Kill the Polar Bear Cub!
I have long believed that many animal liberationists don't love animals. They just hate people. Evidence of this is to be found in this story about a polar bear cub that was saved from dying in the wild and brought to the Berlin Zoo. Rather than have the cub live in captivity, liberationists are insisting that the bear cub be destroyed. From the story:
"Feeding by hand is not species-appropriate but a gross violation of animal protection laws," animal rights activist Frank Albrecht was quoted as saying by the mass-circulation Bild daily, which has featured regular photo spreads tracking fuzzy Knut's frolicking. "The zoo must kill the bear," he added.
This is the thing: Animal liberationists are not animal welfarists. They don't desire to improve the human use and care of animals, but rather, they want to utterly eliminate virtually all human/animal interactions. If they had their way, there would be no saved bear cubs, no seeing -eye dogs, no cattle, no domestic cats, in the end, only animals in the wild with people kept at bay.
This would cause tremendous harm to humans, of course. But so what? Animal liberation, whether implicitly or explicitly, is anti-human.Labels: Animal Liberation Kills Animals
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 9:04 AM
13 Comments
13 Comments:
I must disagree.
First, there is no consensus among animal-rights people of what to do. By lumping everyone with this big "they", your statements imply that all animal-rights or even liberationists would want the bear euthanized.
Second, the reason some liberationists are arguing this is because of the interference with nature. If this animal were in the wild and not in the zoo, it would die.
If anything, it does bring up a weird paradox within the animal/ eco rights because depending on the rationale for protecting the environment, killing the animal would be logical.
But as your statements vastly over-simplify things, I must disagree.
Personally, I don't see how euthanizing the cub would help, especially since many polar bears are losing their natural habitat with the melting of the Arctic. I'm glad the Berlin zoo is standing up for the bear.
Except, here's the thing, Royale: When some elephants were going to be culled in Africa and were instead going to be brought to America and placed in animal parks, PETA and others sued--URGING THAT THEY BE KILLED INSTEAD! PETA kills adoptable dogs and cats. Etc. Etc.
Not all people who support animal rights really do. They just want to be nice to animals and are unaware of the hard ideology that lies behind the more benign face of animal rights. Many committed animal rights ideologues think animals are better off dead than domesticated. The polar bear cub story is just one example.
Wesley, I must agree with Royale. There's nothing to set animal welfare/humane activists to squabbling more than a case like this. You then realize the movement is beleaguered with so much division, it's no wonder they make such little progress.
That said, I will agree with you that there is a certain element within the animal welfare and activist movements that holds a distain for humans. I often wonder how they can think that humans are somehow separate from all other living creatures on this planet. We can no more separate ourselves from nature, even though we think we have, than a wild boar or a honey bee. In that sense these animal liberationists are no different than their adversaries in their view of the division between man and animals.
I am dumbstruck that anyone would advocate the killing of any life. That little polar bear cub is a life, and not only that, a very valuable ambassador for the value of saving our environment. If you carry the argument that the polar bear cub should be killed (sorry, euthanasia is term that should be used only to apply to the killing of an animal that is terminally sick), then you could argue that all humans living in so-called artificial environments as urbans areas should also be killed because we're not living in a natural environment. A silly argument, when you realize that the urban areas merely mimic nature and natural forces, even though we try to eliminate the factor of survival of the fittest (or luckiest).
Thank goodness, the Berlin Zoo has decide to spare the little guy's life.
ej: Thanks for writing. Please note the distinction between animal welfare advocates and animal rights/liberation activists. The two are quite distinct. Liberationists are not welfarists.
Not stupid, necessarily, but profoundly confused.
Seen pictures and videos of the little guy? He's so freakin' cute I wanted to squeal.
The same people bitching about how "hand feeding is bad" support people breaking in to chicken farms and rescuing the chickens (evil animals!) and then giving them "proper nutrition and care" by trained vets! The hell!
"If we do it, it's good, but if anybody else does it, it's oppression by The Man."
What a darling. My mother was reminiscing the other day about helping the zookeeper bottle feed a tiny bear back in the 60s as a girl. That bear's den had accidentally been broken into by a bulldozer, and the mother ran away and never came back. That bear lived a happy life at the zoo with people it knew and trusted. Affection between animals and humans is a real thing. Hope it works out for this one too.
Wesley,
Animosity against zoos is actually more popular than you think, it certainly goes beyond PETA. I've met a number of people who say they frankly hate zoos because they hate seeing an animal caged.
I think this case brings to two things:
1. is a death really better than zoo? some would say yes, I say no.
2. the diversity of principles and beliefs among the animal/eco rights communities.
The plain truth of the matter is PETA and their ilk do NOT care about animals at ALL, and yes, they ARE opposed to eons of domestication of animals.
It is a CULT, an utterly wacko cult, and I am totally against them.
Royale, I think you need to read up on PETA.
They aren't what they pretend to be.
I've never made any claims about PETA, nor appologizing for them, nothing.
But, couple things being missed here:
1. PETA does not speak for everyone concerned about animals or the environment. Rather, the rationales and beliefs are very diverse.
2. There is NO mention of PETA in that story - why is PETA being brought up here? Wesley brought it up because he over-generalizes the community.
3. Anti-zoo mentality goes well beyond PETA.
"Royale, I think you need to read up on PETA. They aren't what they pretend to be."
Do people even read what I write here? How can what I wrote earlier be a defense of PETA?
http://www.peta.org/mc/NewsItem.asp?id=1590&pf=true
I am not a big PETA supporter, they support the ALF which has hurt people and cost tax payers millions of dollars, but, they have nothing to do with this new lunacy, and have perfomed quite contrary acts in the past.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home