Do you think it’s been Animal Holocaust & Slavery?

Jun 2016
1,863
England, 200 yards from Wales
Yet most people would not treat an animal as they would treat a vegetable, or a rock. Thay may not call it animal rights, but what then?
 

sculptingman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2009
3,664
San Diego
This thread ain’t supposed to be a joke like my other thread on whether plants have genders turned out to be! Plants don’t have nervous systems, but that of domestic animals is very similar to ours’.

Here we’re dealing with very real issues, real suffering & quality & sanctity of life, the same sorts of issues which affected people historically, especially during the enlightenment.

For those that don’t agree that animals should have the same rights as humans, that kind of mentality supports slavery, prejudice & discrimination of other groups of humans with even minor differences like skin color, the only difference with animals is that they don’t have the exact same cognitive means as us to communicate, & even when they do manage to it’s often dismissed.

Let’s have you transported to a cannibalistic tribe or cult to house you in uncomfortable conditions & work you to death before cooking you & see what you think of that.
ALL Animals suffer. And it can be argued that those in the wild suffer far greater- from a never-ending fear of predation- to parasites, disease, starvation, and harsh weather- nearly NO animals survive to die of old age.
Domesticated animals at the very least get security from predation, treatment for disease and disease prevention, a plentiful supply of food and water- and a guaranteed opportunity to breed.
In exchange for which they get a merciful death. ( compared to being EATEN ALIVE- which is distressingly common in the natural world.

Your equating animal husbandry with slavery is simply NOT valid because Slaves, freed, are NOT turned out into the wilderness to carve out an existence as best they can, but instead are members of a society who simply get to enjoy ALL the privileges of that society.

Moreover- if we did not EAT cows... how much room would we be willing to make FOR cows? The answer... pretty much none. So instead of the billion cows born every year who get to live for perhaps 5 years in safe capticity- there would be nearly NO cows born at all..
and what good is "freedom" to creatures that were never born at all?


All living things are food for other living things. Animals living in the wild are no different in that regard- mice don't have 40 babies a year so that there will be 40 times as many mice- its because MOST of them will be eaten or die of disease before they reproduce.

I am all for humane conditions for livestock- but animals can have equal standing to human beings when they contribute equally to civilization.
 

Ichon

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
3,724
I am all for humane conditions for livestock- but animals can have equal standing to human beings when they contribute equally to civilization.
Some of those arguments parallel what slave owers said quite remarkably. That slaves have a better life on the plantation than in uncivilized wilderness, the condition of slaves is in many ways superior to free men as they don't have the responsibility to care for themselves, slaves if not harnessed to the needs of civilized men would contribute nothing to the world, etc.

I think it more shows the attitudes of slaver society that they did in fact put slaves on the level of domesticated animals but ones that could fight back like packs of domesticated dogs. Of course, if we release captive animals they don't organize and compete for resources the same way as slaves would (since slaves are in fact human beings with far more complex abilities than any other known animals).

Separately it is quite likely domesticated animals contributed hugely to the attainment of our present level of civilization but their usefulness is waning, the current primary servants of humans are now machines. I suspect we will see gene-engineered creatures within the next 25 years to fill the gaps machines are ill-suited for and this debate will get serious.

Since humans are still regularly eaten by animals (though not nearly on the same scale) I am not sure we can fully separate humans from other animals, humans are really just more organized and capable tool-using animals than any other animals that evolved so far. Also given that there are certain nutrients humans can't get only from eating plants (though we can manufacture all those nutrients explicitly killing animals, the use of land for growing plants rather than herds of animals implicitly means a vast culling of animals still for the needs of humans). This ability to provide the basic nutrition for humans without animals is relatively new and probably most societies will adapt to this fact by reducing the consumption of animals (mostly because raising and caring for animals is relatively expensive compared to feasible alternatives)
 

Edric Streona

Ad Honorem
Feb 2016
4,529
Japan
We are undoubtedly driving most animal life to extinction.

Wether you can apply the term holocaust to animals I am not sure.

But I’m certain slavery doesn’t apply to non sentient life forms.
 
Feb 2019
894
Pennsylvania, US
This thread ain’t supposed to be a joke like my other thread on whether plants have genders turned out to be! Plants don’t have nervous systems, but that of domestic animals is very similar to ours’.

Here we’re dealing with very real issues, real suffering & quality & sanctity of life, the same sorts of issues which affected people historically, especially during the enlightenment.

For those that don’t agree that animals should have the same rights as humans, that kind of mentality supports slavery, prejudice & discrimination of other groups of humans with even minor differences like skin color, the only difference with animals is that they don’t have the exact same cognitive means as us to communicate, & even when they do manage to it’s often dismissed.

Let’s have you transported to a cannibalistic tribe or cult to house you in uncomfortable conditions & work you to death before cooking you & see what you think of that.
While I understand and appreciate the fact that you devote your time and attention to considering and challenging others to consider the impact of their actions upon beings that have no voice to be heard... it becomes difficult to identify human treatment of animals as cruel when our approach mirrors much of what animals do to each other. When a fox or a weasel raids my turkey coop, they usually "thrill kill" every bird there - they are often not killed cleanly (they sometimes are torn up but just alive), their meat is wasted. It is a meaningless, senseless sort of behavior - but it comes naturally to the fox. His sense of "play" means that he will kill every bird and only eat 2 or 3. This is not unusual behavior for predators... even ones that have no need to kill for food (domesticated dogs killing sheep for the pleasure of hunting them, cats keeping mice alive to play with and slowly kill them, etc)

There are these blood-red ants in the Amazon that enslave neighboring colonies. They kill off all of the adult ants so that the new emerging ants can be taught to obey. It's truly fascinating. They turn the captive species of ant into their slave army, teaching them to hunt out new colonies to capture, enslave and rule.

I have seen some people argue that since humans are of higher intelligence, this means that they should abstain from behaving like other animals...

I think that you sometimes have to look at an try to understand the natural world (they live a sort of epic, blood-thirsty existence... like Ancient Rome or the Dark Ages) and see where you belong in that equation. Humans are not able to extract all of their nutrients from plants like a deer or a sheep - they usually must have sources of protein from meat. Just talk to anyone who has been vegetarian or vegan for many years - not everyone is able to sustain it without taking breaks from it for their health's sake, because they cannot absorb enough protein/vitamins even when they are dumping protein powder into smoothies and the like.

People are happy to think of cart horses being banned from giving carriage tours in major cities... the reality is that these horses were bred to do a job (to pull - they love it) and without work, they are nothing but an expense. People may be humane enough to take them off of the streets, but they don't seem to be willing to pay for their care somewhere else. Those cart horses "rescued" from the streets usually end up at an auction, bought for their meat, shipped in a truck without food or water, crammed together for several days till they reach Mexico where they can be slaughtered. One of my horses was in "the kill pen" as they call it at the horse auction - an unusual breed but if no one wants an unusual breed, then he is bound for slaughter.

So, considering that animals enact cruelty and death to one another; considering that humans need proteins that are in meat; and considering that when animals no longer are "enslaved" they often no longer have purpose in the world they were made (strategically bred over centuries) for... what alternative do you have in mind? Do higher standards apply only to humans? Are you okay with domesticated animals being terminally ill-suited to the wild - what's to be done with them? Are people supposed to be sick (protein and vitamin deficiencies; particularly B vitamins) in order to reduce their impact on animals?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist and Runa

sculptingman

Ad Honorem
Oct 2009
3,664
San Diego
Some of those arguments parallel what slave owers said quite remarkably. That slaves have a better life on the plantation than in uncivilized wilderness, the condition of slaves is in many ways superior to free men as they don't have the responsibility to care for themselves, slaves if not harnessed to the needs of civilized men would contribute nothing to the world, etc.

I think it more shows the attitudes of slaver society that they did in fact put slaves on the level of domesticated animals but ones that could fight back like packs of domesticated dogs. Of course, if we release captive animals they don't organize and compete for resources the same way as slaves would (since slaves are in fact human beings with far more complex abilities than any other known animals).

Separately it is quite likely domesticated animals contributed hugely to the attainment of our present level of civilization but their usefulness is waning, the current primary servants of humans are now machines. I suspect we will see gene-engineered creatures within the next 25 years to fill the gaps machines are ill-suited for and this debate will get serious.

Since humans are still regularly eaten by animals (though not nearly on the same scale) I am not sure we can fully separate humans from other animals, humans are really just more organized and capable tool-using animals than any other animals that evolved so far. Also given that there are certain nutrients humans can't get only from eating plants (though we can manufacture all those nutrients explicitly killing animals, the use of land for growing plants rather than herds of animals implicitly means a vast culling of animals still for the needs of humans). This ability to provide the basic nutrition for humans without animals is relatively new and probably most societies will adapt to this fact by reducing the consumption of animals (mostly because raising and caring for animals is relatively expensive compared to feasible alternatives)
That is a specious comparison, because slave owners were arguing that blacks are essentially ANIMALS. But they weren't. they were People; the exact same species as their owners, and just as capable of living in and contributing to a technological society as any slave owner.

And sorry- but animals did not build civilization.
Their contributions in Horsepower were no different than their contributions in calories. We USED them.
by your reasoning we now need to consider that COAL and IRON ORE have 'rights' for their contributions to building civilization.

I am not separating humans from animals.
Obviously we are an animal.

But we are undeniably an animal significantly different in mental capability than all other animals. If Cows had had their own technological culture- their own literature and history of philosophical thought regarding their own existence, and a long tradition of awareness of their own mortality... then perhaps the idea that we had enslaved them would have merit.

But they don't.

It has been argued that Life- itself- can be understood as serving no purpose but to keep food fresh.
Plants and animals all evolved as food for other animals.

Human beings evolved the ability to outsmart and evade nearly all predation... but even we end up being food for worms, bacteria and fungi.

Because of this, there is simply no valid argument against using animals for food. That is what ALL living things are fated to be.

Its certainly valid to suggest that any creature that can feel fear and pain ought to not have to suffer fear and pain... but, even then, if people genuinely had concern over animals suffering fear and pain their gripe OUGHT to be against the natural world, 'red in tooth and claw'.


To me this is hypocrisy borne of Anthropocentric fantasies that are only enabled because of Zoos and domesticated livestock, Pets and nature shows that pretend animals have wonderful lives out in the wild. And Youtube videos that try to make the lives of animals seem so very cute, and funny, and adorable. Like the video I saw posted on facebook of a Father lion cuddling with his cubs... that somehow is never linked to the videos showing that any time a new male lion establishes dominance over the pride- the first thing he does is KILL all the cubs.

There are probably 100 rabbits living on my property. I have never hurt a single one, never chased one, never even yelled at one. And yet anytime I walk anywhere on my property, they jump up and skedaddle like I am the angel of death- their eyes rolled wide in terror.
They have never been able to learn that I am no threat, because, frankly, they just don't live long enough to learn it. I have seen hawks stoop to snatch them and carry them to a tree top where they get eviscerated while still kicking. I have heard the commotion the coyotes kick up every time they catch one. And I know they get taken by half a dozen other predators that roam here on the fringe of the wild chaparral where I live.