THE JOHN ROBBINS INTERVIEW

By Claudette Vaughan.

John Robbins needs no introduction. He gave up a life of immense wealth to follow his dream of a more spiritually based world. His books have infused generations of activists to work for peace for nonhumans and humans alike. Robbin’s work has moved both minds and bodies to risk comfort, to resist the norm, and to strike out for nonhuman animals and the environment. Here he talks to us about the food revolution, America, terrorism, activism and the need to affirm the dignity of all life.

John speaks to the Abolitionist-Online.

Q. Your latest book, "The Food Revolution: How Your Diet can help Save your Life and the World" is not designed for docile bodies. In the big picture your work is about consumer choice and consumer choice is a direct descendant of nonviolent direct action. What is the ‘Food Revolution’ you speak of John?

A. It is the struggle to achieve a world where the health of people and the Earth community is more important than the profit margins of any industry, where meeting basic human needs takes precedence over corporate greed.

There is still strong in our world the belief that animals and the natural world have value only insofar as they can be converted into revenue. In the prevailing belief system, nature is a commodity.

But there are many of us awakening to another possibility entirely. We see that animals and the natural world have value not because they are of use to us; they have value because they are part of Creation. We see that nature is a community, to which we belong, and to which we owe our lives. We are here to bring into reality the dream of the Earth. This is not a dream of unlimited consumption. It is a dream of unlimited compassion.

Q. Activists working against the Food and Drug Administration draconian laws and working towards social change and for a safe food supply, can be tarred with the same convenient broad brush strokes applied to terrorists, whatever that definition of terrorist is. I wonder what your thoughts are here?

A. There is an effort being made in the U.S. today, and I know there are similar efforts being made in other countries, to treat nonviolent activists as terrorists. For example, legislation has been introduced into the Washington state legislature by State Senator Val Stevens of Olympia (R-39), called the “Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act.”

The bill invokes the specter of terrorism to restrict long-standing political rights to non-violent protest. Specifically, it defines “eco-terrorist organisations” as “two or more persons organised for the purpose of supporting any politically motivated activity intended to obstruct or deter any persons from participating in an activity involving animals or…natural resources.”

The legislation’s definition of “eco-terrorist” is so broad that it would include citizens signing a petition to save old-growth forests, passing out vegetarian literature, or simply joining a group like the Sierra Club or EarthSave.

According to Ralph G. Neas, President of People for the American Way, “This dangerously broad definition of ‘terrorist’ would catch anybody who’s ever sent in $10 to save the pandas. It’s a thinly disguised effort to squash environmental activism and intimidate citizens who want to speak out.”

The bill would also create a law enforcement database of “eco-terrorists.” As of this writing, the bill has not yet passed, but the Senate has passed a budget bill that includes $50,000 for the database.

Washington is not the only state where this is happening. The Washington legislation was drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which has drafted virtually identical bills that have been introduced in New York, Texas, Hawaii, Arizona, and South Carolina. At the national level, U.S. Congresswoman Darlene Hooley of Oregon has introduced a federal version in the U.S. House of Representatives.

It’s obvious to anyone who looks at these bills that they are intended to limit the first amendment rights of environmental and animal organisations and activists. The goal is to make it increasingly dangerous to advocate for a sane, healthy, and sustainable way of life. Of course, they will do anything at all to prevent real terrorism. If our elected officials can’t tell the difference between the Sierra Club and Al Qaeda, we’re in big trouble.

Who, you may wonder, is behind this effort? ALEC is funded by right-wing foundations, and by more than 300 corporations and trade associations. Corporations fund ALEC because they want to re-write the laws which regulate their activities. Although ALEC refers to itself as a membership organisation for state legislators (and pays for state legislators to travel to its meetings), its primary function is to enable strip-mining and chemical companies to write environmental laws, drug companies to write prescription drug laws, insurance companies and HMO executives to write health care laws, and fast food chains that pay low wages to write laws that would abolish the minimum wage and worker safety laws.

ALEC has produced hundreds of bills designed to enhance corporate special interests. These bills support the increased use of fossil fuels, and expanded drilling and mining on public lands. And they limit the role of scientific evidence in policy decisions, especially those regarding global climate change. ALEC is vehemently opposed to efforts to control greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide.

ALEC’s “Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act” is one example of the group’s efforts. Another of their bills that has also been introduced into state legislatures is called “The Environmental Literacy Improvement Act.” It creates an “Environmental Education Council” that would approve “acceptable environmental education materials” for schools. The bill states that text materials must “not be designed to change student behaviour, attitudes or values” nor “include instruction in political action skills nor encourage political action activities.” So much for a vibrant democracy.

Another bill, the “Pesticide Preemption Act,” would eliminate a local government’s ability to control pesticide “registration, notification of use, advertising and marketing, distribution, applicator training and certification, storage, transportation, disposal, disclosure of confidential information or product composition.” In other words, it renders communities defenceless to the risks of toxic pesticide exposure from unsafe application methods, poisonous ingredients. And characteristically of ALEC’s bills, it would limit a community’s rights to know about such risks.

It would be comforting if these threats were only imagined. Regrettably, however, this is not the case. ALEC is extraordinarily well funded, and has written bills to roll back environmental protection, dismantle public education, eliminate advances in civil rights laws, and undermine working families. The threats of which I speak are quite real, as are ALEC’s efforts to see them enacted into law. We must not allow them to succeed.

It may seem naïve to speak of love when talking about groups like ALEC, but I believe that who we are and who we become are dependent in large part on the quality and the force of the love we can bring to bear on behalf of life. We are better able to fight such groups if we draw strength from our love of our Earth, our love of democratic principles, and our commitment to free speech.

There is a lot of darkness in our world and country today. One of my mentors, Martin Luther King, Jr., once said something that I believe speaks to our current moment as much as when he said it:

“Difficult and painful as it is, we must walk on in the days ahead with an audacious faith in the future… When our days become dreary with low-hovering clouds of despair, and when our nights become darker than a thousand midnights, let us remember that there is a creative force in this universe, working to pull down the gigantic mountains of evil, a power that is able to make a way out of no way and transform dark yesterdays into bright tomorrows.”

Q. The Food and Drug Administration is inextricably tied to the monolithic pharmaceutical industry. Dr Ray Greek, President of Americans for Medical Advancement has said that pharmaceutical companies are the big campaign finance contributors having given $44million over the last 10 years. This means the FDA ‘works for’ the Industry and not the consumer. Your comments please.

A. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the government agency responsible for regulating food, dietary supplements, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, biologics and blood products in the U.S. It is intended to regulate, but more often serves the massive industries profiting enormously from our over-reliance on drugs, and from our following unhealthy lifestyles that lead to an ever increasing demand for their services and products.

Let me tell you a story...

Once upon a time there was a large and rich country where people kept falling over a steep cliff. They'd fall to the bottom and be injured, sometimes quite seriously, and many of them died. The nation's medical establishment responded to the situation by positioning, at the base of the cliff, the most sophisticated and expensive ambulance fleet ever developed, which would immediately rush those who had fallen to modern hospitals that were equipped with the latest technological wizardry. No expense was too great, they said, when people's health was at stake.

Now it happened that it occurred to certain people that another possibility would be to erect a fence at the top of the cliff. When they voiced the idea, however, they found themselves ignored. The ambulance drivers were not particularly keen on the idea, nor were those who made their living and enjoyed prestige in the hospital industry. The medical authorities explained patiently that the problem was far more complex than people realised, that while building a fence might seem like an interesting idea it was actually far from practical, and that health was too important to be left in the hands of people who were not experts. Leave it to us, they said, for with enough money we will soon be able to genetically engineer people who do not bruise or become injured from such falls.

So no fences were built, and as time passed this nation found itself spending an ever increasing amount of its financial resources on ambulances, drugs, hospitals, and high-tech medical equipment. In fact, it came to spend far more money on medical services than any nation had ever done in the history of the world. Money that could have gone to community services, decent housing, education, and good food was not available to the people, for it was being spent on ambulances and drugs. As the costs of treating people kept rising, growing numbers of people could not afford medical care. There were increasing numbers of homeless, and ever more hungry people and families torn apart by the stress. As a result of these and similar misallocations of national energy and resources, violence, gangs, and inner city riots would well up as outlets for the frustration and despair people felt.

The more people kept falling off the cliff, the more a sense of urgency and tension developed, and the more of the country's money was poured into the heroic search for a drug that could be given to those who had fallen to cure their injuries. When some people pointed out how fruitless the search had been thus far, and questioned whether a cure would ever be found, the pharmaceutical industry answered with massive public relations campaigns showing men in white coats holding the broken bodies of children who had fallen, pleading: "Don't quit on us now, we're almost there."

Of course, this is just a fable.

In truth, we don't really have a "health-care" system. Instead, we have a "disease-care" system. Our medical system does not teach us how to live so that we can achieve the maximum health and highest quality of life of which we are capable. Instead, it teaches us to rely so heavily on pharmaceutical drugs that I sometimes think “M.D.” stands for “More Drugs.”

Like most people in our society, I grew up never suspecting that I could create a lifestyle that would support the radiant health of my body, mind, and spirit. I did not understand that the choices I made and the way I lived could make a tremendous difference to the quality of life I experienced. But over the years I have come to realise that while doctors and medical technology have an important role to play in health care, they do not hold the ultimate secrets to health. Taken together, factors such as the food we eat, whether and how we exercise, the way we give voice to our feelings, the attitudes we hold, and the quality of the environment in which we live are far more important to the quality of health we experience than even the most sophisticated medical technologies. It has been liberating to see that health is less a matter of taking the right drug, and more one of learning to live in vibrant harmony with ourselves, with the natural world, and with one another.

I take heart from the increasing numbers of us who are seeing that we cannot remain passive bystanders to our own health, and then expect the medical system to rescue us. We're seeing how alienating and harmful it can be to think that experts always know more than we do about our bodies and our lives.

Many of us are turning our attention toward what we can do for ourselves on an ongoing basis, building and nurturing our health, rather than ignoring our bodies' needs and then automatically taking ourselves to the doctor to be fixed when illness strikes. We are learning that our health is intimately interwoven with our mental outlook, emotional tone, and spiritual well being, and coming to understand that taking responsibility for our health means more than simply lowering our cholesterol or blood pressure. We are learning to tap the powerful regenerative forces that dwell within our own beings.

After years of assisting people with cancer, the noted surgeon and author Bernie Siegel, M.D. remarked that the people who survive the disease are typically those who don't submit passively to the patient role. He said that he could tell that a patient was going to do well when nurses told him, "Your patient is a real problem; he won't take his clothes off; I can never find him in his room, and he keeps questioning every blood test."

In studies done at Yale, Bernie Siegel says, "It got to be a joke. There was a 100 percent correlation between the head nurse's opinion of the patient and the long term survival rates. If the head nurse said, 'He's a real s.o.b. and won't let you draw the blood for the test,' they would find no trouble with the immune system. If he was a submissive, gentle patient who would not question anything, and would always let the nurses draw his blood, he was in trouble."

If you want to be well, Bernie Siegel concludes, the key is to stand up for yourself and make your needs known. People who give their power away to their doctors and the drug companies not only feel helpless — they die sooner.

Q. Can you foresee a peoples global uprising confronting the tyrannies of the 21st century or will effective change occur (as is the age-old way) from creating another counter-culture where a small number of people with persistent effort will impact on a critical mass of people in the way they think and feel about their food choices in the hard realities of our time?

A. When we challenge the belief systems, the assumptions, the dogmas and complacency that permits the nightmare to continue, then we find ourselves with the energy we need to build a new world. As each of us awakens to our power to make a difference, and to our responsibility to live with reverence for the whole earth community, we become, each in our own unique ways, agents of the change that is needed.

Q. The western system of animal agriculture is a nightmare. Another achievement ‘ The Food Revolution’ has brought to the foreground is showing the forces maintaining, subsidizing and sustaining a corrupt system which has veritably halted any progress in the area for animal rights and liberation. Your thoughts.

A. The factory farm system of raising livestock is one of the great horrors of our time. I have wanted from the depths of my soul to alert people to the damage it is doing — the damage to the animals, to our health, and to the health of our environment. If people could see it, if they could for a moment lift the veil and see just how bad it really is, I believe they would never again be able to consume the products of what Jim Mason and Peter Singer have called “animal factories.” It is not an exaggeration to say that the conditions are akin to concentration camps for the animals whose flesh, milk and eggs we eat.

Q. Today is Good Friday on the Christian calendar and I’d like to know your thoughts on Jesus’s words: “By our words and our deeds we will be known.”

A. There is a phrase from the Christian scriptures that stays with me: “doing the truth in love.” In a culture of lies and half-truths, this is what we are called to do. In a way, it’s simple. Try to tell the truth. Feed some people who are hungry. Help some poor families build their own houses. Stand up for the poor and the persecuted. Fight official lies, corporate greed, and the destruction of God’s creation. Challenge the oppression of those who are being exploited.

John Dear is a Jesuit priest, peace activist, and director of the largest and oldest interfaith peace organisation in the U.S. — the Fellowship of Reconciliation. He points out that Jesus was anything but passive, complacent or corrupt. Rather, he was on fire with love for every human being who ever lived, and for all of Creation. As such, he was trouble from day one; trouble for the establishment, trouble for the religious elite, trouble for the rulers, trouble for the war-making empire.

Q. The way the system works in America and in Australia is around a central core of ‘experts’ who deal with large scale public necessities. In this environment these ‘experts’ assume authoritative influence and are maintained by those who can employ them. You took on these experts in all of your books but I’d like to focus on ‘The Food Revolution’ in the chapter on preventing cancer and equally the politics of preventing cancer.

A. So much is at stake in our times. Whether we like it or not, the choices we make, individually and collectively, in the coming years will make an incredible amount of difference, perhaps more so than at any other time in the history of life on this planet. It is not just the quality of our personal lives and health that depends, now, on the choices we make. The destiny of life on Earth is up for grabs. And we are each part of how it will turn out.

You must never forget that heroic people don’t always conform to what is popular at a given time. You must be willing to be out of step with public opinion. This was true of the founders of the United States—most colonists were content with dependence on England. It was true of Abraham Lincoln—most Northerners didn’t want blacks to be free or equal. It was true of Susan B. Anthony—even most women at the time weren’t in favor of women voting. And it is true today. If you are going to be a voice for the future, you can’t allow today’s “experts” to tell you what is possible and what is not.

The other thing that you must never forget, if you want to help bring forth the dawn, is that it’s no use trying to be perfect. The people I have known who have moved the world were all flawed human beings, like you and me. But they didn’t let that stop them. They knew that it is part of our glory as human beings that, even with our imperfections and wounds, we can still help heal and cherish each other and our beautiful planet.

Some of history’s great heroes have been well known and recognised as influential. Most, though, have lived relatively anonymous lives, making choices and working without public recognition, serving the greater healing for which we all pray as well as they could, given the circumstances of their lives. There is no calculating the debt humanity owes those who labor without receiving much validation or affirmation for their efforts, who bring love even when beset by indifference or hate.

When each of us comes to the end of our lives, what will matter is not whether the world thought we were important or influential. What will matter are the values we have upheld and the principles and possibilities we have stood for. What will matter then, and what matters now, are the quality of the love we share with the world and the statements we make with our choices and our lives.

Q. When simple things like understanding that animals were not put on this earth to be experimented on and when seven million American women and I million American men suffer from an eating disorder in our diet and food-obsessed culture, what advise do you give here John?

A. Far too often, our culture today tells us a tremendous lie. It tells us that we don’t, as individuals, make a difference unless we happen to be one of the “rich and famous.” But nothing could be further from the truth.

Your life does matter. It always matters whether you reach out in friendship or lash out in anger. It always matters whether you live with compassion and awareness or whether you succumb to distractions and trivia. It always matters how you treat other people, how you treat animals, and how you treat yourself. It always matters what you do. It always matters what you say. And it always matters how you care for yourself and others.

When you choose to affirm the dignity inherent in life and to uphold the beauty, the magic, and the mystery of the living Earth, something happens. It happens whether or not anyone else recognises your efforts, and it happens regardless of how wounded and flawed you are. What happens is that your life becomes a statement of human possibility. Your life becomes an instrument through which a healthier, more compassionate, and more sustainable future will come to be.

Q. The challenges we face ahead of us are supersize. Will we rise to the challenge and become giants of the human condition? What will future generations think of the 20th century experiments of the Nuclear age, given the legacy of radioactive leftovers contaminating the planet for hundreds of thousands of years? What do you think they will think of us for altering the genepool resulting from genetic engineering of organisms and of generations who have polluted the earth’s atmosphere, its soils, its water with poisons that has sickened people, planets and nonhumans in great numbers?

A. We are called to love in a time of indifference, hope in a time of despair, nonviolence in a time of violence, justice in a time of injustice, and life in a time of death. We are here to transform not only the world, but our own broken hearts as well.

Whatever the future holds, I want to live and die knowing that I did what I could, that I sought as best I was able to uphold the possibility of healing and compassion, even in a world that seems so lost in darkness.

It is far too late, and things are far too bad, for pessimism.