Oh what a circus!
Submitted by ANIMAL RIGHTS MALTA’S BLOG
True animal rights
Today’s The Times publishes my letter in response to Shane Johnson’s letter of December 14, when apparently the only pro-animal circus “animal rights activist” in the whole world (Mr Johnson) thought fit to let us know that we are making a fuss about “nothing”.
Now, some people will perhaps find my response too harsh, and believe that to be pro or anti animal circuses is a matter of opinion. Rights are not a matter of opinion. If one claims to be “for animal rights” one should at least believe in such rights, and rights are not to be picked and chosen at will and when convenient.
If non-human animals are rights-holders, they are so because they share in common with us the relevant characteristics that make them rights-holders. Just as sentience is enough for any and all humans to have both the right to life and the right not to be treated as property, so should sentience suffice in the case of any and all non-human animals. To claim otherwise would make one a prejudiced and/or discriminatory non-believer in animal rights and a speciesist. At best, such a person would be an animal “welfarist”, even though “animal welfarist” is a misnomer since it is in all animals’ welfare interests to have any and all of their rights respected and recognized.
Moreover, if we were to follow Mr Jonson’s logic in his letter of December 14 and not “make a fuss” about the circus when “cats and dogs are tortured, protected birds are blasted out of the sky“, etc, wouldn’t it be equally illogical for Mr Johnson to “make a fuss” about the regrettably unpreventable torture of cats and dogs by a few sociopaths, or the quick killing (though still murder) of birds by hunters, when thousands of non-human animals are made to suffer and are killed unnecessarily (murdered) in Maltese abattoirs? Does Mr Johnson perhaps not protest about these animals simply because he derives pleasure from the taste of meat? Again, are animal rights something we can pick and choose at our convenience? All treatment of non-human animals as if they were human property is abuse and a rights violation, and an animal rights activist opposes any and all kinds of animal abuse.
My letter in today’s The Times goes as follows:
“When will people such as Shane Johnson (December 14) finally realise that animal rights means the abolition of the property status of all animals (including humans) and in essence, animal rights advocacy is advocacy for the abolition of any unnecessary and/or involuntary use of non-human animals by humans, as if they were human property?People falling short of this goal and purpose while claiming to be ‘for animal rights’ are either simply misinformed, deluded or dishonest.
So in short, this means that despite his claim to be ‘forever in favour of protecting animal rights’, Mr Johnson is nothing of the sort. A fundamental animal right is the right to liberty, and property cannot have rights. At best, property can only have certain privileges which can be revoked at any time by the property owner.
The choice is simple: Either non-human animals are not property (and therefore have the right not to be used as if they were property - which means circuses violate their rights) or else non-human animals are human property with no rights.
Mr Johnson concludes his letter by saying that ‘any animal rights group activist worth his salt should know (the) facts before dissuading people from visiting these circuses or any other organisations that use animals to entertain’. To that I answer that any animal rights activist worth his salt knows the basics of animal rights theory, and recognises the simple fact that involuntary use of rights-bearing individuals is in itself abuse. This makes all animal circuses abusive of at least one basic right - the right to liberty.
For a more detailed reply to Mr Johnson’s letter, please visit www.animalrightsmalta.blogspot.com (”Protests over circus animal slavery - a dissenter“) , where people interested in true animal rights may also find a list of books on animal rights philosophy”.
Animal circuses - the hidden costs
Meanwhile, Larissa Tirhett writes a letter entitled “Oh what a circus!” in today’s The Times, complaining about the high prices charged at the animal circuses that came to the Maltese islands this month. Ms Tirhett writes:
“Last Saturday, I went to the circus in Pembroke with my children. I paid Lm9.50 to enter - nothing strange so far. I then bought a Coke that cost 75c, one portion of chips at Lm1, a sachet of popcorn at Lm1, and a lollypop, which I normally get at 5c, for 45c.I think this is too much. Who is in charge of these rates? Do they make their own prices? Is there an authority over these people? I have cancelled the booking for the circus in Floriana. I don’t like the fact that they charge as much as they want to.
After all, the show wasn’t that spectacular. We expected much better”.
What Ms Tirhett does not realize is the hidden costs of animal circuses. Of course, the hidden costs unfortunately do not affect the human patrons of the circuses, but only affect non-human animals, otherwise more people would choose not to attend and support these circuses.
These hidden costs include kidnapping of wild animals, rape of wild animals (breeding of non-humans for human purposes), imprisonment and deprivation of non-human animals of their liberty, forced long-distance travelling in small compartments (cages or other containers), and forced display or performance for human profit. This is what is common to all animal circuses, among them the circuses that are in the Maltese islands this month. Other animal circuses might also include forced training (often by violent means, but always by coercive methods), food deprivation as part of the non-human animals’ “training”, and murder when they can no longer “perform” and so are no longer profitable.
Now, considering all the above hidden costs, should not all people who claim to “care about animals” and “oppose animal cruelty” join the people who recognize animal rights, and boycott this evidently abusive and exploitative industry? Should we wait until the victims of exploitation and abuse are our own selves before deciding to act morally and oppose injustice wherever it happens and whoever the victim of injustice is?
Visit 1800blogger to see all of our industry leading blogs.
