(Animal Justice) Party Poopers: Why we’re Not Voting for the Animal Justice Party, even though we’re Vegans

By Nick and Katie




Katie’s bit – the personalised, passionate part

For anyone assuming I would vote for the Animal “Justice” Party because I believe in animal rights and social justice, you’re wrong. This is the party that preferences the Liberal party. Their candidate attacked me and destroyed the animal rights group I was with, leaving me in a deep depression. One of their people said they would support homophobic legislation if it meant passing their animal welfare Bill. The worst kind of vegans are those who only care about animals and not any other social justice causes.


strange bedfellows

Image from getup.org.au – there were problems with the Animal Justice Party preferencing right-wing, racist, homophobic etc parties last election. Same again this time.


Nick’s bit – the impersonal, boring part

Preferencing the Liberal Party

The Animal Justice Party ‘supporting the re-election of Jason Wood [from the Liberal party] in the seat of La Trobe’ is a good example of their single issue, “it’s all about the animals” approach. They argue that they have done this because he supports a ban on the import of hunting trophies from hunting in Africa (hardly a controversial position in the West) and because he supported legislation to stop animal testing of cosmetics in Australia. This is despite the fact that Labor and the Greens also support this legislation along with the Liberal and National Coalition – it is going to get through anyway. Nevertheless, they ‘will preference him over his rivals’. This is because they argue that: ‘Any politician that supports decent treatment of animals, regardless of party, deserves our support’ (my italics).


This support is despite his atrocious voting record on human rights and social justice issues, which you’d expect from a Liberal party politician:

  • Voted very strongly against increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management.
  • Voted very strongly against implementing refugee and protection conventions.
  • Voted very strongly against increasing protection of Australia’s fresh water.
  • Voted very strongly for privatising government assets.
  • Voted very strongly against increasing funding for university education.
  • Voted very strongly against extending government benefits to same-sex couples.
  • Voted very strongly for decreasing availability of welfare payments.


I guess all of this is beside the point for a party that solely focuses on (non-human) animals – humans are animals too! These issues are not even raised as concerns for the Animal Justice Party, who focus solely on his attitudes towards non-human animals. Interestingly, Wood’s voting record also shows a complete disregard for the environment:

  • Voted very strongly against a carbon price.
  • Voted very strongly against increasing marine conservation.
  • Voted very strongly for unconventional gas mining.


Crossovers between Different Issues

Wood’s voting record on these policies affects not just the environment as a whole but non-human animals specifically, who are harmed and killed as a result of environmental impacts such as climate change and loss of habitat. This demonstrates the crossover between environmental and animal rights issues. Indeed, there are strong links between all social justice issues, including human rights issues as well.



We care deeply about non-human animals but unlike the Animal Justice Party, that is not our single focus. We also see how the oppression of non-human animals shares similarities with and intersects with other forms of oppression, which we also view as important issues in their own right. For more on why we support an intersectional approach to animal advocacy, which views other issues such as human rights and environmental issues as also important, you can hear our talk ‘Intersectionality in Practice’ or listen to episode 93 of our podcast, which includes this talk and further discussion on intersectionality:



Cartoon by miriamdobson.wordpress.com


Policies Towards Non-Human Animals

Any party’s policies towards non-human animals are going to be limited within the current animal welfare framework, including the Animal Justice Party. They focus on ‘the phase out of factory farming’ and ‘the rapid phase out of live export and the slaughter of animals without pre-stunning for any reason; including religious beliefs’. So basically we’re left with the “humane” slaughter of animals, which we think is nowhere near enough to take the interests of non-human animals seriously – cutting their life short is a harm in itself. Their position on this is understandable, as no party will gain any traction calling for a complete end to animal slaughter. However, despite some important exceptions such as mentioning plant-based diets and opposing the kangaroo cull, their current policy for the vast majority of non-human animals who are killed by humans, which is for food, is the same as parties like the Greens – more “humane” slaughter.


The Animal Justice Party has (very slightly) better policies towards non-human animals than progressive parties like the Greens. However, it would only make sense for us to vote them if non-human animals were our singular focus. That is why we will be voting for progressive parties whose current policies towards non-human animals are inadequate (as are the Animal Justice Party’s), but who, unlike the Animal Justice Party, have strong positions on a wide range of other issues we care about, such as opposing the horrible treatment of refugees, addressing economic inequality and protecting the environment.


How We’re Voting This Election

1. Socialist Alliance
2. Australian Progressives
3. The Greens
4. Australian Sex Party
5. Pirate Party
6. Drug Law Reform


House of Representatives:
1. HODGINS-MAY Steph – The Greens
2. McKENZIE-KIRKBRIGHT Levi – Drug Law Reform
3. VON DOUSSA Henry – Marriage Equality
4. DANBY Michael – Australian Labor Party
5. SMYTH Robert Millen – Animal Justice Party
6. HOLLAND Peter – Independent
7. GUEST Owen – Liberal
8. MYERS John B – Independent


Why We’re Voting This Way

We discuss why we’ve ordered the parties in this way on episode 138 of our podcast:


7 thoughts on “(Animal Justice) Party Poopers: Why we’re Not Voting for the Animal Justice Party, even though we’re Vegans

  1. You know, there are any number of politicians and parties with social justice issues in their policy platform – clearly several even press your buttons as covering the right bases. But if by voting AJP I can get even one person into parliament whose FOCUS is animal rights and welfare, then I will be more than happy. Because it would be the beginning of something that hasn’t happened before – a true voice for animals in our political process. Non-human animals ARE my singular focus because it is they who have NO representation at all. And I am certainly not sending my vote to the Greens when their own leader happily fries up some animals on national television…


    • ‘Non-human animals ARE my singular focus’.

      This single issue approach doesn’t make any sense to me, considering humans are animals too – why leave out one species? We are very familiar with this idea that it is only non-human animals that are important and other issues are unimportant/a distraction/something that needs to be sacrificed “for the animals” etc and I think this position has been extremely damaging to the movement – turning many people who are otherwise into social justice away from caring about non-human animals because in the animal movement it is often framed as non-human animals VERSUS other social justice issues, rather than all of these issues are important.

      Yes, we disagree with the Greens policies towards non-human animals (animal welfare), as we do with the Animal Justice Parties current animal policies (animal welfare – though the end goal/ideal situation is animal rights, unlike the Greens, the current policies are very similar) but this is just one of many important issues for us. As stated in the article, if your sole area of concern is non-human animals it makes total sense to vote for the AJP, if not, less so.



  2. Terina says:

    AJP isn’t about a single issue it is about non humans (All the other species) and the impacts animal industries have on not only animals but ‘Human’ beings and the entire Planet – AJP is taking on the long ignored and mammoth task of addressing the national and global ‘impacts’ these industries are having on the survival of this Planet. Progressive because they are addressing issues that impact the survival and future of this planet.


    • Yes, advocating for other species is very important, which is why we’re both vegan animal activists. However, standing up for other species is no excuse for being indifferent to homophobia, racism etc in my opinion.


  3. I am a relative newcomer to the wonderful???? world of city living having resided and worked within remote areas for a large part of my life, but what I see is a concept that is so vital to the country of today being rent asunder by people that carry varying degrees of what this organisation should be targetting, look, let me insert my two bobs’ worth, please. Recognise that the organisation is up and running, which to my observation is remarkable within itself, and because there is a projectile moving forward, GET INVOLVED, O.K. perhaps the basic stated objective is not perfectively what you think it should be, but it has the capacity to change if there is a certain anount of internal rationalising from within the membership, embrace the stated goals, that is what got the whole show off the ground in the first place, obtain those goals and then present your arguement to retarget the missile to correct the aims of what you consider worthy of notice. Please, for all of our sakes, do not dismantle something that has, by this time, become a force to be recognised within the parliament of today.


    • Yes. there is always an argument to get involved to try and improve organisations, rather than criticising from the outside. Some organisations though, I believe to be so fundamentally flawed that it is not worth trying to get involved. Considering people high up in the AJP seem to think it’s okay to support homophobia (for example) in order to advocate for animals means this organisation crosses that line for me.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s