we remain Jungle beasts at heart

I have been hesitating to write a response to this particular situation, but can only procrastinate so long in vocalizing some sort of reaction. I have exerted some effort in preventing an animal rights diatribe; to instead expose what I hope is a lean, objective article. With only this brief forewarning for you, cherished reader, I proceed with the retort that took me a week to articulate.


As many of you know, a rather incriminating video was recently publicized that involved slaughterhouse employees’ treatment of what the FSIS calls “non-ambulatory” cattle – cows that, due to severely detrimental health, are unable to walk from the hauling trucks into the slaughterhouse. Not only does this video depict the obviousness of the cows’ physical limitations, but it also captures the employees’ nonchalance in their crude efforts to move the “downer cows”.

Due to public outcry, the release of this video sparked a beef recall of over 143 million pounds – the largest in history. This is a class II recall, meaning the situation posed “remote probability of adverse health consequences”, which leaves me to conclude that trashing the meat was predominately for public relations reasons – to soothe the spontaneous public objection.

My critique is at this juncture in the post; from what I can see, the public’s concern du jour did not justify the sheer waste produced from the recall. Simply put, the recall was absolutely unnecessary and quite probably a cop-out maneuver. My reason behind this assertion is twofold:

First: Many people are reluctant to believe that the images from the video are a common reality of the meat industry. The public wants to sleep better with its convictions that it was a rare event; that “they wouldn’t let that happen.” My question is who exactly “they” are and, if this is indeed a rare occurrence, how “they” could have allowed for it to happen for two years straight – the time spent by undercover activists capturing film evidence. I have seen this video and dozens of others like it; if “they” are indeed “not letting this happen”, how does one explain that, in fact, it has been?
(Regardless of "their" regulations, it is, in actuality, commonplace.)

Second point: The recall was more wasteful than it was effective in hindering consumption. Much of the beef had already been distributed to vendors (including school lunch programs) months before it was declared “unfit” for human consumption. Not only was this exaggerated action taken too late, but the reality is that many people had relinquished their fleeting protests within a few days: their concern was suppressed by a rejuvenated awareness of their fondness for beef. Perhaps appeased that, again, “they” had taken care of things, most everyone was happy to return to the dinner table and resume their blissful lives.

In short, my response is muddied by disillusionment. It is not the video itself that receives my critique, because it was in no way new for me. It is instead the way it was received by the public – through ephemeral concern and subsequent appeasement. There will be no lasting remedy for the real tragedy of this situation, which is the public’s enduring, blind tolerance.

We have condemned these animals to either "be interesting, or be invisible"; unfortunately, an outcry is awarded only in favor of those creatures who, for a mere moment, emerge from invisibility to tear at our capricious interests.
We soothe our own fickle compassion with a massive recall; an obscene waste that only serves to further oil the capitalist gears in two day's time. The animals receive only fleeting recognition before fading away again into the background of what is still The Jungle.

See the video here.

Sources:
FSIS recall
CNN recall
The New York Times
USA Today