 |
 Your free book to action animal rights |
Grr! Graphics for Animal LiberationHow to Do Animal Rights -
And Win the War on Animals
Contents
About
Chapter 1
Introduction to Doing Animal Rights
1. The Broad Setting
2. Mass Extinction
3. The Animal Holocaust
Chapter 2
Know Your Animal Ethics & Animal Rights
1. Animal Ethics
BackgroundEthicsImportance of Animal EthicsGlossaryNow a Biff From HistoryHow to Proceed?Ethical TheoriesEthical Theories ComparedChoosing an Ethical TheoryDo Philosophical Ideas Work?2. Animal Rights
What are Animal Rights?Background to Animal RightsMajor Dates for RightsAnimal Rights TheoryFundamental Animal Ethical PositionsVariations on Animal RightsAre Rights a Cure-all?Universal Declaration on AnimalsArguments For & Against Animal Rights3. Comparing Animal Philosophies
Animal Ethics vs Animal RightsAnimal Rights vs Animal WelfareAnimal Rights vs ConservationDeep EcologyConclusion
Chapter 3
Campaigning Methods for Animal Rights
1. Introduction
2. Campaigning
Where to Begin?Keeping GoingTen Essential Campaigning TipsMore Tips3. Civil Disobedience
What Is Civil DisobedienceCivil Disobedience & Animal RightsArguments For & Against Civil Disobedience4. Direct Action
What is Direct Action?Examples of Animal Rights Direct ActionIndividual vs Mass Direct ActionSea Shepherd Conservation SocietyStop Huntingdon Animal CrueltyThe Battle of BrightlingseaInset: Background to BrightlingseaComparing Direct ActionsDirect Action vs Civil DisobedienceEfficacy of Direct Action5. Action Planning
What is an Action Plan?Why an Action Plan?Who Should Produce the Action Plan?Before You BeginDistinguish Operations From AdministrationsCreating Your Action PlanYou Should Be SmartYou Should Also SWOTMake It HappenReview ItA Simple Action Plan Template6. Lobbying
Who Can Lobby?What & Whom to LobbyStart LobbyingHow to LobbyLobbying Techniques7. Picketing
What is Picketing?AR Picketing is Like Industrial PicketingHow to Picket8. Starting a Group
What to Do?Name & LogoFinding MembersA Constitution?The Group CommitteeGroup Success Or FailureNewslettersFundraising9. Publicity
10. LeafletingDesignPrintingDistributionPosters & PlacardsOther Media11.News MediaMedia TipsA Feature Article?The Letters PageNews ReleaseThe RadioRadio Tips12. InternetThe WebEmailCreate Your Own Web SiteDesigning Your Web SiteCapturing ViewersDiscussion Boards
Chapter 4
Activities for Animal Rights
1. Undercover Investigator
2. Video Activist
3. Animal Friendly Traveller
4. Preacher
5. Animal Rescuer
6. Investigative Reporter
7. Media Watcher
8. Philosopher
9. Flyer
10. Personal Activist
11. Animal Lawyer
12. Politician
13. Prisoner Supporter
14. Public & School Speaker
15. Aerial Snooper
16. Scientific Investigator
17. Solo Information Worker
18. Street Theatre Actor
19. Teacher
20. Voluntary Worker Abroad
Chapter 5
The Law & Animal Rights
1. Terrorism
BackgroundTerrorism DefinedAnimal Extremism & TerrorismDoes AR Extremism Work in Practice?2. Violence or Nonviolence?
Can We Justify Violence?Kinds of ViolenceViews For & Against ViolenceIs Violence Efficacious?Conclusion3. The Law - US & Britain
United StatesFBI vs ExtremistsBritainExtremist TacticsEstablishment Fights Back4. Police Arrest
In the Street & At Your DoorAt the Police StationYour TacticsKnow Your RightsRemaining SilentYour LawyerSuing the Police
Chapter 6
Assorted Animal Rights Activists
1. Steven Best
2. John Lawrence
3. Andrew Linzey
4. Richard Martin
5. The McLibel Two
6. Ingrid Newkirk
7. Jill Phipps
8. Henry Salt
9. Henry Spira
10. Peter Singer
11. Tom Regan
12. Richard D Ryder
Chapter 7
Animal Numbers Raised & Killed
1. Summary
2. Chickens
3. Pigs
4. Beef Cattle
5. Fish
6. Meat Consumption
7. Fur-bearers
8. Experimental Animals
Chapter 8. Extras!
1. Mutilations of Farm Animals
2. The Five Freedoms
3. Painism
4. The Forgotten Fur
5. The Golden Rule
6. Human Overpopulation
7. Climate Change
8. Think Like an Animal
Appendix 1
World Scientists' Warning to Humanity.
Appendix 2
Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare.
 Italiano |
|
 English |
And Win the War on Animals
Know Your Animal Ethics & Animal Rights
"To spread the concept [of animal rights] beyond our species is to jeopardize our dignity as moral beings, who live in judgement of one another and of themselves." Roger Scruton (1)Alternatively…
"...animal rights must not only be an idea but a social movement for the liberation of the world's most oppressed beings, both in terms of numbers and in the severity of their pain." Steven Best (2)
What are Animal Rights?
Animal rights are the rights of animals to be protected from human use and abuse and can take moral, legal and practical forms. People who support animal rights believe that animals are not ours to use as we wish for whatever purpose, be it for food, clothing, experimentation or entertainment. Animal rights supporters also believe that we should consider the best interests of animals regardless of the usage value they may have for us. But what are animal rights specifically, how do animal rights compare with human rights, and should animals have rights?
Background to Animal Rights
The concept of human rights is often based on a belief in 'natural rights'. Natural rights are assumed to be given by God, or were enjoyed when people were living in a 'state of nature' before people were civilized, or are in some way possessed universally in that rights apply to everyone automatically, indisputably and irrevocably. The English philosopher John Locke in the 17th century was among the first to distinguished certain natural rights he thought people were entitled to: the rights to life, liberty and property.
Alternatively, human rights might be neither natural nor universal. You could argue that rights are only what people are willing to confer as they see fit on others, being the granting of particular benefits by people to people. The generally held modern view of human rights is that they are:
Major Dates for Rights
Animal Rights Theory
The justification for conferring rights on animals is that animals are in many important ways like humans. Animals are sentient creatures. They feel pleasure and pain, experience emotions, remember, anticipate and learn. What happens to them is important for them, unlike what happens to a rock or a stone. So, if you argue that humans deserve rights, by simple extension you can argue that animals also deserve rights.
Animal interests, however, are not always the same as human interests. Thus the range of rights that animals need are not always the same as the range of rights that humans need. Animals are not in need of equality before the law, freedom of speech, freedom of religion or fair taxation. Nor do animals have an interest in voting or getting a high school education. Hence, it would be meaningless and silly to talk of giving animals the right to these interests. However, this should not prevent us from bestowing relevant or appropriate rights on animals.
Relevant rights for animals can be any benefits appropriate for animals that people wish to bestow on them. Relevant rights for animals can include:
Fundamental Animal Ethical Positions
As for the actuality of giving rights to animals there are three fundamental positions: abuse, welfare and liberation.
1. Abuse: animals have no moral status.
This is the attitude that we owe nothing to animals except to make use of them as and how we like. It is the position many people held in past centuries and many people still hold today, especially in China and surrounding countries.
2. Welfare: animals should have welfare.
This view is that animals are a resource for humanity, we should treat animals kindly, but humans always come first when there is a conflict of interest. Welfarists acknowledge the need to use animals but try to alleviate 'needless' animal suffering. It is the position most people in the West support today.
3. Liberation: animals should be liberated.
This is the avant-garde position: animals deserve moral status similar in some way to human moral status. There are two types of animal liberationist and both want to abolish the use of animals on moral or other grounds. ‘New welfarists’ regard abolition as a long-term goal and meanwhile try to ease as much animal suffering as possible by introducing practical welfare measures. The 'hard-line abolitionists’ believe welfare is a waste of time and pitch straight for abolition of animal use on the grounds that if there is no abuse there is no need for welfare. Liberationists have a lifestyle quite different to the majority of people, being vegan or vegetarian and reject goods and services based on animals.
For a comparison of animal rights and animal welfare (and new welfare) see Animal Rights vs Animal Welfare, next page.
Variations on Animal Rights
The concept of animal rights has different levels of definition. So to make any discussion meaningful and avoid talking at cross purposes you need to clarify what people have in mind when they speak about animal rights. For example you can distinguish three basic views: absolute, equal and relative.
1. Absolute Animal Rights: you should always protect animals' rights, even when doing so is troublesome.
Animals have value in themselves independent of their worth to humans (they are said to have 'intrinsic' value, that is value irrespective of their use to humans) and do not exist solely for humans. Moreover, people must protect the rights of animals even when to do so is difficult for human society. For instance, people should not experiment on dogs to develop a possible life-saving drug for humans even if it means delaying the drug's development by some years. This view is held by animal rightists.
2. Equal Consideration of Animal Rights: you should give equal importance to comparable interests of animals and humans.
Animals have at least some value in themselves irrespective of human values (they have some intrinsic value), so we should treat them well. Furthermore, people must give equal consideration to the comparable interests of animals and humans. For example, when making a moral decision about the sufferings of a dog and a human, neither want pain inflicted on them, so we should give the same weight of consideration to the dog as we would to the human. If we are not prepared to make a human suffer we should not make a dog suffer. This view may be held by people with a Utilitarian philosophy.
3. Relative Animal Rights: you should overrule the interests of animals if you have good reason.
Animals have at least some value in themselves irrespective of human attitudes (they have some intrinsic value), so we should treat them well. But although people should avoid causing animals 'unnecessary' suffering, animal rights are relative to human rights, so we can cancel the interests of animals for the benefit of humans if there is justification. For instance, we should use dogs and monkeys in research and their welfare is important, but the well-being of humans is more important. This view may be held by welfarists.
You need not confine yourself to these three levels when discussing animal rights. You can make up nuances as you like, such as broadening animal rights to apparently non-sentient animals or to the whole of inanimate nature or by coming up with different definitions of animal rights. But bear each level in mind to make discussion meaningful.
Are Rights a Cure-all?
Rights should be absolute if they are to protect individuals; they cannot be suspended or hacked about to fit in with what someone may happen to want. Yet sometimes there seem to be cases for overriding rights during conflicts of interest. For example, it might seem right to kill some individuals to save others, such as killing mice spoiling a harvest and setting off a famine, or killing predators such as coyotes or foxes eating the last individuals of an endangered species. How should we react to situations like these? We might react by temporarily adopting another philosophy, like Utilitarianism - that you should act to bring about the greatest good to the greatest number of individuals. Thus we should be aware that rights are not a panacea that can cope with all moral conditions all the time; now and then we may have to look outside rights for other solutions to guide us when dealing with moral issues.
Another problem with rights is that sometimes animals are said to have intrinsic value - have a worth in themselves irrespective of their value to humans. As an animal rightist you might claim that all sentient beings are entitled to rights because they have equal intrinsic value. But does intrinsic value really exist? Does it exist independently of humanity? Intrinsic value may simply be a part of the human value system that values things that have no value or are said to have no value. If you do not believe in intrinsic value then you might have to pursue animal liberation via Utilitarianism, not through animal rights. As a utilitarian you could claim that sentient animals have interests and therefore no species (ie humanity) is more important than any other and we should give equal moral consideration to every creature's moral interests.
Both rightist and utilitarian views are similar in that withholding rights or equal consideration of interests is speciesism. A difference between these views is that you must not harm any animal who has rights even if the harm you propose may benefit the majority. On the other hand, according to Utilitarianism, you are allowed to harm sentient animals providing the harm has a useful outcome and you would also do the same harm to humans.
Universal Declaration on Animals
Questions about human welfare and about nature conservation are addressed at the highest levels of government. They are debated at international meetings and agreements among nations are codified in binding Charters. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on Biodiversity are examples. Yet animals have no worldwide protection, presumably because they are so important a part of human economic exploitation.
The lack of success in shaping internationally binding charters on animal rights has not been for want of trying. People have attempted to identify and advance the rights of animals at least since the 18th century. Henry Salt (1851 - 1939) is credited with writing the first book on animal rights, published in 1892 and subsequently, and he traced efforts back to John Lawrence (1753 - 1839) one of the earliest writers in modern times on animal rights and welfare. Lawrence argued in his 1796 book, A Philosophical and Practical Treatise on Horses and the Moral Duties of Man Towards Brute Creation, that we have to care for animals and common law should support this principle in practice. (For more about Salt and Lawrence see Chapter 6.)
The 20th century saw a number of international declarations supporting animal rights. Perhaps the most prominent venture was the announcement (5) in 1978 by the United Nation’s Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) of the Universal Declaration of Animal Rights. Among the Declaration's pronouncements are that all animals have the same rights to existence, no animal shall be ill-treated or subject to cruelty, animals shall command the protection of law, and dead animals shall be treated with respect. The Declaration, however, waned and faded away before it could reach significant levels of international agreement.
More recently some of the world's leading animal welfare organisations have started campaigning for the United Nations to adopt a new declaration, this time on the welfare of animals: the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare. Why welfare and not rights? Possibly the softer option of welfare is easier for people to accept, so that this new declaration has a better chance of being endorsed and enduring.
The animal organisations behind this new declaration envisage that signatory countries to the document will recognise animals as sentient beings. They hope their Declaration will make animal welfare an important global issue, pioneer the way for legally binding international agreements on animal welfare and hasten a better deal for animals worldwide. The Declaration would also underscore the importance of animal welfare as part of the moral development of humanity. So far a number of United Nations member states are acting as a steering group to advance the initiative at the UN. But achieving this Declaration for animals will be a long and twisting journey. To illustrate, the Convention on the Rights of the Child took thirty years of effort before the United Nations adopted it.
See Appendix 2 for a draft copy of the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare.
Arguments For & Against Animal Rights
Listen to people's arguments for and against animal rights. Break down their arguments into simple statements and add them to these common outlooks to help argue your own case.
1. Drawing the Line
(1) Scruton, Roger. Animal Rights. City Journal. Summer 2000.
(2) Best, Steven. Essay Animal Rights and the New Enlightenment.
(3) Salt, Henry. Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress. G Bell & Sons: London, 1894. Reprinted 1980 by Macmillan & Co: New York and by Centaur Press: London.
(4) Lawrence, John. A Philosophical and Practical Treatise on Horses and the Moral Duties of Man Towards Brute Creation. T N Longman: London. 1796.
(5) The Times, 17 October 1978.
| How to Do Animal Rights - And Win the War on Animals. First published on the Web: April 2008. © Roger (Ben) Panaman, April 2008. All rights reserved. |