Animal Rights vs. Veganism: The intersection between animal rights and veganism
Although one can argue that, in the second decade of the 21st century, most animal rights people are now vegan, the reverse is not true. Probably, the majority of vegans are not animal rights people, but are eco-vegans, health vegans and social justice vegans.
JORDI CASAMITJANA: In the last decade or so, the identity of vegan and animal rights persons have overlapped a lot, to the point many may assume they are the same. In the past, though, they were more clearly separate. Especially for those who have recently acquired either of them, it may be worth looking at their similarities and differences to see how they intersect…
Veganism and animal rights are indeed philosophies, in the sense they are particular systems of thought relating to the understanding of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. Also, they are both non-religious philosophical beliefs in the sense they do not go into metaphysics or cosmology of a religious nature. They are both key philosophies followed by people who care about non-human animals and try to respect them, and animal protection organisations involved in advocating for them and helping them. However, I believe they focus on different subjects and belong to different philosophical disciplines.
The philosophy of animal rights focuses on non-human animals, which is to say, all individuals of all the species in the Animal Kingdom except Homo sapiens. It looks at them and considers whether they have intrinsic rights which justify being treated by humans in a different way than they had been traditionally treated. This philosophy concludes that they indeed have basic rights because they have moral worth, and if humans want to live in a law-based society of rights, they must also consider the rights of non-human animals, as well as their interests (such as avoiding suffering). These rights include the right to life, body autonomy, liberty, and freedom from torture. In other words, it challenges the notion that non-human animals are objects, property, goods, or commodities, and ultimately aims to acknowledge all their moral and legal “personhood”.
This philosophy focuses on non-human animals because it looks at who they are, what they do, how they behave, and how they think, and, accordingly, assigns them attributes related to sentience, conscience, moral agency, and legal rights… It does not focus on non-human animals to tell them how they should behave, or how right or wrong is what they do. It focuses on them to understand who they are and speculate about their minds. How do we know they are different from us so we can justify treating them differently? For me, that is more of an epistemological approach than an ethical approach. And how do we value non-human animals to give them the rights they deserve? For me, this sounds like part of axiology…
However, although many people may assume that veganism also focuses on non-human animals, I do not believe this is the case. I believe veganism focuses on humans, and in particular, how they behave with “others” (regardless of who these others are). The fundamental principle of veganism has been known for millennia as ahimsa, the Sanskrit term meaning “do no harm” which is sometimes translated as “non-violence”. This has become an important tenet of many religions (such as Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism), but also of non-religious philosophies and movements (such as pacifism, vegetarianism, and veganism).
Veganism asks humans not to harm others (apply ahimsa to all sentient beings), and although such others are often thought of as being non-human animals, it does not limit its scope to these. The first part of the official definition of veganism of the Vegan Society says that veganism “is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude — as far as is possible and practicable — all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose.” It does not use the term “non-human animals”, which was already widely used in 1988 when this definition was finalised, because it does not exclude humans from the exploitation and cruelty requirements. Being non-human animals the most numerous victims of humanity’s misbehaviour, it is easy to understand why many people would consider the focus of veganism is on them…
Regarding philosophical disciplines, veganism clearly falls into ethics, as it is focused on humans (specifically on humans’ relationships with others) and does tell them how they should behave (do no harm). Veganism is not concerned about whether one particular animal has a conscience or moral agency. It considers all animals (including humans) as beings capable of being harmed (as they are sentient beings), and therefore it aims to protect them by asking humans not to harm them. Indeed, harming them would be considered “wrong”, and changing one’s behaviour by excluding all forms of animal exploitation (the vegan lifestyle) would be considered “right”. Veganism is an ethical philosophy. It’s all about the rights and wrongs of human behaviour…
Although one can argue that, in the second decade of the 21st century, most animal rights people are now vegan, the reverse is not true. I think that, probably, the majority of vegans are not animal rights people yet (but eco-vegans, health vegans and social justice vegans). One can seek to exclude all animal exploitation and cruelty to all animals (hence, be an ethical vegan) without believing that non-human animals deserve rights that are not legally recognised yet. They may still be supremacists who believe their respect for animals comes from their “generosity” and “compassion” as superior human beings, as opposed to believing all animals (including humans) are essentially the same and deserve equal basic rights appropriate to their species. They may behave in line with veganism (trying not to harm other sentient beings), but they may still believe that humans are superior. They may not discriminate against any species (they may be anti-speciesist), but not because they think all species are equally worthy or deserve the same, but because they believe they are superior beings whose role is to look after inferior beings in a fair and magnanimous way.
I am not one of these vegans. I truly embrace equally both the philosophy of veganism and the philosophy of animal rights, and I do not believe humans, vegans, or ethical vegans are superior to any other “group”. I believe non-human animals deserved the same moral rights before humans even existed, so their natural rights and intrinsic worth have nothing to do with us. We are treating them as if they do not have them, but it is not up to us to “grant” them such moral rights as a token of our generosity. They already had them before we can along and ignored them. We just need to stop ignoring them and treat them with respect. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: