Democracy for the Non-Human

Democracy for the Non-Human

As a nation, we have become entirely too dependent on animals as profit. Yet, those who protest against cruelty to animals seem to focus on the emotional, “animal loving” aspect while excluding the entire issue of our treatment towards nonhumans from both serious political and moral standpoints. To protest against animal inequality is to support the prevention of suffering and misery of all animals, not just to make the lives of “cute pets” more comfortable. What we as a country are allowing to take place is the tyranny of human over nonhuman animals. Humans view all animals, and subsequently their flesh, as purely sustenance – not as the independent sentient beings they in fact are. Further, not only are animals being tortured in order to be skinned alive for their meat, they are being abused and maltreated as they are used for pets, food, clothing, entertainment, and scientific research. What is unbelievable is how our human morality can be so easily pushed aside and replaced by ease and comfort. Laws of the Earth essentially intertwine Nature, Animals, and Mankind - thus it is our responsibility to make the mental switch in our attitudes and practices towards a large group of nonhumans that in essence, we share many similarities with. Do animals not feel? Do they not have basic biological functioning? Does their heart not beat and does blood not flow through their veins? It is our responsibility to speak on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves. “Animal Liberation is Human Liberation”.

Peter Singer’s novel Animal Liberation proved to be a magnanimous source of information in forming the basis of the equality argument. He calls upon the masses to disregard their prejudices and provides them with his new ethics for our treatment of animals. He states that our habits of thought lead to our clouded judgment and inability to see that the interests of animals should not be disregarded and can in fact be challenged successfully. His argument is deeply rooted in solid logic and factual information thus making his case as strong as possible. One of he aspects of the maltreatment of nonhumans he challenges is the field of scientific research. He states that, “There are extensive federally financed programs in which animals are poisoned, starved, and tortured, and ultimately after going through such extensive abuse, authorities are saying that such experiments are not worth doing and yield results not worth publishing.” So my question is this, “Why do they keep occurring?” If the pain undergone by the animals is not sufficient enough to dissuade us to terminate such experiments, shouldn’t the factual and unsatisfactory results do the job? Apparently, it seems the answer is an ignorant “no.” One particularly powerful image comes to mind when speaking on the subject of scientific research – the strapping down of chimps by force with rope and restraints – the fear evident in its eyes – after which to his head is attached a mechanical head encasing of some sort with metal probes protruding out of the sides. The countdown begins…three…two…one! An electrical surge loud enough to be heard through the video leaves the chimp lifeless as his head is snapped back and his body convulses and contorts up as if in a back bend. And what did the study prove for the results of electrical simulation of the brain? Insufficient results to be determined. The old chimp is discarded. A new test subject is brought in. The cruelty of laboratories, although decreased in previous years by animal rights activists such as PETA and IDA, still bears an overwhelming influence in our nation. So next time you apply makeup or swallow that pill, take a second to consider how many innocent animals were tortured to provide you with the luxury.

Besides scientific research, the use of animals in entertainment and for clothing has recently surged tremendously. Annually, millions of animals are killed for their wool, their leather, their exotic skins or their fur and even more subjected to abuse and maltreatment in the field of entertainment. A world-renowned example is the famous “Running of The Bulls” in Pamplona, Spain. There, bulls are pitted against one another in competition after men speed up the process of transporting them through tactics of fear and excitement. This tradition is protested against severely by animal rights groups seeing as how in their race to reach the pens, the bulls proceed to trample each other fearing the men herding them. What they are unaware of is that they are racing towards their death because as soon as they are “safely” locked inside their pens, they are transported to their slaughter. Another similar example is bullfighting, again more popular in Hispanic cultures, during which bulls are tortured for entertainment by angering and teasing them and finally slowly killing them by sword. Such depictions of humanity leave much to be said about our actions. The same can be said of those who sport animal skin as fashion. In most cases, animals that are sentenced to live their life in order to supply the fashion industry with material live miserable lives. Observing cows destined to be leather goods, the calves are usually separated from their mothers 7 days after birth and are transported to isolated facilities where they are so malnourished that their bones are so fragile that they lack the strength to hold up their emaciated and frail bodies. Farmers claim that this is the only way to raise leather because if they are fed on the diet they deserve but are so selfishly denied, “their coats will become tainted and thus unusable. No cow should be wasted”. No cow should be wasted… the phrase lingers as the cows that are “ready” and “sufficiently abused” are skinned alive for their hides, their cries echoing. Once again, farmers claim the practice to be the only way and thus justifiable. Humanity’s absolute dependence on animals, especially in cases such as these, deserves to be questioned and abhorred. If we as a people feel no sympathy for the animals we subjugate in order to be entertained for an hour or two, or look “fashionable” for an evening out, I hate to imagine what will become of us if our practices are not changed. 

Animal Rights has always been a topic I have demonstrated interest in and being able to present my claims in such a way finally has provided me with an outlet. A documentary that has had tremendous impact on me has been the feature length documentary, Earthlings, narrated by Joaquin Phoenix. His booming narratorial voice, deep and full emotion, not only transcends the argument but injects it with claims illustrating our complete disrespect for these so-called "non-human providers." Earthlings, uses hidden cameras to depict footage and chronicle the day-to-day practices of some of the largest industries in the world. While the entire film was a phenomenal look into the human psyche and towards animal cruelty (I highly recommend the film), the animals-as-food argument was the strongest and most emotionally empowering. “Hundreds of millions of animals living in spaces so cramped that they barely experience their bodies, and these are the livestock that bring premium prices at the market. Thus, the practice continues.” A particularly influential scene in the documentary was one in a pig-raising factory where the animals were being fattened up for products such as steak and bacon. The slaughter of animals is the most gruesome aspect and the standard most needing regulation. The video displayed the herding of pigs, so closely packed together that they were unable to move, to their slaughter. An unseen man was in command of the herding with an electrical probe in his hand. He explained that it was just precautionary because if he were to kill the pigs with it, their meat would get tainted with blood, yet when they weren’t moving fast enough to his satisfaction, he seemed to have no problem killing them instantaneously whilst yelling, “Go mother fucker! Don’t fuckin’ stop! Let’s go, let’s go!!! Come on, bitch!” All the while, his cruel and sadistic laugh permeated the slaughterhouse, but not loud enough to drown out the helpless whining of the dying pigs. The scene ends as he proceeds to murder another pig, laughing hysterically, and immediately flashes from black to another area in the slaughterhouse where the rest of the pigs are now hanging upside down, their throats slit, a steady trickle of crimson blood flowing and ebbing from their cut. Many were still convulsing, not yet dead, but not completely alive – somewhere in limbo where even their guttural cries will not bring them aid. Michael Pollan’s quote, “Surely, if slaughterhouses had glass walls, would not all of us be vegetarians?” rings true and close to the heart in this particular instance. But slaughterhouses do not have glass walls. “The architecture of slaughter is opaque, designed in the interest of denial, to ensure that we will not see even if we wanted to look. And who wants to look?”

How easy would our lives be, and how drastically would they improve, if we were to rid ourselves of these subjugating habits and terminate the cruelty we force upon animals. I began watching the documentary not completely sure of what to expect. Within five minutes, I was in tears. The entire film lasted a total of an hour and a half and I cried for the entire time. As they say, “seeing is believing”, and seeing the abuse animals go through is no exception. In fact, it should be placed above all else. The logic represented is undeniable when witnessing what one living creature is doing to another, living, breathing creature. Arguments have been made that books such as Singer’s and films such as Phoenix’s display the extremes of the issue and that in reality, the situation is not as bad. While not entirely accurate, why refuse to change the situation if not all slaughterhouses, and not all forms of entertainment are as cruel as others. What will it take to persuade humanity that what we are doing is irrational and downright immoral? Do all the slaughterhouses have to mercilessly kill their pigs while simultaneously insulting them and degrading them by yelling? How many experimental chimps and animals have to die before we come to the realization that testing is inhuman? Not only do such films and novels and statistics make me want to reject all meat products, animal fashion, and forms of entertainment, the argument supporting said rejection provides logic alternatives. Pleather, Tofurkey, and Faux Fur are just several of the many available alternatives. I am not embarrassed to say that I eat meat. On several occasions I attempted to become a vegetarian with no luck. Due to health reasons, I was not allowed to continue by my parents. Yet, when I do eat meat, I make sure to check that the animals were allowed to graze, were fed grass and no animal by-products or genetically modified hormones. While that may pale in comparison to a life without meat whatsoever, it is the best I am able to do at the moment. Slowly, I am building up information providing reasons on how a vegetarian diet is sufficient sustenance for the human body and how in some cases, a vegetarian is able to consume more protein and vitamins from beans, cheese, or yogurt, than they would ever have been able to had they maintained eating meat.

To persuade such an overwhelming population to put an end to actions on which they were reared proves to be a challenge. This factor brings to light that “habit” is the final barrier of which we must free ourselves of in order to free nonhumans as well. Animal Liberation should be viewed in the same light as Black Liberation because the discrimination and prejudice witnessed is essentially the same. There are so few who can say with confidence that none of their actions or attitudes can legitimately be questioned. We need to become prepared to question our most fundamental attitudes and we need to consider our thoughts from the point of view of those who suffer by them. If we are able to do that, not only will our lives benefit, but we will also provide a substantial bettering on the lives of animals - the creatures that our essentially our brothers. The difference between chimpanzee and oyster in our eyes is minimal; the challenge that stands before us now is to minimize the gulf between chimpanzee and human.

We are the same. “Animal Liberation is Human Liberation.” “Make the Connection.”