Connecting with animals

1519: 

Most humans don’t give much thought to anything but their own life-quality.  To them, the idea of liberating animals is pie in the sky, since the animal trade is so entrenched in our culture.  It seems absurd to try to interfere with such a tradition.  But there are those of us who want to interfere with it, to bring it to the surface and into consciousness, in order to set off a fundamental change in our thinking.  If such a change is to occur, it would only be brought about not by some animal welfare reform but by an attitudinal reform, pitched to a higher plane of consciousness.

Surely, what we are all trying to do is to connect with the people and the world around us, and with our own true nature.  But in practice it may not work out that way, if we follow the examples set by those whose job it is to influence us when young.  Unless we set out to question what they teach us about right and wrong.

The teacher, inspired by 'connecting', takes her students to the zoo, but by taking them she implies that it’s all above board.  Most children will be glad of the outing, and be prepared to accept what they're offered.  But what if the kids kick up a fuss about the caging of animals?  What can the teacher say?  Behind her stands the institution of the zoo, which makes itself look as if it’s only interest is in the conservation of endangered species.  When kids ask questions about the individual animal’s life in this imprisoned state, when they condemn the animals' lack of freedom, how can the teacher respond?  They may have to be fobbed off, since she was inspired by her wish for the students to 'connect with animals', to see the animals who are part of the world we all live in.  That's her reason for organising the zoo-visit.

The same goes with almost any of our intentions to 'connect' with animals.  We would dismiss a hunter’s professed 'love of nature' as mere hypocrisy, as a smoke-screen behind which he can continue to have his fun.  If you are not a hunter yourself, you'd have no trouble condemning hunting, but it's not that much different to the attitude that allows animals to be imprisoned and killed for food.

Whether it's hunting or zoo-visiting, it's a perversion of the idea of connecting with animals. Would ‘people wanting to connect’ be the primary reason they visit the zoo?  I know that people walking around the zoo are not sadistically revelling in the animals’ discomfort, but at the same time they aren’t empathising with the animals either. They aren’t asking how the lion feels. Indeed, they may well be saying, “Who cares what the lion feels?”.  But there’s the rub.

How is it that we do something which hasn’t been thought through empathetically?  In today’s consciousness-raised atmosphere, why is an animal’s perspective not relevant or important?  If we can accept that zoo-prisons are okay places to visit, isn’t that rather worrying? Isn’t that a sign that we really ought to be trying to interfere with a culture that encourages children to accept such a warped and one-sided connection with the animal?