Abolitionism (animal rights)

Last updated

Abolitionism or abolitionist veganism is the animal rights based opposition to all animal use by humans. Abolitionism intends to eliminate all forms of animal use by maintaining that all sentient beings, humans or nonhumans, share a basic right not to be treated as properties or objects. [1] [2] Abolitionists emphasize that the production of animal products requires treating animals as property or resources, and that animal products are not necessary for human health in modern societies. [3] [4] Abolitionists believe that everyone who can live vegan is therefore morally obligated to be vegan. [3] [4]

Contents

Abolitionists disagree on the strategy that must be used to achieve their goal. While some abolitionists, like Gary L. Francione, professor of law, argue that abolitionists should create awareness about the benefits of veganism through creative and nonviolent education (by also pointing to health and environmental benefits) and inform people that veganism is a moral imperative, [5] others such as Tom Regan believe that abolitionists should seek to stop animal exploitation in society, and fight for this goal through political advocacy, without using the environmental or health arguments. [6] Abolitionists such as Steven Best and David Nibert argue, respectively, that embracing alliance politics and militant direct action for change (including civil disobedience, mass confrontation, etc), and transcending capitalism are integral to ending animal exploitation. [7] [8]

Abolitionists generally oppose movements that seek to make animal use more humane or to abolish specific forms of animal use, since they believe this undermines the movement to abolish all forms of animal use. [1] [2] The objective is to secure a moral and legal paradigm shift, whereby animals are no longer regarded as things to be owned and used. The American philosopher Tom Regan writes that abolitionists want empty cages, not bigger ones. [9] This is contrasted with animal welfare, which seeks incremental reform, and animal protectionism, which seeks to combine the first principles of abolitionism with an incremental approach, but which is regarded by some abolitionists as another form of welfarism or "New Welfarism". [10]

Concepts

Abolitionists oppose horse racing as they believe it is a form of animal exploitation. Horse race, Churchill Downs 2008-04-18.jpg
Abolitionists oppose horse racing as they believe it is a form of animal exploitation.
Flag of abolition of meat and speciesism, modeled after the flag of the Republic of India, with the Ashoka's Wheel of Dharma in the center. Flag.for.abolition.of.meat.and.specism.jpg
Flag of abolition of meat and speciesism, modeled after the flag of the Republic of India, with the Ashoka's Wheel of Dharma in the center.

The word relates to the historical term abolitionism —a social movement to end slavery or human ownership of other humans. [11] Based on the way of evaluating welfare reforms, abolitionists can be either radical or pragmatic. While the former maintain that welfare reforms can only be dubiously described as moral improvements, the latter consider welfare reforms as moral improvements even when the conditions they permit are unjust. [12]

Gary L. Francione, professor of law and philosophy at Rutgers School of Law–Newark, argues from the abolitionist perspective that self-described animal-rights groups who pursue welfare concerns, such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, risk making the public feel comfortable about its use of animals. He calls such groups the "new welfarists", arguing that, though their aim is an end to animal use, the reforms they pursue are indistinguishable from reforms agreeable to traditional welfarists, who he says have no interest in abolishing animal use. He argues that reform campaigns entrench the property status of animals, and validate the view that animals simply need to be treated better. Instead, he writes, the public's view that animals can be used and consumed ought to be challenged. His position is that this should be done by promoting ethical veganism. [13] Others think that this should be done by creating a public debate in society. [14]

Philosopher Steven Best of the University of Texas at El Paso has been critical of Francione for his denunciation of militant direct actions carried out by the underground animal liberation movement and organizations like the Animal Liberation Front, which Best compares favorably to the "nineteenth-century-abolitionist movement" to end slavery, and also for placing the onus on individual consumers rather than powerful institutions such as corporations, the state and the mass media along with ignoring the "constraints imposed by poverty, class, and social conditioning." In this, he says that Francione "exculpates capitalism" and fails to "articulate a structural theory of oppression." The "vague, elitist, asocial 'vegan education' approach," Best argues, is no substitute for "direct action, mass confrontation, civil disobedience, alliance politics, and struggle for radical change." [7]

Sociologist David Nibert of Wittenberg University argues that attempting to create a vegan world under global capitalism is unrealistic given that "tens of millions of animals are tortured and brutally killed every year to produce profits for twenty-first century elites, who hold investments in the corporate equivalents of Genghis Khan" and that any real and meaningful change will only come by transcending capitalism. [8] He writes that the contemporary entrenchment of capitalism and continued exploitation of animals by human civilization dovetail into the ongoing expansion of what he describes as the animal–industrial complex, with the number of CAFOs and the animals to fill them dramatically increasing, along with growing numbers of humans consuming animal products. [15] [16] He rhetorically asks, how can one hope to create some consumer base for this new vegan world when over a billion people live on less than a dollar a day? Nibert acknowledges that post-capitalism on its own will not automatically end animal exploitation or bring about a more just world, but that it is a "necessary precondition" for such changes. [8]

New welfarists argue that there is no logical or practical contradiction between abolitionism and "welfarism". [17] [18] Welfarists think that they can be working toward abolition, but by gradual steps, pragmatically taking into account what most people can be realistically persuaded to do in the short as well as the long term, and reduce animal suffering as it is most urgent to relieve. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, for example, in addition to promoting local improvements in the treatment of animals, promote vegetarianism. Although some people believe that changing the legal status of nonhuman sentient beings [19] [20] is a first step in abolishing ownership or mistreatment, others argue that this will not succeed if the consuming public has not already begun to reduce or eliminate its exploitation of animals for food.[ citation needed ]

Personhood

In 1992, Switzerland amended its constitution to recognize animals as beings and not things. [21] The dignity of animals is also protected in Switzerland. [22]

New Zealand granted basic rights to five great ape species in 1999. Their use is now forbidden in research, testing or teaching. [23]

Germany added animal welfare in a 2002 amendment to its constitution, becoming the first European Union member to do so. [21] [24] [25]

In 2007, the parliament of the Balearic Islands, an autonomous province of Spain, passed the world's first legislation granting legal rights to all great apes. [26]

In 2013, India officially recognized dolphins as non-human persons. [27]

In 2014, France revised the legal status of animals from movable property to sentient beings. [19]

In 2015, the province of Quebec in Canada adopted the Animal Welfare and Safety Act, which gave animals the legal status of "sentient beings with biological needs". [28] [29]

See also

Related Research Articles

Speciesism is a term used in philosophy regarding the treatment of individuals of different species. The term has several different definitions. Some specifically define speciesism as discrimination or unjustified treatment based on an individual's species membership, while others define it as differential treatment without regard to whether the treatment is justified or not. Richard D. Ryder, who coined the term, defined it as "a prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species". Speciesism results in the belief that humans have the right to use non-human animals in exploitative ways which is pervasive in the modern society. Studies from 2015 and 2019 suggest that people who support animal exploitation also tend to have intersectional bias that encapsulates and endorses racist, sexist, and other prejudicial views, which furthers the beliefs in human supremacy and group dominance to justify systems of inequality and oppression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal welfare</span> Well-being of non-human animals

Animal welfare is the well-being of non-human animals. Formal standards of animal welfare vary between contexts, but are debated mostly by animal welfare groups, legislators, and academics. Animal welfare science uses measures such as longevity, disease, immunosuppression, behavior, physiology, and reproduction, although there is debate about which of these best indicate animal welfare.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Sztybel</span> Canadian philosopher (born 1967)

David Sztybel is a Canadian philosopher specializing in animal ethics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gary L. Francione</span> American legal scholar (born 1954)

Gary Lawrence Francione is an American academic in the fields of law and philosophy. He is Board of Governors Professor of Law and Katzenbach Scholar of Law and Philosophy at Rutgers University in New Jersey. He is also a visiting professor of philosophy at the University of Lincoln (UK) and honorary professor of philosophy at the University of East Anglia (UK). He is the author of numerous books and articles on animal ethics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal rights movement</span> Social movement advocating animal consideration

The animal rightsmovement, sometimes called the animal liberation, animal personhood, or animal advocacy movement, is a social movement that advocates an end to the rigid moral and legal distinction drawn between human and non-human animals, an end to the status of animals as property, and an end to their use in the research, food, clothing, and entertainment industries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal rights</span> Rights belonging to animals

Animal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth independent of their utility to humans, and that their most basic interests—such as avoiding suffering—should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. Broadly speaking, and particularly in popular discourse, the term "animal rights" is often used synonymously with "animal protection" or "animal liberation". More narrowly, "animal rights" refers to the idea that many animals have fundamental rights to be treated with respect as individuals—rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture that may not be overridden by considerations of aggregate welfare.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roger Yates</span>

Roger Yates is an English lecturer in sociology at University College Dublin and the University of Wales, specialising in animal rights. He is a former executive committee member of the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV), a former Animal Liberation Front (ALF) press officer, and a co-founder of the Fur Action Group.

<i>The Case for Animal Rights</i> 1983 book by Tom Regan

The Case for Animal Rights is a 1983 book by the American philosopher Tom Regan, in which the author argues that at least some kinds of non-human animals have moral rights because they are the "subjects-of-a-life", and that these rights adhere to them whether or not they are recognized. The work is considered an important text within animal rights theory.

Joan Dunayer is an American philosopher and abolitionist animal rights advocate. She is the author of two books, Animal Equality (2001) and Speciesism (2004). She has argued for "species equality" the view that all animals including insects should be given rights.

David Alan Nibert is an American sociologist, author, activist and professor of sociology at Wittenberg University. He is the co-organizer of the Section on Animals and Society of the American Sociological Association. In 2005, he received their Award for Distinguished Scholarship.

Animal protectionism is a position within animal rights theory that favors incremental change in pursuit of non-human animal interests. It is contrasted with abolitionism, the position that human beings have no moral right to use animals, and ought to have no legal right, no matter how the animals are treated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Norm Phelps</span> American animal rights activist (1939–2014)

Norm Phelps was an American animal rights activist, vegetarian and writer. He was a founding member of the Society of Ethical and Religious Vegetarians (SERV), and a former outreach director of the Fund for Animals. He authored four books on animal rights: The Dominion of Love: Animal Rights According to the Bible (2002), The Great Compassion: Buddhism and Animal Rights (2004), The Longest Struggle: Animal Advocacy from Pythagoras to PETA (2007), and Changing the Game: Animal Liberation in the Twenty-first Century (2015).

<i>Animals, Property, and the Law</i> 1995 book by Gary L. Francione

Animals, Property, and the Law (1995) is a book by Gary Francione, Distinguished Professor of Law and Nicholas deB. Katzenbach Scholar of Law and Philosophy at Rutgers School of Law–Newark. The book was the first extensive jurisprudential treatment of animal rights.

<i>Animal Rights Without Liberation</i> 2012 book by Alasdair Cochrane

Animal Rights Without Liberation: Applied Ethics and Human Obligations is a 2012 book by the British political theorist Alasdair Cochrane, in which it is argued that animal rights philosophy can be decoupled from animal liberation philosophy by the adoption of the interest-based rights approach. Cochrane, arguing that there is no reason that (nonhuman) animals should be excluded from justice, adopts Joseph Raz's account of interest rights and extends it to include animals. He argues that sentient animals possess a right not to be made to suffer and a right not to be killed, but not a right to freedom. The book's chapters apply Cochrane's account to a number of interactions between humans and animals; first animal experimentation, then animal agriculture, the genetic engineering of animals, the use of animals in entertainment and sport, the relationship of animals to environmental practices and the use of animals in cultural practices.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Commodity status of animals</span> Legal status as property of most non-human animals

The commodity status of animals is the legal status as property of most non-human animals, particularly farmed animals, working animals and animals in sport, and their use as objects of trade. In the United States, free-roaming animals are (broadly) held in trust by the state; only if captured can be claimed as personal property.

<i>Rain Without Thunder</i> (book) 1996 book by Gary L. Francione

Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement is a 1996 book by American legal scholar Gary L. Francione. The basic premise of the book is that there is a fundamental difference between those that call for animal welfare reform and those that call for the complete abolition of animal use, and that animals have a fundamental right to not be exploited.

Satya was an American monthly magazine which covered vegetarianism, animal rights, environmentalism and social justice issues. It was co-founded by Beth Gould and Martin Rowe in 1994 and released its final issue in 2007. Scholar Gary Francione says Satya became the main journal that promoted animal welfare after the demise of The Animals' Agenda in 2002.

<i>Moral Inquiries on the Situation of Man and of Brutes</i> 1824 book by Lewis Gompertz

Moral Inquiries on the Situation of Man and of Brutes is an 1824 book by Lewis Gompertz, an early animal rights advocate and vegan. The book argues that animals, like humans, are sentient beings capable of experiencing pain and pleasure, and thus deserve moral consideration. He critiques the exploitation of animals for labour, food, and clothing, condemning practices such as slaughter, hunting, and scientific experimentation. He also addresses the suffering of wild animals, suggesting that even in nature, animals face hardships such as hunger and predation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Valéry Giroux</span> Canadian philosopher

Valéry Giroux is a Canadian philosopher, lawyer and animal rights activist from Quebec. She is an adjunct professor at the Université de Montréal Faculty of Law, associate director for the Centre de recherche en éthique, a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, and an author and speaker on animal ethics issues and veganism, with a notable focus on the topic of antispeciesism through her co-editorship of the antispeciesist journal L'Amorce. Her philosophy argues for the equal moral consideration of all sentient beings, objects to the ethical notion that the utilization of non-human animals by humans as being morally permissible, and advocates for the individual right to freedom for all sentient beings, regardless of their species, emphasizing negative or republican freedom over positive freedom.

References

  1. 1 2 The Six Principles of the Abolitionist Approach to Animal Rights
  2. 1 2 Francione, Gary. "Animal Rights: The Abolitionist Approach"
  3. 1 2 Gary Francione, Eat Like You Care
  4. 1 2 HowDoIGoVegan.com
  5. ↑ "Thought of the Day: Abolitionist Veganism and Arguments About Health". 23 December 2016. Retrieved 11 December 2020.
  6. ↑ "For the abolition of veganism, for the abolition of animal exploitation". 17 November 2012. Retrieved 11 December 2020.
  7. 1 2 Best, Steven (2014). "The New Abolitionism: Capitalism, Slavery, and Animal Liberation". The Politics of Total Liberation: Revolution for the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 21–49. doi:10.1057/9781137440723_2. ISBN   978-1137471116.
  8. 1 2 3 Nibert, David, ed. (2017). Animal Oppression and Capitalism. Praeger Publishing. p. 306. ISBN   978-1440850738.
  9. ↑ "The Torch of Reason, The Sword of Justice, animalsvoice.com". Archived from the original on 22 July 2011. Retrieved 24 May 2011.
  10. ↑ Francione, Gary L. and Garner, Robert. The Animal Rights Debate. Columbia University Press, 2010.
  11. ↑ "When Vegans Won't Compromise". New York Times. 16 August 2015. Retrieved 17 April 2016.
  12. ↑ Stepanenko, Walter Scott (2018). "Two Forms of Abolitionism and the Political Rights of Animals: A Case Study". Journal of Animal Ethics. 8 (1). University of Illinois Press: 26–38. doi:10.5406/janimalethics.8.1.0026. JSTOR   10.5406/janimalethics.8.1.0026 . Retrieved 21 August 2022.
  13. ↑ Francione 1996, chapter. 5.
  14. ↑ "For the abolition of veganism, for the abolition of slavery. About the necessary paradigm shift needed in the animal rights movement" . Retrieved 3 February 2019.
  15. ↑ Nibert, David (2011). "Origins and Consequences of the Animal Industrial Complex". In Steven Best; Richard Kahn; Anthony J. Nocella II; Peter McLaren (eds.). The Global Industrial Complex: Systems of Domination. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 208–209. ISBN   978-0-7391-3698-0.
  16. ↑ Nibert, David (2013). Animal Oppression and Human Violence: Domesecration, Capitalism, and Global Conflict. Columbia University Press. pp. 189, 233–240, 260–261. ISBN   978-0-231-15189-4. Archived from the original on 4 November 2022. Retrieved 24 December 2022.
  17. ↑ "Farm-animal welfare, legislation, and trade". Law and contemporary problems 325-358. Retrieved 14 December 2014.
  18. ↑ Smith, Allison; Reese, Jacy (24 March 2016). "An empirical perspective on animal advocacy" . Retrieved 17 April 2016.
  19. 1 2 Duportail, Judith; de Villers, Vincent Tremolet (15 April 2014). "Les animaux ne sont plus des "meubles"" [Animals are no longer "furniture"] (in French). Le Figaro. Archived from the original on 16 April 2014. Retrieved 21 April 2024.
  20. ↑ "New bill aimed at modifying the legal status of animals announced". Montreal SPCA. Archived from the original on 14 December 2014. Retrieved 14 December 2014.
  21. 1 2 "Germany guarantees animal rights in constitution". Associated Press. 18 May 2002. Retrieved 26 June 2008.
  22. ↑ "Swiss constitution". 18 April 1999. Archived from the original on 21 April 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2013.
  23. ↑ Thomas Rose (2 August 2007). "A Step at a time: New Zealand's progress toward hominid rights" (PDF). CBC News.
  24. ↑ Constitutional Protection for Germany's Animals. page 13
  25. ↑ "Germany guarantees animal rights". CNN. 21 June 2002. Retrieved 26 June 2008.
  26. ↑ Thomas Rose. "Going ape over human rights". CBC News. Retrieved 26 June 2008.
  27. ↑ "Dolphins gain unprecedented protection in India" . Retrieved 2 August 2007.
  28. ↑ "Domestic animal legislation in Quebec"
  29. ↑ Animal Welfare and Safety Act

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.