![]()
![]() How 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 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 2. Animal Rights ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 3. Comparing Animal Philosophies ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 4. Universal Declaration of Animal Rights ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Chapter 3. Campaigning Methods for Animal Rights ![]() 1. Campaigning ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 2. Civil Disobedience ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 3. Direct Action ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 4. Action Planning ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 5. Lobbying ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 6. Picketing ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 7. Starting a Group ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 8. Leafleting ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 9. News Media ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 10. Internet ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Chapter 4. Activities for Animal Rights ![]() 1. Undercover Investigator ![]() 2. Video Activist ![]() 3. Animal Friendly Traveller ![]() 4. Animal 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 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 2. Violence or Nonviolence? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 3. The Law - US & Britain ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 4. Police Arrest ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 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. Three Philosophers ![]() ![]() ![]() Chapter 7. Numbers of Animal 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 - World Scientists' Warning to Humanity |
And Win the War on Animals ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Animal Ethics vs Animal Rights ![]() Having discussed animal ethics and animal rights on the previous two pages, how do they compare with each other? The Table below summarises some main points. ![]()
![]() Thus, animal ethics is a broad theoretical pursuit, like studying music theory, whereas animal rights is a practice, like playing a specific musical instrument. ![]() Animal Rights vs Animal Welfare ![]() Animal rights overlaps with animal welfare and conservation. But although all three share many similarities there are significant differences that set them apart from each other and make them conflicting philosophies, as this Table and the following one indicate. ![]()
![]() Animal rightists often disparage of animal welfare. As the radical animal rights academic and activist Steven Best (see Chapter 6) says, "Animal 'welfare' laws do little but regulate the details of exploitation." (1) ![]() A major rift between animal rights and animal welfare is that one is subjective and the other is objective. We cannot measure animal rights impartially or scientifically. It is a concept and a personal moral choice. It resembles the conviction of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) that we should not harm humans even in the interests of the majority. Animal rights takes Kant's view (a Duty Ethics concept, see Chapter 2: Animal Ethics) a step further and applies it to animals. Animal welfare, on the other hand, has the advantage that we can measure it objectively and manipulate it scientifically. For instance, to find which kind of bedding chickens prefer, we can count the number of chickens who seek to live on a straw floor or a wire mesh floor. Then we might provide the chickens with their choice, economic and other constraints permitting. ![]() Animal welfare has a variation called new welfarism, in outlook between animal welfare and animal rights. Like animal rightists, new welfarists support abolishing the causes of animal suffering; however, new welfarists argue that it will take a long time to achieve this and meanwhile we must do all we can to support the welfare of animals to lessen their suffering. Thus, for instance, new welfarists want to phase out fur farms and animal experiments but in the short-term they try to improve conditions for these animals. Critics of new welfarism say this route supports animal exploitation and therefore is a useless philosophy and the ultimate act of betrayal for animals. New welfarists counter by claiming that their outlook is more achievable, and therefore is of more immediate benefit to exploited animals, than the perhaps impossible goals of animal rights, such as demanding complete closure of anti-animal industries and changing the deep seated habits of billions of people. ![]() Animal Rights vs Conservation ![]() Animal rights and nature conservation both became popular among the public in the late 1970's. Both standpoints oppose human-centredness and believe that wild animals have intrinsic value (although this is not an attitude of all conservationists). Animal rightists and nature conservationists both support conserving nature, although for different reasons. Conservationists support nature for the sake of greater conservation whereas animal rightists support nature for the sake of the animals who live in it. The differences between both outlooks, however, are deep, as illustrated by this Table: ![]()
![]() Deep Ecology ![]() There is another philosophy that has a considerable bearing on our behaviour to animals. It contrasts with animal rights and helps to see it in perspective. Deep Ecology is concerned with fundamental philosophical, practical and personal questions about the ways humans relate to their environment. It relates to animals because of course animals live in nature and are part of our environment. Deep Ecology opposes the exploitation and destruction of the natural world by materialism and consumerism. It says we should minimise our impact on the world and it appeals for a change in the way we think about the world. Deep Ecology predicts that if we do not shift our basic values and customs we will destroy the diversity and beauty of the world's life and its ability to support humanity. ![]() The ideas of Deep Ecology came about against the background of the nascent Environmentalism of the 1960's. Deep Ecology is primarily associated with Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess (1912 - ). The Deep in Deep Ecology refers to a fundamental or wise questioning of attitudes to nature. Deep Ecology questions the root causes of the degeneration of the variety and richness of the world. It calls for a more enlightened approach for humanity to live within the bounds of Nature rather than to depend on technological fixes as remedies for our exploitation / destruction of nature. ![]() Naess coined the term Deep Ecology in 1973 in contrast to shallow ecology, a lesser form of environmentalism and typical of present society. The nature of shallow ecology has a utilitarian and anthropocentric attitude, based on materialism and consumerism. Shallow ecology focuses on using the world's natural resources for unlimited human growth and comes up with technological solutions to offset environmental problems thus made. For example, shallow ecology promotes recycling of commercial and industrial waste instead of preventing the generation of waste in the first place. Again, shallow ecology supports placing ever increasing demands on the land to produce more food instead of improving human birth control to reduce human numbers. ![]() ![]() Eight tenets, composed by Naess and colleagues, form the basis of Deep Ecology thought. These points are intended to be agreeable to people from any philosophical, political or religious background. The eight tenets of Deep Ecology, paraphrased and contrasted with shallow ecology, are shown on this Table: ![]()
![]() The philosophy of Deep Ecology is supported by some sections of political parties and is used as a philosophical basis for change by environmental activists opposing the human destruction of nature. As a guide for personal growth, Deep Ecology invites each individual to intermesh with and identify with all living creatures. But we are not just saving other species and ecosystems, we are really saving ourselves, because nature is the part of us extending beyond our skin. Deep Ecology says that humans are not isolated objects but are part of the whole. ![]() A criticism of Deep Ecology from the animal rights viewpoint is that it maintains we can use animals to satisfy our basic needs (Tenet 3). 'Deep' animal rights philosophy forbids the use of animals. We would use up a vast number of animals if all the billions of humans put to use an animal even just occasionally. Another problem with Deep Ecology is that it relies on the idea of intrinsic value (Tenet 1) - that animals have a value independent of humanity. However, if you do not believe in the notion of intrinsic value you could still support Deep Ecology and pursue animal liberation (as opposed to animal rights) by adopting a utilitarian philosophy (see Are Rights a Cure-all? in Chapter 2: Animal Rights). ![]() Conclusion ![]() Can you be an exclusive animal rightist, welfarist, conservationist or deep ecologist? Actually, being exclusively one or the other may be the most difficult course. Another approach is to see these philosophies not as necessarily mutually exclusive but as reinforcing one another. We can surely be benignly flexible and adopt the best ideas and activities from each of them depending on the particular circumstances we encounter. Certainly, knowledge about each of them and their antitheses helps us understand the outlook of other people. ![]() References ![]() (1) Best, Steven & Nocella, Anthony J (eds). Terrorist or Freedom Fighter? Lantern Books: New York. 2002:12. ![]() |
|