Re: [Marxism] Delicatessan

[Darian Linehan <dante.fs@xxxxxxxxx>]

n 12/5/05, Calvin Broadbent <calvinbroadbent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> BTW, I find it interesting that whilst Marxism has embraced environmentalism
> to quite a considerable extent, in theory as well as practice, the same
> recognition has not been accorded to the animal liberation movement. I
> consider this a product of chauvinistic insensitivity and indulgence. Just a
> thought.

I don't think this is as clear-cut as you make out. There is a genuine
debate to be had to what level "animal liberation" is a coherent
stance to take, or whether it makes sense to talk of animal rights at
all. If these rights stem from some biological characteristic (e.g.
some level of development in an organism's nervous system) then do we
apply this to related arguments (e.g. abortion)? Is it a binary
distinction (fly = no rights, gorilla = full rights?) or there some
kind of spectrum?

There are numerous issues relating to food production, but on this
issue I think it is unhelpful to mix the arguments. For you the
primary focus seems to be an ethical stance so the health / economic
arguments seem slightly irrelevent (would you start eating meat if it
was 'proved' that steaks were good for the heart and the soil
somehow?)

Either way, the distinction between the environmental issue and
"animal liberation" is clear : the latter is largely an ethical
concern, the former is primary to human survival.

Thanks,
Darian Linehan

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism