Gary Francione has written several books and essays on the animal rights movement in the United States.
Following is one such excerpt. For more information visit: www.animal-law.org/index.html

Professor Gary L. Francione copyright 1996

If the animal rights movement is to survive the backlash of animal exploiters, and if the movement is going to harness both its own internal energy and the general level of political dissatisfaction, the movement needs to re-strategize and re-organize in light of the New World Order. Now is the time to develop a radical--nonviolent but radical--approach to animal rights as part of an overall program of social justice.
The solution will not be simple, but we must make a start. Consider the following suggestions:
1. We must recognize that if animal rights means anything, it means that there is no moral justification for any institutionalized animal exploitation. Many people believe that as long as a person "cares" about animals, that caring makes someone an advocate of animal "rights." But that is no more the case than merely "caring" for women makes one a feminist. Feminism requires justice for women, and justice means, at the very least, the recognition that women have certain interests that cannot be sacrificed. Rape is prohibited; it is not left to whether or not a potential rapist "cares" about women. Similarly, if animals have rights, then the interests protected by those rights must receive protection and cannot be sacrificed merely because humans believe that the beneficial consequences for humans of such sacrifice outweigh the detriment for animals. We cannot talk simultaneously about animal rights and the "humane" slaughter of animals.
2. We need to reshape the movement as one of grassroots activists, and not "professional activists" who populate the seemingly endless number of national animal rights groups. For many people, activism has become writing a check to a national group that is very pleased to have you leave it to them. Although it is important to give financial support to worthy efforts, giving money is not enough and giving to the wrong groups can actually do more harm than good. For the most part, support local groups that you work with or that operate in your area. Significant social change has to occur on a local level.
3. We need to recognize that activism can come in many forms. Many people think that they cannot be good activists if they cannot afford to have big, splashy campaigns, often involving the promotion of legislation or big lawsuits.
There are many forms of activism, and one of the most potent is education. We were all educated, and we need to educate others--one by one. If each of us succeeded in educating five people per year about the need for personal and social nonviolence, the results multiplied over ten years (including the people educated by those with whom we have contact, etc.) would be staggering. Those of us inclined should reach out to greater audiences--on radio or television talk shows, in print media, in the classroom, or in the context of peaceful demonstration--to teach about nonviolence as a paradigm of justice.
But it is important to realize that these issues are too important to leave to anyone else. We--each of us--has an obligation to seek justice for all persons, human and nonhuman. And we--each of us--can help effect that justice on a daily basis by sharing our ideas with those with whom we come in contact.
Never underestimate the power of the individual and of small groups: Fidel Castro liberated Cuba with literally a handful of comrades.
4. If we decide to pursue legislation, we should stop pursuing welfarist solutions to the problem. Animal welfare seeks to regulate atrocity by making cages bigger or by adding additional layers of bureaucratic review to ensure that the atrocity is "humane." We should pursue legislation that seeks to abolish particular forms of exploitation. For example, a carefully focused campaign to end federal funding for animal use in psychological experiments, or for military purposes, may very well be received sympathetically by a public increasingly skeptical of continued public funding of animal use. And any campaign should be accompanied by the political message of ultimate abolition of all institutionalized exploitation. Animal advocates should always be up-front about their ultimate objective, and use all campaigns as an opportunity to teach about nonviolence and the rejection of all institutionalized animal exploitation.
5. We should recognize that there is a necessary connection between the animal rights movement and other movements for social justice. Animal exploitation involves species bias or speciesism, and is as morally unacceptable as other irrelevant criteria such as race, sex, sexual orientation, or class, in determining membership in the moral universe. But if we maintain that speciesism is bad because it is like racism, sexism, or homophobia, then we have necessarily taken a stand on those other forms of discrimination. And anyone who maintains that speciesism is morally wrong but that sexism or racism or homophobia are not, deserves the title of misanthrope.
We need to recognize that the movement to achieve animal rights is a movement that is related to, but different from, the political left. The animal movement is related to the left because it necessarily supports other progressive and nonviolent struggles for human liberation. The animal movement is different because it emphasizes the concept of nonviolence.
6. Animal advocates should stop worrying about being "mainstream." How long will it take us to understand that the mainstream is irreversibly polluted. Animal advocates--indeed, many progressives--are afraid to be labeled as "extremists." But what does it mean to be an "extremist" when people like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh are revered by millions? When a man of color in Harlem has a lower life expectancy than a man living in the poorest of nations? When millions go without health care or even minimal shelter or adequate food in the wealthiest nation on earth? When billions of animals are slaughtered yearly for absolutely no reason other than "it tastes good."?
Perhaps it is time that animal advocates learned to be proud to be called "extremists." Perhaps we all need to be a bit more "extremist."
In closing, I emphasize that the most important point is that we can no longer look to others to solve the enormous problems that we confront. We must work with other like-minded people, but we can never ignore or underestimate the ability--or the responsibility--of each person to affect significant change on a personal and social level.
And we cannot wait any longer for "moderation" to work. Time is running out for us, for nonhuman animals, and for the planet.