Hierarchy, Global Justice, and Human–Animal Relations

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1 Erika Cudworth, Social Lives with Other Animals (2011).

2 John Locke, The Two Treatises of Civil Government (1689).

3 John Rawls, The Law of Peoples (1999).

4 Aldo Leopold, Sand County Almanac (1966).

5 See Rawls, supra note 4. For a critique of Rawls's early individualist conception of the moral subject, see Michael J. Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice 15–66 (2d ed. 1998).

6 See, e.g., Sandel, supra note 6, at 154–164.

7 Alison M. Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature 42–44, 314–15 (Marshall Cohen ed., 1983).

8 Maneesha Deckha, Intersectionality and Posthumanist Visions of Equality, 23 Wisc. J. L. Gender & Soc'y 249, 265 (2008).

9 See Thomas Pogge, Rawls and Global Justice, 18 Can. J. of Phil. 227, 229–230 (1988).

10 The Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years' War in 1648, established a principle of noninterference in the domestic affairs of nation-states.

11 See Raymond Corbey, “Race” and Species in the Post-World War II United Nations Discourse on Human Rights, in The Politics of Species: Reshaping Our Relationships with Other Animals 67, 67–69 (Raymond Corbey & Annette Lanjouw eds., 2013).

12 Caley Otter et al., Laying the Foundations for an International Animal Protection Regime, 2 J. of Animal Ethics 53, 54–55 (2012); see also Steven White, Into the Void: International Law and the Protection of Animal Welfare, 4 Global Pol'y 391 (2013) (noting that the European Convention for the Protection of Animals During International Transport is an exception to the general rule, but it is also (obviously) a regional agreement and not a global one).

13 White, supra note 13, at 394.

14 Id.

15 Id. at 395.

16 See, e.g., Leopold, supra note 5; J. Baird Callicott, The Conceptual Foundations of the Land Ethic, in Companion to A Sand County Almanac: Interpretive and Critical Essays 186 (J. Baird Callicott ed., 1987); Holmes Rolston, III, Why Species Matter, in The Environmental Ethics and Policy Book (Donald VanDeVeer et al. eds., 3d ed. 2003).

17 Id.

18 Leopold, supra note 5, at 239; see also sources cited supra note 16.

19 Leopold, supra note 5, at 258–259.

20 Id.

21 Id. at 259.

22 Id.

23 Id.

24 Id.

25 Id.

26 Callicott, supra note 17, at 228.

27 Id. at 234.

28 Id.

29 Rolston, supra note 17, at 477.

30 Id.

31 Id.

32 Id. at 482.

33 See id.

34 Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights 362 (1983).

35 See id. at 262.

36 See Callicott, supra note 17, at 234.

37 Id.

38 Id.

39 See id.

40 Id.

41 E.g., White, supra note 13, at 393.

42 Id. (quoting CITES art. VIII, March 3, 1973, 27 U.S.T. 1087, 993 U.N.T.S. 243).

43 See id.

44 Sue Donaldson & Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights (2011).

45 Id. at 74–75.

46 Id.

47 Id. at 156.

48 Id. at 210.

49 Rawls, supra note 4.

50 Id.

51 Id.; Donaldson & Kymlicka, supra note 45.

52 Donaldson & Kymlicka, supra note 45, at 168.

53 Id. at 159; Gary L. Francione, Introduction: The Abolition of Animal Use Versus the Regulation of Animal Treatment, in Animals as Persons: Essays on the Abolition of Animal Exploitation 13 (2008).

54 Donaldson & Kymlicka, supra note 45, at 160–164.

55 Id. at 172.

56 Id.

57 Id. at 53.

58 Id. at 172.

59 Iris M. Young, Global Challenges: War, Self-Determination, and Responsibility for Justice 170 (2007).

60 This suggestion also borrows from Young's famous “Five Faces of Oppression,” using the five modes of oppression identified by Young as modes of domination. See Iris M. Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference 15–38 (2011).

61 At the end of the day, this is an anarchist conception of justice. “Anarchism is both a political philosophy or ideology, and a social movement struggling for the abolition of domination, oppression, appropriation and exclusion, and therefore opposing—in principle—all forms of hierarchy, including the state, capitalism, religious institutions, patriarchy, and racism. Anarchism as a philosophy and a social movement also conveys a positive project of justice, liberty, equality, and solidarity.” Francis Dupuis-Déri, Is the State Part of the Matrix of Domination and Intersectionality? An Anarchist Inquiry, 24 Anarchist Stud., no. 1, at 36, 42 (2016).

62 Karl Marx, Capital, vol. 1, 283–87 (Vintage Books 1977) (1867); John Locke, Second Treatise of Government 21 (Hackett ed. 1980) (1689) (“God, when he gave the world in common to all mankind, commanded man also to labour, and the penury of his condition required it of him. God and his reason commanded him to subdue the earth, i.e. improve it for the benefit of life, and therein lay out something upon it that was his own, his labour”).

63 Murray Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom: The Emergence and Dissolution of Hierarchy (1982).

64 Ian Werkheiser, Domination and Consumption: An Examination of Veganism, Anarchism, and Ecofeminism, 8 PhaenEx, no. 2, at 161, 171 (2013).

65 See, e.g., Karen J. Warren, The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism, 12 Envtl. Ethics 125 (1990).

66 See Marti Kheel, Vegetarianism and Ecofeminism: Toppling Patriarchy with a Fork, in Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat 332–333 (Steve F. Sapontzis ed., 2004); Marti Kheel, The Liberation of Nature: A Circular Affair, in The Feminist Care Tradition in Animal Ethics (Josephine Donovan & Carol J. Adams eds., 2007); Jason Wyckoff, Linking Sexism and Speciesism, 29 Hypatia 721, 724–748 (2014).

67 Catharine MacKinnon, Of Mice and Men: A Feminist Fragment on Animal Rights, in Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions 264 (Cass Sunstein & Martha Nussbaum eds., 2004).

68 Jason Wyckoff, The Problem of Speaking for Animals, in Animal Ethics and Philosophy: Questioning the Orthodoxy 122–123 (Elisa Aaltola & John Hadley eds., 2015).

69 Jason Wyckoff, Analysing Animality: A Critical Approach, 65 The Phil. Q. 529 (2015).

70 Deckha, supra note 9, at 260.

71 Mark S. Roberts, The Mark of the Beast: Animality and Human Oppression 51 (2008).

72 Deckha argues that Darwin's theory of evolution necessitated the creation of not-fully human categories in order to square the scientific rejection of a sharp human/animal divide with a hierarchy placing European masculinity at the top. See Deckha, supra note 9, at 251–253.

73 Barak Ravid, Netanyahu: We'll Surround Israel with Fences “To Defend Ourselves Against Wild Beasts,” Haaretz (February 9, 2016), http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.702318.

74 See Roberts, supra note 74, at 57.

75 Wyckoff, supra note 71, at 123.

76 See David Nibert, Animal Rights/Human Rights: Entanglements of Liberation and Oppression 222 (2002) (on “pest” animals and “animal control”).

77 Marc Bekoff, Who Lives, Who Dies, and Why? How Speciesism Undermines Compassionate Conservation and Social Justice, in The Politics of Species: Reshaping Our Relationships with Other Animals, supra note 11, at 15, 20–22; Annette Lanjouw, The Fabric of Life: Linking Conservation and Welfare, in The Politics of Species: Reshaping Our Relationships with Other Animals, supra note 11, at 197, 204.

78 Kay Anderson, Culture and Nature at the Adelaide Zoo: At the Frontiers of ‘Human’ Geography, 23 Transactions of the Inst. of British Geographers 276 (1995).

79 Nibert, supra note 79, at 216–217.

80 Id. at 36–37; see also Roberts, supra note 74, at 51–52.

81 Erika Cudworth, Social Lives with Other Animals 113 (2011).

82 Vine Deloria, Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto 7–8 (1969).

83 Id. at 8.

84 Theda Perdue & Michael D. Green, North American Indians: A Very Short Introduction 89 (2010).

85 48 Stat. 984, currently codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 461–479.

86 Deckha, supra note 9, at 253–255.

87 Corbey, supra note 12, at 72.

88 Claire Jean Kim, The Wonderful, Horrible Life of Michael Vick, in Ecofeminism: Feminist Intersections with Other Animals and the Earth 187 (Carol J. Adams & Lori Gruen eds., 2014).

89 Iris M. Young, Inclusion and Democracy 242 (2000).

90 Richard Twine, Addressing the Animal-Industrial Complex, in The Politics of Species: Reshaping Our Relationships with Other Animals, supra note 11, at 86–87; see also Richard Twine, Ecofeminism and Veganism: Revisiting the Question of Universalism, in Ecofeminism: Feminist Intersections with Other Animals and the Earth, supra note 89.

91 These justifications are given both by those who subscribe to the relevant cultural norms and by outsiders who do not, and they are frequently contested by both cultural insiders and cultural outsiders. Examples abound; I will point to just two. On the issue of contested cultural justifications for whale hunting by the Makah tribe in the Pacific Northwest, see, e.g., Richard Twine, Ecofeminism and Veganism: Revisiting the Question of Universalism, in Ecofeminism: Feminist Intersections with Other Animals and the Earth 196, 200–201 (Carol J. Adams & Lori Gruen eds., 2014). Regarding Inuit seal hunting in Canada, see Rick Riewe, Review of Animal Rights, Human Rights, Ecology, Economy and Ideology in the Canadian Arctic, by George Wenzel (1991), 45 Arctic 202 (1992) (“Since the animal rights movement pressed the European Economic Community to ban seal products in 1983, the Inuit lost their major market for seal skins and their means to subsidize their hunting activities. This has drastically reduced the flow of wild meat into the communities. Now their communal sharing, and hence their culture, is in jeopardy of being destroyed”).

92 Alison M. Jaggar, “Saving Amina”: Global Justice for Women and Intercultural Dialogue, in Real World Justice 44 (Andreas Follesdal & Thomas Pogge eds., 2005).

93 Maneesha Deckha, Animal Justice, Cultural Justice: A Posthumanist Response to Cultural Rights in Animals, 2 J. of Animal Law & Ethics 189, 208–219 (2007).

94 Id. at 220.

95 Id. at 222.

96 Corbey, supra note 11, at 67–68.

97 White, supra note 13, at 391, 397.

98 Otter et al., supra note 12, at 68–69.

99 Joan Schaffner, An Introduction to Animals and the Law 185–186 (2011).