid Newkirk has built a movement around theatrical outrage, deliberately steering PETA into a realm where provocation outweighs persuasion, and grotesque stunts take the place of reasoned advocacy. Under her command, PETA has not only normalised shock tactics, it has become defined by them.
PETA’s extremist views, reliance on misinformation and use of discredited science (such as alleging dairy milk is linked to autism) represent the antithesis of animal welfare and places it well outside the mainstream. It should have no role in shaping policies that affect animals, people, or the industries working to improve welfare standards through evidence-based approaches.
Given the harmful rhetoric and lack of credible solutions, it is crucial to re-evaluate why this organisation continues to receive funding and enjoy an unquestioned platform in society.
It is time to save animals – and humans – from PETA.
Brian Monteith is a former MEP.