1712:
I often wonder what is worse, the act of
hurting animals and killing them or the unwillingness of people to acknowledge
that it happens at all. If any of us saw an animal being killed, or indeed
being mistreated, our first instinct would be to want to do something,
to help. But since there’s nothing much we can do (these animals are always the
property of someone) instead we turn away and pretend not to know. We even
sometimes pretend we don’t care. We pretend there's a ‘turn-off’ switch, for
instant desensitiseation. If we do want to re-sensitise, we surely have to say
goodbye to the routine killing of animals - and do it by boycott, by not buying
abattoir produce.
Whether the killing is done at the abattoir
or in the back yard, or in modern clinical surroundings, there is a killing.
The killing has been happening for a long time, plus enslavement, etc, at any
time in the past. The moments-of-horror never change much. And perhaps the
greatest for them as it is for us, the deception/betrayal/abandonment-feeling.
The innocent animal, nurtured by relatively
kind humans, is now forced to meet the most ugly of dooms. The human heart’s
capacity to turn. In such a cold and calculated way. From kindness to violence.
illustrates how humans have hardened, by
playing a trick on the animal, lulling it into a false sense of security in
order to manage it with minimum difficulty. And then to betray it at the end.
The cold-heartedness of today’s animal food industry exemplifies this, and the
money is afforded and spent as we move into a world where we can no longer afford
to be omnivores. It's this warning some of us have taken on board. So I think
we do feel as a bunch, that all this ugliness we want to put behind us.
What are animals? How are they different to
humans? Perhaps they can’t match our brain power, but does that justify being cruel
to them? Use them let alone exploit them! Most animals that are useful for food
have long since been enslaved and denied any form of natural life. We justify
the ending of their lives. We support the killing. And we give our support in
order to meet our own 'needs'. This trumps everything else. But cunningly, it's
been so utterly disproved that the conspiracy theorists' heads are often being
scratched. When we say, "If we have to kill them, and
keep them captive, we must. We must maximise productivity and stay in business.
Movement-restriction preserves valuable expenditures of the animal's energy and
growth potential. Enclosure is maximised so that their management and killing
present as little problem as possible.
We, the consumer, asks if there's an
ethical component here. We weigh usefulness against compassion, even when it
involves cruelty. Economics rules the animal-production business. And it is a
competitive business, where every cost is calculated to keep ahead of the
competition. It’s a ‘dog-eat-dog’ mentality, and there’s no room for
sentimentality.
But many today DON'T accept this. Empathy
and ethics are based on the sentience of these animals. They are like us
in that they have 'feelings' which show as responses - their ability to suffer
and their need to escape attack is like our own. Their suffering isn't for lack
of food, it's lack of everything else. On a farm or at an abattoir there’s no
escape. I can only imagine that that must feel like the ultimate terror. I
imagine this is at the heart of the dilemma, for those kind-hearted meat-eaters
who have to accept the concept of ‘necessary’ animal suffering!
That meat and dairy ISN'T necessary (and
only eaten for the pleasure of eating it) the belief that plant-based diets are
dangerous has long been exploded. We are now safe to live with a clear
conscience. We no longer need to hurt animals, because we no longer need to
‘use’ them. Animal products need play no part in any aspect of our lives,
whatsoever!
No comments:
Post a Comment