Recognizing Our Connections
The consideration of animals, both as members of society that should not be unnecessarily harmed, and as mass producers of greenhouse gases are relatively new considerations in human society. Factory farming has become an increasingly problematic issue for many people both as an ethical and an environmental problem. The responses to this dilemma have come from many different perspectives and cultural backgrounds, each with a unique take. It is from the authors, Daniel Wildcat, Sue Donaldson & Will Kymlicka, that two such points of view will be explored. While Donaldson & Kymlicka have a more Western approach, Wildcat is looking at these issues from an Indigenous perspective. Each of these important authors highlight how practices such as factory farming is detrimental to the well-being of the animals, the environment and humanity itself. Ethically, the ways in which we treat the animals around us is a direct reflection of the value that we place on our own position in this world. While anthropocentrism places us above all living and non-living elements of this world, the authors will argue that humanity has no higher position than any other animal. It is from the perspective of equality and harmony with all life that we must understand our place on earth. We all must limit the amount of damage that we do to both biodiversity and our own well-being through more sustainable farming practices. The end to factory farming is essential to help to mend the harm that has been done to the animals that we live with and to the planet that we are all a part of.
When considering animal welfare, the position from which we approach it is as important as any other consideration. Donaldson & Kymlicka argues that all animals should be seen as valued agents while also having fundamental rights under the law. They argue that those rights should be similar to those that are provided to humans. In this vein they place animals into three categories for which to determine their status: domesticated animals, wilderness animals, and liminal animals. Domestic animals hold a special place for the authors as they have become subordinate to humans and placed in a position of dependence upon us. They have become “members of a shared society with us” (p. 41) so much so that their very livelihoods depend on us being able to care and feed them. With this being the case, they should also be afforded the same rights as any other human. They should be considered co-citizens. Their lack of ability to speak for themselves should not be a means to discriminate against them as there are many humans who are in a similar position but have others to speak on their behalf. The ability to provide guardianship or representation should be foundational to our system of governance. This is especially true since these are unique animals within the wild. They are domesticated because they can engage in “relations of trust” (p. 42). These aspects should afford them the very rights that all humans also enjoy.
Wilderness animals are another subsection that includes animals that have never been domesticated yet have the lands that they hunt and graze on stolen from them without repercussions. These animals can be compared to other nations in the world that enjoy the autonomy and sovereignty that is imbued to them through respected nation borders. These wild animals have with them a way of life, regions that they rely on, and societies that they live within. These aspects mean that they should be provided with the same rights as any other nation and have their sovereignty respected. This may look different for different animals, as some may roam far and wide, while others stay in a specific region, but both of these cases can be evaluated accordingly, and rights can be afforded based on their needs.
Liminal animals are those animals that live among us but are not a part of our everyday lives. They include but are not limited to such animals as rats, squirrels, and raccoons. These animals currently have no rights, which has resulted in their eradication through means of “pest” control. What should occur instead is that these animals be considered “denizens” (p. 43). This is similar to how citizens of one nation that work or visit in another are afforded similar to, or the same rights, as any full citizen. Although many of these animals may not want to be co-citizens, “they need tolerant co-existence or conviviality rather than intimate cooperation” (p. 43). They need to be afforded the right to autonomy and the right to be free of violence and eradication.
Within the context of these two authors, factory farming is considered to be abhorrent as it does not respect animals in any way. In fact, the animals that are included in factory farming would fall under the highest bracket that they describe: domestic animals. If we were to consider cows, chickens, and pigs as co-citizens and give them the rights that they deserve then factory farming would never be taken into consideration. The confined spaces, hormonal or steroid injections, mistreatment, and inhumanity that goes along with factory farming is example enough that these practices are not only unsustainable but downright wrong. To contemplate this type of treatment of a fellow citizen would be considered against the law and would get you thrown in jail. This also needs to apply to factory farming, as these animals are as much citizens as any human.
The argument for citizenship of domestic animals is not necessarily the road that Wildcat takes, but his sentiment is similar. Wildcat sees the current state of Western society as missing the deeper connections to nature that the Indigenous perspective embraces. This embracement allows for a deeper connection to wilderness, the land and to animals. The respect that is developed and understood is then embedded within the society such that the very notion of caging hundreds to hundred of thousands of animals in confined spaces is unfathomable. He sees this as the “nature-culture nexus” (p. 20). This is a relationship that embodies both nature and culture in a way that develops a connectedness that goes beyond just the appreciation for nature but the understanding that “humankind does not stand above or outside of Earth’s life system” (p. 21). This explicitly includes all of that of which is not human, from the soil to the largest animals across the planet. He argues that there is no true divide between nature and humanity as humans are entirely dependent upon nature to continue to live on this world. If the planet dies, so to does humanity. Once this recognition occurs, it breeds the understanding that the animals that live along side us are not simply there as a resource that we can tap at our choosing, nor can those animals be treated without the same respect we give to one another. With this deeper appreciation for both perspectives, we can see that each piece converges on the abhorrence of factory farming. This is especially true for Wildcat seeing as how the mass farming practices have resulted in not only the mistreatment of millions of animals, but also the degradation of millions of other species. The biodiversity of North America continues to shrink to keep up with the demand of meat for human consumption. This loss means the natural order is put out of balance as animals go extinct while others are scattered across the land with their numbers dwindling. To maintain these factory farms also means that monocrops are planted which removes swathes of forests that would otherwise remove mass amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. It also results in the erosion of soil, lost nutrients that then need to be replenished through artificial means. All this to maintain gigantic farms that mistreat animals.
None of the above information is at all surprising to Wildcat nor any Indigenous individual as they have been warning Western societies that the abuse towards the land and nature itself will result in nothing more than our own destruction. Factory farming is a symptom of a broken system that needs a new perspective. Wildcat uses a term “Indigenuity”, which refers to the abilities of Indigenous peoples for being connected to nature and finding ways to develop technology that is sustainable and does the least amount of harm for all of nature. This is but one aspect of why Wildcat provides the most persuasive argument against not only factory farming, but all unsustainable practices in general. Although Donaldson and Kymlicka give a compelling argument for treating animals as equals, and they very much should be, the viability of such an approach is debateable. Getting humanity on-board with the idea that all animals are our brethren is a feat that is virtually insurmountable at this point in time. However, with Wildcat, it is not about equality so much as it is about humility, humanity, sustainability, and the desire to do better for ourselves and for future generations. The call is not simply to give animals the rights that humans have but alter the very perception that we carry with us as animals ourselves living within nature, dependent upon it as much as any other.
Wildcat is also more immune to criticisms that could weigh heavily against Donaldson & Kymlicka. One could argue that animals should not be afforded the same rights as humans because they do not carry the same mental capacity that humans do. Yes, they should be afforded some rights and they should be treated well, but they should never be treated as equals as humans have direct advantages over them. The ability to reason, develop complex strategies and societies are central to this point. If animals were seen as equals, then they would need to be able to hire lawyers to fight injustices and change laws that resulted in their mistreatment, but none of these things can occur with any other animal as they will never be able to communicate on the same level as humans. The fairness of this argument is debatable, and it is from that perspective that its very foundation may fall out from under it.
Although Wildcat does not make the same claims are Donaldson and Kymlicka, it is very likely that he would not disagree with much of what they argue for. The intelligence of animals is not only difficult to discern, but also entirely irrelevant. There are plenty of human beings that exist in this world that make them incapable of doing the things that others take for granted. Those who have difficulty reading, those who are deaf, and those with cognitive issues are either unable or have an extremely difficult time tending to legal matters and equality issues, similar to any domestic or wild animal. This does not remove them from society as beings worthy of counting under the law of the land, it simply means that they get represented or helped along the way so that they can access the same resources as any other human. Their intelligence or abilities is not a prerequisite to being included as a part of the human race and this should not be a hindrance for any other species being afforded those same rights. All humans are as deserving of respect as any other species on the planet, therefore, the very argument itself is lacking in any real substance to back it up.
As discussed throughout this paper, the very nature of factory farming is a scourge on humanity. There is no valid reason for allowing animals to be placed in this type of atmosphere and there is also no good reason to continue to consume the amount of meat that we do to continue to need such facilities. These practices should be outlawed and an entire shift in our perspective is needed in how we farm, live, and treat both the animals on this planet as well as nature itself. For without the earth, nothing alive will be around to see tomorrow.
Wildcat, D. R. (2009). Red alert!: Saving the planet with indigenous knowledge. Golden, Colo: Fulcrum.
Williston, B. (2016). Environmental ethics for Canadians.
