More and more of us think that the issue of animals, of their suffering, is an ethical issue that challenges us as a species, that questions and condemns us for the way we treat them. Ethics, then, is behind the decision to maintain the status quo, to look the other way or not, to face a "holocaust" that takes the lives of billions of people around the world every year. The search for ethical arguments led me to talk to Oscar Horta when I was writing my book. Professor of Moral Philosophy and Politics at the University of Santiago, activist, now publishes an essential book to know what we are talking about when we talk about the suffering that humans cause to other animals. And how to avoid it. It is entitled Un paso adelante en defensa de los animales (A step forward in the defence of animals) and has been published by Plaza y Valdés, a small Mexican label that has become a benchmark for alternative testing since its landing in Spain some years ago.
The starting point of Un paso adelante en defensa de los animales is antispecismo, a current of which Horta is perhaps the greatest intellectual reference in Spain and which dismantles the idea that humans have more rights than other animals simply because they are human. Anti-speciesism exposes a system of exploitation towards our fellow human beings that has reached its most disturbing expression with industrial livestock farming, but that covers all areas, not just food: medicine, cosmetics, fashion or leisure, among others.
In a didactic and informative tone, Óscar Horta places himself in the position of a reader who asks himself questions about speciesism and animal mistreatment, but who has not yet found answers: Why stop eating animals? why are circuses an unacceptable condemnation for animals? why are bees also animals? is it healthy to eat only vegetable products? what is veganism? I believe that any question or doubt that the reader may have regarding animal suffering and its variables has been carefully collected by Horta and, best of all, he has answered it with solid arguments, always from the antispeciesist perspective he was talking about.
It is a book that tries to open the eyes of the reader, an essay that is aware that specificity is so deeply rooted in our culture that we can hardly get rid of it overnight. That is why he recommends the reader to take his time, to set goals that are acceptable to him. Although the idea is to minimize the harm we do to animals, any step in that direction will be positive.
Horta also devotes a section to the conflict between ecology and anti-speciesism. To sum up, Horta explains, ecology does not defend animals in particular, as individuals who suffer, but as part of a collective, as inhabitants of an ecosystem. A vision that irretrievably clashes with anti-speciesism. An example of this conflict would be, for example, the different position of ecologists and anti-speciesists in solving the massive presence of "invasive" species in certain ecosystems.
Now ( and this is for me the only questionable point in the book), I believe that Horta's determination to make the difference between anti-speciesism and ecology, which I share in large part, should not be an obstacle to seeking points of convergence, a convergence. It is true that most of the ecology has been left behind. As far as I know (I may be mistaken), none of the main environmental NGOs (Greenpeace, Ecologistas en Acción, SEO-Birdlife, WWF and Friends of the Earth) in Spain have anti-speciesism among their lines of work. Quite the contrary.
And Horta is absolutely right about that. Ecologism, or at least a large part of this movement, should make a very serious reflection in this sense and reconsider a vision anchored in the preponderance of ecosystems over individuals. At the same time, however, those who declare themselves to be anti-species are not always consistent with animal welfare on a global scale, as they do not take into account the damage that humans are causing to the environment and which, in any case, will bounce off us like a boomerang.
Removing animal products from our feed is undoubtedly an important step in the fight for animal rights, in order to prevent animal suffering, and will also benefit the environment. But if we eat fruit and vegetables packed or brought in from faraway countries, for example, if we abuse the car or the plane in our daily lives, we are doing animals a disservice. The burning of fossil fuels for transport or to produce plastic is behind the greenhouse gases that have already changed the Earth's climate and are killing millions of animals. Of course, I am not saying that Horta does not take these factors into account, but from my point of view, in addition to making a difference to ecology, we need to build bridges, we need a global response that guarantees a dignified and sustainable life for all the inhabitants of the planet, human and non-human, without supremacy of any kind. To achieve this, it will require the confluence of all liberation movements, including feminism and ecology.
The debate is, in any case, open and A Step Forward in the Defence of Animals provides strong and convincing arguments to those of us who believe that another world is possible, including with regard to animals, including humans.
imagen: google.com