Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Mr. Fluffy Goes to Washington
As the Christmas shipping season buries me under a never-ending torrent of data, I find myself with little time to read and write about politics. I am, however, never too busy to bask in the latest insanity to come out of Vox: “Should dogs be citizens? It’s not as crazy as you think.“
“Not as crazy as I think” is a bar set so low as to be underground, and clearing it is not a feat worth bragging about. Just how crazy is it, Vox?
What if domestic animals — pets such as dogs and cats as well livestock like cows and chickens — were granted citizenship rights? That may sound like a crazy question, but Canadian philosopher Will Kymlicka thinks it’s a critically important one.
Kymlicka, a professor at Queen’s University, is a well-regarded figure in modern political philosophy. He’s also the author, along with writer Sue Donaldson, of Zoopolis, a book making the case for animal citizenship. Their basic premise is simple: animals are already part of our society, as pets and work animals, therefore we should formally recognize them as such.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am eating a bacon cheeseburger from Five Guys as I write this. Kymlicka believes that the cow and pig which provided me with this delicious meal should have roughly equal standing in our legal system with me.
That’s not just a head-in-the-clouds thought experiment.
Yes it is.
If we really want to improve animals’ lives, Kymlicka and Donaldson argue, we need to stop thinking in terms of merely treating animals better. Rather, we need to acknowledge on a fundamental level that animals are a part of society and deserve to be treated as such. That leads you, however improbable it might sound, to citizenship.
Of course they are a part of society — just a part that goes in my belly. But citizenship implies not only rights, but responsibilities. Will dogs and cats be called in for jury duty like the rest of us? Will we soon find ourselves standing in line to vote behind chickens?
The right to vote doesn’t apply to animals, but the deeper ideas behind them do. So we need to find mechanisms that ensure their interests are counted in determining the public good. And we need a way for them to have a say in matters that affect them. It won’t be through voting, so we need to find other ways of soliciting and responding to their preferences.
Though I am not a cow, I think it is safe to assume that they prefer to not be eaten. Kymlicka agrees:
Yeah. We can’t go around eating our co-citizens.
Though identified as a philosopher, Kymlicka appears to have given his own idea of animal citizenship very little thought. First, he argues that cows, pigs, and chickens are members of our society because we domesticated them and that, therefore, we should afford them citizenship. It never occurs to him that if we can no longer eat or milk cows, we no longer have any reason to domesticate them and include them as members of our society. How does he envision these animals contributing to society in his future animal utopia?
We’re very interested in the idea of animals as workers.
Of course you are.
We’ve been thinking about cases like, say, sniffer dogs at an airport. Here you have a dog with a human, they’re both working. I see no reason why that couldn’t be, in principle, an expression of membership for both.
But, if it’s to be consistent with our citizenship model, there would also have to be workers’ rights. The sniffer dog would need maximum working hours, a right to a safe environment, the right to a retirement, the right to disability pensions, and so on and so forth.
If I classify the sniffer dog as an independent contractor, do I still need to provide him with a pension? Can they unionize? Will some dogs cross the picket line as others hurl epithets such as “scab” at them?
This hypothetical doggie strike is so adorable that I am now on board with this plan. How can we use bloated and inept bureaucracies to codify the inferred preferences of cows into law?
In the Netherlands and several other European countries, they have animal rights parties. [The Dutch] party has actually elected representatives in the national parliament. This is a feasible option in countries that have proportional representation. And those animal rights parties — they have elected members both in the national legislature and the European Parliament — are very effective spokespersons for the interests of animals.
Both leftist and moderate canines agree: more biscuits. The far right is more reactionary, and focused primarily on the removal of squirrels from their yards. The squirrels themselves have a fascinating array of opinions across the political spectrum, though the prohibition of cars trumps all other concerns.
This is not the first time I’ve written about animal rights extremists. Watching their struggle to imagine a framework of ethics where human life is of greater inherent value than animal life is, if nothing else, always good for a laugh.
English singer Morrissey has opined on how Christians can believe in natural rights without believing that animals have them as well, all without noticing that whole “created in God’s image” thing setting us apart from beasts. I’m forced to wonder how such people can care so deeply about granting citizenship rights to animals, while callously denying unborn human children their right to life.
Published in General
If an animal can be a citizen, can they intermarry with humans?
Not any more bizarre a concept than same sex marriage was a few decades ago.
If it’s all about love, and you love your dog (cat, turtle, goldfish) who are we to limit your love?
I don’t understand why the Republican party isn’t making a bigger outreach to the squirrel-American community. They’re a natural constituency: hard working, industrious, forward-planning, cute, big families… Should be a shoe-in.
To our dog members:
Bark. Bark-bark-bark. Yelp. Ruff ruff ruff ruff snarl. Bark yelp.
Sorry. I know I came close to the C-of-C there, but it needed to be said.
— Dr. Doolittle
I heard what you were dog-whistling there.
Would Dr. Gruber’s average American voter be more or less stupid if our new animal citizens could vote?
Dems have them nailed down tight. To be a Democrat is to be squirrely. Just look at Nancy Pelosi. Or Joe Biden. Sheila Jackson-Lee. I could go on forever.
Seawriter
If it is citizenship that would give cows the right to not be eaten, does that imply anything regarding non-citizen humans?
Did you mean “… where human life is of no greater inherent value …”
Can we assassinate an American cow?
You know, if she joins al-Cowda?
I just know if Troy had expanded his “choose between Bush, Romney and Rubio” question to include the guy in the picture above, we would have had a clear winner.
And aren’t trees, really all plants, an important part of our society well? Do you realize there are people who EAT our green brothers and sisters? Shocking, I know.
“What? Well, you eat eggs, don’t you?”
Sorry, but you know that’s what they would say
I don’t know about the pension, but the IRS will surely expect you to issue the sniffer dog a form 1099 so his income could be taxed appropriately.
The dog shouldn’t worry too much, though, I’m sure he’ll find a way to qualify for the earned income tax credit.
Well:
(Originally linked on Ricochet by Misocracy as I recall.)
Seawriter
MINIMUM WAGES FOR CHICKENS!
SNAKE-ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC ENTRANCES!
Thinking about it more, I doubt that classifying the dog as an independent contractor would hold up. One would assume that the dog would not be free to determine the manner in which the job is performed, does not own his own tools, and does not carry his own insurance and risk (among other factors). So a W2 will definitely be required instead; sorry employers – no escaping the employment taxes on this one.
No more controlling the reproductive rights of your pets. You will have ask you dog and receive its informed consent before having him neutered.
In the end, it always comes down to empowering the people who claim to speak for the animals, not the animals themselves. Rather than making animals and humans equal before the law, all it does is make humans unequal before the law.
Although a society that granted pet psychics special privileges over their fellow human beings could be rather entertaining…
“Sorry, sir, but my powers sense that your cat thinks he’s overworked.” “He’s asleep more than half the time. How is that overworked?” “He wants to communicate that sleeping in human laps puts ergonomic stress on his spine and therefore counts as work. Also, he says felines deserve maximum-hour laws that fit their particular species. One hour a day, tops.”
That might not be too bad as a wedge issue for the left. The animalists vs the eugenicists/population controlists.
Hell yes! No more ‘separate but equal’ cracks in the brickwork by which to find ingress to the house. If a crack is good enough for bees and other insects then it should be good enough for the snakes too. Yes, that might mean ‘snake ramps’ enabling the snakes to reach the eaves just like the flying insects do, but it’s only fair to demand this equality.
I stopped reading when I got to “Canadian philosopher.”
Don’t forget to account for the fringe benefits. We allow our chickens full use of the steamer and the barbecue sauce jacuzzi. The HR department doesn’t much care what we do with the chickens (“not my job”), and the CR department is too busy hunting for feed and establishing a pecking order to notice.
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
MINIMUM WAGES FOR CHICKENS!
SNAKE-ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC ENTRANCES!
Any building Dick Durbin can get into by himself is snake-accessible by demonstration.
Do you know that to enter some buildings we have to USE THE PLUMBING? I have seen it with my own eyes. It is SO DEMEANING!
You can’t blame us when we take the opportunity to GET OUR REVENGE!!!
I didn’t want to say anything, but I deleted at least three Canadian jokes from the final draft.
It’s been years since I’ve read it, but I seem to recall that the science fiction novel Steel Beach by John Varley featured dinosaurs that were unionized. They negotiated on how many dinosaurs could be harvested and eaten each year.
Assassination is out. But enhanced interrogation using a set of nipple clamps would probably get you plenty of intelligence about the moovement.
What about spatchcocking? Or is that considered workplace harassment?
Post them in the PIT!
Seriously though, noted philosopher is pretty much an oxymoronic term. I would bet you a very nice dinner Mr. Beauchamp had never heard of Mr Kymlicka before writing this asinine piece. 99% of philosophy is bunk the other 1% is common sense.