Good points if incomplete at places ignoring the big ‘ideas revolve around humans because we sense and interact with the world as humans (mostly) not other beings’. I agree we can’t 1-1 compare ourselves to other creatures, or them among themselves, we’re all different obviously. The whole argument felt more Nietzschean at the start than Marxist however and shows itself again in the ‘natures’ AI’ line (makes me think not only of some reddit/4chan communities but of gaia theory).
I think there’s a fitting line from Dr. Doolittle about most non-human animals lacking the higher brain structures associated with language and such, so they are out on class consciousness for the time being. If you really, really wanted to stretch things to the point of silliness they’re still in the trappings of pre-ancient societies with any fledgling ‘hierarchy’ depending on being based on merit, age or family line, like we possibly were as protohuman. We weren’t always human, with luck and another few million years likely won’t always be. Nor will life on this planet look the same as time goes on, maybe other creatures could develop into something like us. Pure barstool hypotheticals since we can only go off generalities, but this is the internet.
Nature itself isn’t too friendly to animals neither is a point many vegans overlook. Birds of prey hunt squirrels, winter may be overly harsh on said birds. Humans experienced this too in our development, and some of it eventually became more cultural like for example eggs as the food and the symbolism. Something that becomes so entrenched like that, even if we abandoned animal products as a whole its competition would be in the far future. We may even have egg-shaped delightfully artificial food that tastes vaguely of chocolate, or plant-based mixes formed into the shape of cuts of meat that are somehow tasty.
Neurosci does show animals sensing pain, the neural/glial stuff they have to sense this is different than humans and exists to a degree even in the humble fruit fly (was involved in a study using them as a pain model, now that’s one that makes you think). We can’t gauge ‘intelligence’ too well in other humans (broad definition and then whole bias etc), we’re definitely not going to have luck with other animals. Cetaceans, great apes, big parrots, some octopi make a good case for protections, direct comparison no they have different needs due to their nature and evo.
By taking up ‘OG’ Darwinism they take up the errors by Malthus in failing to consider the environment of a thing and how that affects development and sci has worked hard to address the whole environmental Achilles heel. Mastery of the planet, not yet, compared to other animals absolutely. We are still at the mercy of our environment with crop failures, new diseases(they’re all zoonotic in origin if you go far back enough), far flung cosmetic events and so on. Obviously not as fragile as other animals but enough that I hesitate to say we have mastery yet, but we are moving toward it.
We can try to be conscientious about other animals when able but realize we’re fighting our development and our ignorance. Our actions are still made as human seeing as human (ex bug trapped in a house or the McRib cult), our technology and social development doesn’t yet allow us to avoid this.
We’re at the point I’d say there’s no choosing, even the strictest vegan or Jain will bring harm upon a creature at some time unwittingly no matter how blameless and simply they try to live. We’re still very much like any other animal on that one imo.
Making social Darwinist arguments to own the vegans for trying to prevent the massive environmental damage and waste caused by animal-based food production.
The top commenter at least is noting their shit arguments.
There is nothing revolutionary in agreeing with the status quo that has been prevalent for thousands of years, no matter how it’s dressed up in revolutionary language.
There is no reason in a post-capitalist society that all members can’t be vegan. Outside of the anti-speciesist arguments, the original article is really about decrying veganism (“In fact, I would go even further and say that anti-speciesm or even veganism, in general, is either supremely arrogant as an ideology or ironically anthropocentric.”).
On speciesism itself, well, they are contradictions that will be resolved in socialism. We exploit animals in capitalism because it comes from a long tradition of making them perform labour for the benefit of humans. What is the argument to continue testing pharmaceuticals on animals in communism? What is the argument to eat meat in communism? Socialist countries consistently protect the environment better than capitalist countries.
Speciesism will resolve itself when the material conditions send us past having to exploit animals for our benefit.
