James Aspey Turns His Back On “The Animals” To Stand As A Candidate For The Animal ‘Justice’ Party

James Aspey Turns His Back On “The Animals” To Stand As A Candidate For The Animal ‘Justice’ Party

In what has to be the biggest rejection for “the animals”, since NSW MLC Mark Pearson was caught eating fishes. Alleged animal rights activists has announced his plans to stand as a candidate for the seat of Heathcote in the coming NSW general election.

In making the announcement last week, the Animal Justice Party of New South Wales, referred to James as an “animal protection advocate”. (James’ announcement was delayed a few days due to his appearance on the Rich Roll podcast being more important, along with being in transit to Florida to give one of his cookie cutter speeches).

Animal Protection Doesn’t Equal Animal Rights

With the Animal Justice Party referring to James as an “animal protection advocate”, it has exposed something that has becoming increasingly concerning to actual animal rights activists.

He is more interested in ensuring that some animals are treated better, than having their inherent rights acknowledged or respected.

The Animal Justice Party has a history of only making noise in favour of the popular animals, while ignoring the similar plight of others.

Their Companion Animals policy would see those animals designated as “companions” continue to be sold and used as props, though this time through companion animal NGO’s using breeding schemes that benefit the animals involved, whatever they may be.

Did He Sell His Soul Or Was The Opportunity Too Good to Resist?

The promo for James’ gig in Florida, USA has the quote “Veganism in not a diet choice. It is the difference between enslavement and freedom, between torture and peace, between life and death”.

By announcing he was standing as an Animal Justice Party candidate, James has shown that these words are just that – words, pure rhetoric.

For those who came in late, the Animal Justice Party only promotes a “plant based diet” and not veganism. (We all know there is a HUGE difference between the two).

The sitting member in NSW, Legislative Council MP Mark Pearson, was caught eating fishes, claiming he was tempted by the morsels. He then went on to give a sorry not sorry apology stating that he was fully committed to not eating any animal product where sourcing could have involved harm. (Again, what does that even mean?)

Legislative Assembly hopeful Emma Hurst is going with a platform of bigger cages for layer hens, ending the kangaroo cull, and something about animal agriculture and the environment. The last thing that you would expect a claimed tireless advocate for the animals to get behind.

Is It A Token Campaign?

Why is a self described “animal rights activist” supporting campaigns that are based on animal welfare?

Does he understand the difference and not care, or has he still not made the effort to understand the difference?

Those of us who understand politics know that to put up a genuine election campaign you really need to start 12 months out from the election.

You need to appear everywhere. Literally at the opening of a chip packet if people will see you, or you can get into the media.

For James’ campaign he has decided to do something different, and isn’t even in the country. (It is possible that he was in transit when the Animal Justice Party NSW made the announcement).

How is going to campaign from Florida, I have no idea.

When he is coming back to Australia to start/continue campaigning is unknown.

Something else that makes James’ campaign interesting is that, when he appeared on the Rich Roll Podcast, he proudly boasted on not having paid rent for the last five years.

Which means it is unknown whether he actually lives in the Heathcote electorate, or even understands what the soap box issues for the electorate are..

Is He Going Against His Principles?

Spend any time watching one of his street activism clips, and you would be forgiven for believing that James is against slaughterhouses.

Which is interesting because he is quoted as agreeing with another AJP candidate that there needs to be an independent animal protection agency established in NSW.

It is believed this agency would oversee slaughterhouse operations to ensure they comply, and possibly prosecute any breaches of animal welfare legislation.

Adding to this is Mark Pearson’s support of last year’s ACTU motion to build more slaughterhouses in Australia.

The Party Itself Is Problematic

James Aspey aside, there are other things about the Animal Justice Party that is highly problematic.

  • A majority of the NSW Committee are also standing as candidates at the election. Presenting a possible conflict of interest.
  • A candidate expressed the view that higher education should be a wholly user pays system because, “it is an investment in self & leads to a higher earning capacity”. (This goes against the three of the AJP’s claimed core values of “kindness”, “rationality” and “equality”.
  • Devout followers have claimed the Animal Justice Party will end live export, despite it literally being constitutionally impossible to do so.
  • Candidates are saying that a lower house vote for the AJP is automatically an upper house vote. (This is not possible, and is either a rookie mistake or intentional dishonesty)
  • And the list goes on…

When it comes time for you to put a number next to a box for the NSW election, please don’t think twice about it, thing thrice or even four times before putting a number one in the box next to the Animal Justice Party.

image source: facebook

Subscribe to the Vegan Police Newsletter

Here’s your chance to become a VeganPolice.com.au subscriber and be notified of new posts, updates, and all that good stuff related to dogmatic and purist veganism.



What are your thoughts?