21st of April 2016
This social movement unites people with different points of view on the relationship between humans and animals. Maximalist approach adherents believe that we need to waiver farming, animal husbandry, hunting and other ways of using animals for human needs. The main idea can be expressed through a verbal formula: "Man and animals are equal and therefore have equal rights; to kill animals is just as crime, as to kill a person." However, this theory does not hold out to any criticism, as the idea of equality between men and animals is highly irrational.
Animal protection extremists, or eco-terrorists affect not only farmers, those in animal husbandry but also research institutions that use animals in labs. After letting them all out, the result was the death of many "liberated" animals, unfit for life in the wild. Animal protection extremists commit actions and demonstrations against furriers: they set fire to billboards, pour paint over them and shop windows of fur shops, cover in paint their slogans. As a result, the fur industry has suffered not a very large, but significant damage of image.
Treating the protection of animal rights can be accomplished in a number of ways: do not pay attention to them; consider them as secret agents of powerful corporations – manufacturers of artificial materials (furriers competitors); and, finally, treat them as ordinary youth extremists who claim to have some kind of ideology. At first glance, the easiest way to explain the emergence of animal rights is unfair game of the competition. It is well known that the anti-fur campaign of the first half of the 1990s led to a drop in demand for fur in Western countries (Regan). However, the ideology of animal rights began to emerge at a time when no synthetic materials did exist.
Philosophers of antiquity, such as Plutarch and Pythagoras, have made a possible revision of our attitude towards animals. A new stage in the development of this ideology began with the statements of the British lawyer and philosopher J. Bentham (1748-1832 years). He, in particular, wrote: "There was a time - and I'm sad to say that in many places it has not yet passed - when most of the species under the name of slaves were slighted by law as, for example, in England some animals are still disparaged.” (Bantam).
Bentham's ideas inspired the Australian philosopher Peter Singer, who wrote a well-known book on "Animal Liberation", which can be considered a major ideological justification of the struggle for animal rights. In the United States became famous the works of the philosopher Tom Regan who appeared to be even more radical than Singer. When Regan was asked whom he would save if the ocean capsized the boat, a dog or a child were thrown overboard, and he replied: "If it was a wonderful dog and a mentally retarded child, I would have saved a dog," (Regan).
The shortest explanation of the whole philosophy of animal and human equality was made by Ingrid Newkirk, head of the PETA, the most famous organization that leads an active struggle for the rights of animals. She said: "The Liberators of the animals do not separate man from animals, there is no rational basis to say that a person has a special law. The rat and the pig, the dog and the boy. They are all mammals," (Regan). It is unlikely, though, that the most fanatical defender of animal rights will be able to say that the rights of a neighbor's rat, dog or pig are equal to the rights of his own child, the more to leave him to die in order to save some animal. There are certain basics of life, and the words "my life", "my family", "my species' are not an empty phrase.
It can be assumed that in Western countries en masse enjoys such a well-known psychological phenomenon, as the anthropomorphism of animals, which is, giving them human traits. Perhaps the reason for this phenomenon is the increasing urbanization of the developed countries of the West, which has led to the emergence of an urban civilization isolated from the environment (isolated from nature). Most urban residents do not possess objective knowledge about the real relationship between living organisms and tend to introduce unconsciously the representations about fair relations between people and animal in a civilized society.
Individuals who believe this idea to be correct, of course, start to demand to "liberate" their new "citizens". However, not all members of the animal kingdom, can count on the protection of their rights (Tinbergen). For example, to ban hunting of seal pups animal rights supporters conduct noisy international campaign, with demonstrations and picketing embassies, whereas the multibillion-dollar fishing gives them a minimum reasons to show emotions. Identification of animals has its own laws. The greatest sympathy is caused by living beings, like most people, especially the mammals, whose appearance has pronounced infantile signs (Tinbergen). It is enough to see the propaganda literature of animal rights defenders, to be sure. If an animal wants to have protection, it should be like a panda, koala or a seal pup, but in any case not a hyena or snake. However, we often quite rightly include in the scope of the same systematic approach beings, deprived of the opportunity to make independent moral choices; such, for instance, as our attitude towards young children or for people who for one reason or another do not have the mental capacity to understand the nature of moral choice (Singer). Probably, Singer sees the main value of the abstract "human being" in intellectual capacity: "Even with all kinds of intensive care, handicapped children will never be able to reach the dog's level of intelligence. The only thing is that such a child will grow adult and in most cases a wholly person (Singer).
Animal waste and farming are the main factor of environmental pollution, the main cause of global warming. This statement allows the defenders of animal rights groups count on the support of their ideas by people concerned about the state of the natural environment. In reality, microorganisms relatively easily utilize animal waste and farming as they are natural substances (Singer). The main factors of pollution of nature in the modern world are transport and chemical industries. They saturate the environment with harmful synthetic substances that break down slowly and retain their properties for tens and even hundreds of years. These truths are known to any schoolchild.
Conclusion
Even the superficial critique of the ideology of animal rights raises doubts as to its correctness. However, in the world there are many ideas that can not be confirmed by rational arguments. The idea of equality of human and animal rights- is one of them. The population of the urbanized West is inclined to sympathize with all those who declare their willingness to protect the environment, including animals. Unfortunately, not all people tend to be critical of new ideas and the more regular check of the argument rebels, who claim that they know how to save the world.
Works Cited
Bentham, Jeremy. The principles of morals and legislation. Buffalo, N.Y: Prometheus Books, 1988. Print.
Regan, Tom. The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Print.
Singer, Peter. Animal liberation: the definitive classic of the animal movement. New York: Ecco, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, 2009. Print.
Tinbergen, Niko. Curious naturalists. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984. Print.
