The Myer Samra Interview

Interviewed by Claudette Vaughan

Long time vegan and well know in the Sydney Scene, Myer Samra started the first ever Vegan Society NSW.

A lawyer by trade he talks here to the Abolitionist on all things vegan, his opinion of holocaust being born Jewish and his vision in his early years of Isaiah's Vision being a reality.

Abolitionist: Why did you start the first ever Vegan Society NSW?

Myer Samra: I'd been a vegan since 1971. I used to distribute the magazine “Vegan Views” in Sydney. I had been distributing this info at Animal Liberation NSW meetings, in retails shops and at Palm Sunday march once a number of people were interested in learning about veganism so they asked us to do meetings which we subsequently did do. We had functions once a month and this was kind of an offshoot from people that attended the Animal Liberation functions at the time.

When we first started there was only two of us who were vegans - myself and a man called Bill Westerman. The others in the group were interested or sympathetic but were mainly vegetarians. The meetings centred around a meal. I would prepare a meal and then we would have a discussion or a speaker. The first meeting there were only two of us that were vegan. By the time of the second meeting a number of others had become vegan. People who haven't identified as ‘vegans' before very quickly were doing so. We were in the process of forming a Society and months were spent debating what should go into our constitution. Bill and I went down to Melbourne to make contact with a well-known vegan society down there. Shall we say there was a degree of rivalry between us and them in the beginning. Within a year of our formation there used to be something called “Meat Week” around September each year. I can recall that the politicians at the time celebrated “Meat Week” by having a BBQ in front of Parliament House. This was part of trying to encourage people to eat more meat.

We hit upon the idea to hold our own BBQ and call it “To Celebrate The End of National “Meat Week”. We organised a BBQ with tofu, gluten, potatoes and what have you. At least a couple of hundred people showed up. One of the people that was involved with us was also involved in the media so we managed to get some good publicity. A member of ours had a couple of lovely Alsatian dogs whom she had been raising as vegans so when the media arrived they got this great photo shoot of the dogs jumping up to catch a carrot.

So we put this article into our newsletter at the time and indicated this was just like any Aussie BBQ except ours was all cruelty-free and vegetable based.

The Victorian group then challenged us in terms of is it a good thing to be like a “normal” BBQ? They were accusing us of being a sell out in a way, which of course we weren't. Another thing that caused tension between the groups was we charged a few dollars for the BBQ and we were accused of catering a). for the well off and b). we were using hotplates that had been used for meat purposes. Again rumours were flying but these accusations were offensive to us and not true.

An other thing the man from the Victorian vegan group did was he made a declaration that one shouldn't eat anything with sugar in it as sugar was processed on burnt charcoal right across Australia except in South Australia therefore he gave out the idea that you can't be a vegan if you are eating anything with charcoal in it. We replied to that, which was put in the way of an accusation, that when put in reality we really can't expect to be complete perfectionists. For example: If you drive a car you're not going to be able to avoid killing insects if we are driving at night and there's also some ingredient in tires that isn't completely vegan. In the past there used to be an ethical issue about taking photographs because of the gelatin component and there was much discussion whether vegan magazines should have photographs in them. The American Vegan Society used photographs and the English Vegan Society refused to. Jay Dinshah wrote he felt the photographs in their magazine, Ahimsa, represented them in terms of getting a vegan message across. I guess what he was saying was veganism isn't a state, it's an ideal. It's a striving not a destination.

Abolitionist: What do you put all the in fighting down to?

Myer Samra: Human nature and people's personalities. That first committee of ours dissolved after a few months over the homely style that Bill and I represented. They wanted another style that they perceived as more sophisticated and impressive. After our trip to Melbourne in that first year we brought home with us some cartoonish style cards that one of the members in Melbourne had made. We were going to sell them in Sydney. They had pro-animal messages on them. Lyn Carson and her partner at the time was disgusted with us selling these unsophisticated looking things. The committee disappeared for a while. I ended up running the society on it's own for a while. When a woman called Amanda Venium arrived she used to help me arrange events and talks. We used to sell Herbon soap, Bonsoy, Spiral Foods and vegetable soaps. We had a keen following in these kinds of cruelty-free products.

Abolitionist: Are you a vegan for ethical reasons or for health reasons?

Myer Samra: Ethical reasons. From early childhood the idea that animals were killed so people could eat was quite disturbing for me. As soon as I was able to break away from my parents pressure I went vegetarian. It was quite difficult for me in the sense of our family situation. My parents put pressure on me. Every time we had visitors Dad would make a big fuss about the fact that I was vegetarian. In a way he was inviting our guests to tick me off and tell me how silly I was.

I went on strike in terms of eating meat when we were on a holiday once. There was an insect that we weren't familiar with. It was a big insect and perhaps looked frightening. My father wanted to kill it and I said he shouldn't. When he said he wanted to kill it I said I would stop eating meat if he did. He went ahead and killed it and I went on strike and gave up eating meat from then on. That was already a big deal. A few days later there were eggs around and I had to decide whether I would eat eggs or not and that was another big decision for me. I refused eggs. At the time, as I said previously, we were on holidays. I fell ill. I asked my father to take me to see a doctor. My father kept telling me it was because I had stopped eating meat. “Just be sensible and you'll be okay” he said. We went to see the doctor. I described my symptoms, which at the time was it felt like my head was splitting into two. Dad had to pipe in with, “Of course you know in the last couple of weeks he's stopped eating meat.” The doctor smiled and asked me if I had been swimming in the river. I said, “Yes” and Dad said “Only a little bit”. The doctor said nothing about the vegetarian issue and told me I had picked up an infection from the river. At that time I was very grateful for finding some other explanation for my illness instead of blaming the fact that I had given up meat. He didn't buy into my father's emotive argument.

Abolitionist: As a Jewish man do you find it offensive that the factory-farming holocaust for nonhuman animals has been likened to the human holocaust?

Myer Samra: I'm not sure how to react to that. Clearly the mass slaughter has been terrible and sure, the way that animals are treated is also terrible. I guess the use of the term ‘Holocaust' from one to the other is unfortunate to the extent that you're not letting something stand for itself. If you are not describing something for it's own sake and you have to use a metaphor so in one sense it is more terrible. The word ‘Holocaust' evokes that image. At the same time you're not giving the situation with what's happening with the animals its own identity. It sends out the message, through calling it a Holocaust, that this is in the image of what has happened previously with the Nazis. So in that sense you create an impression of it as not looking at the situation for it's own sake. It's being looked at as if it was something else. There's also an implication that there is an evil monster behind the scenes running the whole show, like Hitler. I don't believe that is the case with non-animals.

I remember writing in one article for “Vegan Views” that I had been to a party where I met a guy who had won the title “Apprentice of the Year”. He was an apprentice butcher. Apart from the fact that he was a butcher and in that sense what he was doing was quite shocking to me, he was actually a nice person. The meat industry isn't quite the same as the Holocaust because it'' not being run by one person with an evil inclination. It's rather the fact that society as a whole is blind to the significance and the impact they are having to animals around them. I'm not emotionally indignant to the question you asked but I do think it's an unfortunate equation to be making.

Abolitionist: So are you saying that by juxtaposing the human holocaust with the nonhuman holocaust we neglect to take in the breath-taking horror of each separately?

Myer Samra: Yes, that's correct. You're not really looking at something for it's own sake and for what it is.

Abolitionist: You are a lawyer and I wondered what your views are on personhood rights for nonhuman animals are?

Myer Samra: I indicated previously about indicating one thing with another but at the same time I'm conscious of the various movements over time that have considered slavery immoral. The awareness of the equality of men and women generally and with sexual preference concerns – all of these have changed over time. There's a different awareness now of what there was and what was considered appropriate 50, 100, 150 years ago. Things are certainly changing. How difficult it would be and a general acceptance of animal's having rights, I'm not quite sure how that will pan out. One article I wrote was a review of a book called “Does A Tree Have Legal Standing?” That was interesting.

Abolitionist: You said once that Australians are heavily identified with their pastoral culture. The Aussie image from the 70's is the beer swilling, redneck homophobe male. If he's no longer with us, he's still eating meat.

(laughter)

So tell us: Can Trees have legal standing?

Myer Samra: The system of law we have, only a person withstanding with an interest can bring an action in relation to some matter. Historically it wasn't possible to bring an action on behalf of another about a concern that really doesn't affect your – the individual - rights. The idea was whether aspects of nature – a river or a forest - can sue for their own protection by taking legal action. The law has been moving towards being able to protect such things. Our law operates on the basis of an individual being, the plaintiff or the defendant and a corporation is also regarded as a defendant. The problem thereby arises, from my perspective, if we are talking about a forest or a river is where to start and where is the end of the kind of activity that you are giving this personal status to? In terms of talking about the needs or the interests of something in the environment, to what extent do we understand that [in law]. For example, my lawn needs water to remain ‘a lawn'. What if it, that same piece of land, was to be something other than a lawn? It may then have different needs – so how would that work into the law one would have to ask oneself. So we would be identifying the original particular need or status which may not be the same if that status changes mid-way through.

Abolitionist: Will justice have to come before peace is achieved in the world?

Myer: In terms of my Jewishness, as a child I saw the vision of Isaiah with the lion and the lamb and the child. It was a vision of the perfect society in the messianic age. I was excited by that and longed for it. At this stage I don't have any sense of when and if our species will reach such a perfect world. I think it's something to strive for. Unfortunately at the moment I can't see things going that way yet. In terms of resources existing in the world, they are finite and obviously as a vegan we're using less of them than are meat-eaters. Also in terms of health we're better off on a diet with as little animal input as can be managed.

I think those are 2 pluses will move us towards a vegan lifestyle.

The ironical aspect of that is the animals that are around in the world, to a large extent, have been bred for human consumption and exploitation. I don't know ethically where I stand in terms of is it good to end up with a world where there are no animals because we are not exploiting them anymore for our own use therefore we let them die out. For human beings I can say also it's quite clear that we can and should live without animal products but I do have a sense of uncertainly about what to do about animals which are natural carnivores. Maybe I still long for Isaiah's vision as a future possibility.