[Sean]

Originally Posted by Deckard

Three things I'd say to this. First, you're falling for a marketing technique, in the sense that it's got you talking about issues even if you think they're idiots.

I'm not sure I quite agree. What I'm primarily talking about is that I think the people in PETA are idiots. I only referred to the marketing campaign because it's evidence of that idiocy. Frankly, their campaign doesn't inspire a single constructive thought in my head. The only thing that HAS inspired any constructive thoughts has been the discussion about breed health we've had here, which was actually unrelated to the moronic marketing campaign PETA put together about dog equality and it's parallels to white supremacists.

Originally Posted by Deckard

You're taking the parallel drawn in a deliberately provocative publicity campaign and drawing an equivalency. It's precisely because people are inclined to do that that PETA can be assured of column inches and radio time (and moveon.org can link Bush with Hitler ). PETA take the hit for the benefit of spreading their message that bit further.

I've never been a believer in the idea that "any publicity is good publicity". In the case of PETA, I remember when I actually used to think they were a good organization that was working for a just cause. That was before they started doing moronic things like equating chicken farms to the Nazi Holocaust, or the Westminster Dog Show to a KKK rally. So now, instead of hearing that PETA has made a statement about something and thinking "hm - I'm interested in hearing what these folks are trying to achieve", I actually think "oh shut the f#$k up you dumb sonsabitches". So in the case of PETA, yes, they may get more exposure from dumbass stunts like this, but that's all it is. MORE exposure - not effective, constructive, or good exposure. So unfortunately, I feel they've blown any credibility they once had which, in my opinion, has had a net negative affect on their ability to get a valid point across.

Originally Posted by Deckard

Third, drawing a parallel between the KKK and the American Kennel Club might sound extreme, but don't let that throw you off the genuine parallels that exist. A BBC documentary last year described how the Kennel Club in this country was borne from the eugenics movement, which, let's not forget, was a movement that believes "the human race can be improved and purified by breeding the best to the best". The KC undeniably does continue to embrace, even today, eugenics principles - even its most vehement supporters would have to admit that much. That doesn't mean to say the KC are as bad as Hitler or the KKK, but it's precisely the human tendency of interpreting a parallel as an equivalency that fuels a controversial campaign.

It strikes me as being generous to assume that the morons over at PETA are simply drawing an innocent parallel, while any conclusions of equivalency are nothing more than the result of the viewer's innate tendencies. There is no way in hell that PETA could have drawn these parallels without the desire to also blatantly imply equivalency. In fact, it's so blatant and over the top that as far as I can see, the eqivalency was probably the primary goal of this campaign. It would be in keeping with statements and campaigns I've seen from them in the past.

That being said, you could also draw parallels between Darwin's "Origin of Species" and eugenics, but that doesn't mean it would be a good idea for proponents of creationism to make a commercial showing Darwin and Hitler out for a "guys night" together - tipping back a few beers, going to see a ball-game, and high-fiving as they picked up a couple hotties. Although on second thought, that does sound like an entertaining commercial - but the point remains that we can draw parallels between all kinds of stuff that doesn't warrant it.

Originally Posted by Deckard

Dressing up two of its members like this is undeniably a ploy, a deliberately provocative way to gain publicity and get the topic talked about (even if while criticizing the approach itself). My guess is it's backfired in one respect and worked in another, depending on what their expectations were. We're talking about the subject matter, and - in this instance - no-one has had to die for this to happen (which is always nice). Sure I will always question any tactic that involves causing offence, but if I'm being honest I struggle to feel that outraged about the possible offence caused, when viewed within the bigger picture.

I hear what you're saying. I just think this campaign is idiotic and counter-productive. And frankly, while I'm not "outraged", it is offensive to me in that it inherently trivializes the brutality of what the KKK has done, and what it represents. Just as their "holocaust on your plate" campaign trivialized what happened to the millions of victims of Nazi death camps. Their idiocy in delivering their message has completely overshadowed any valid points they could be making.

And to make my position on this as clear as I can, that doesn't have to rely on any moronic parallels or equivalencies. It's enough to just bring attention to the realities we need to deal with without trivializing historic human atrocities.

PETA is populated by mental midgets.