Scan barcode
A review by juliette_dunn
Animal Liberation Now by Peter Singer
4.5
To be clear, Peter Singer is an ableist POS. I read this book because of its massive influence in animal rights.
This book is an expert philosophical takedown of speciesism, and an undoubtedly major influence on the modern animal liberation movement. He does an excellent job showcasing why holding human life as sacred above animals is entirely arbitrary, as well as explaining how being anti-speciesist does not equal giving every species the exact same rights and treatment.
He goes over the two biggest areas of animal exploitation - farming and lab testing, and an overview of the horrors involved. I actually learned quite a bit about animal testing from this. Many people take the stance that it should be done for science, as science can save human lives, but be banned for trivial cosmetics testing. But Singer exposes the almost comedically trivial reasons animal tests have taken place, the absurd waste of not only animal lives, but also time and money, for the sake of experiment after experiment proving nothing relevant at all. Were we to keep the essential experiments around the deadliest of diseases, we would still be eliminating the vast majority of animal science testing.
I am grateful he added a section on fish in this edition, as even those who otherwise support animal rights will dismiss the suffering of fish due to their lack of similarity in expression. Sea creatures are by far the most exploited and killed animals, by number eclipsing the suffering of any other, yet are also the least talked about in activism. They deserved their own section and Singer provided.
Singer says that in the past he was against the argument that giving animals a good life is enough justification for killing them equaling net good, but has now revoked that viewpoint. This falls perfectly in line with his ableist comments around disabled children. He believes that so long as someone can anticipate the future and make plans for it, such as most adult humans, killing is wrong, but in the case of non-human animals, infants, and severely mentally disabled humans, who are not aware of the future or planning, killing can be justified.
This is an abhorrent argument, and any sensible person would recognize that killing a human baby is not justified just because they are unable to be aware of their own future. In approving of this, of course Singer can approve of killing happy animals. From his clear arguments against speciesism, we can recognize that taking their lives prematurely simply for our own pleasure can never be moral, just as killing a disabled baby is immoral, no matter how much Singer advocates it. Singer's ableism further ironically cements the connections between speciesism and ableism and why total abolition must be applied to animal agriculture. His defense of the rape of disabled people and his defense of bestiality similarly go hand in hand.
Reading the book in isolation, unknowing of his viewpoint toward disabled people, it is an excellent text, and I can see why it had such the influence it did. But the animal liberation movement needs to move on from Singer.
This book is an expert philosophical takedown of speciesism, and an undoubtedly major influence on the modern animal liberation movement. He does an excellent job showcasing why holding human life as sacred above animals is entirely arbitrary, as well as explaining how being anti-speciesist does not equal giving every species the exact same rights and treatment.
He goes over the two biggest areas of animal exploitation - farming and lab testing, and an overview of the horrors involved. I actually learned quite a bit about animal testing from this. Many people take the stance that it should be done for science, as science can save human lives, but be banned for trivial cosmetics testing. But Singer exposes the almost comedically trivial reasons animal tests have taken place, the absurd waste of not only animal lives, but also time and money, for the sake of experiment after experiment proving nothing relevant at all. Were we to keep the essential experiments around the deadliest of diseases, we would still be eliminating the vast majority of animal science testing.
I am grateful he added a section on fish in this edition, as even those who otherwise support animal rights will dismiss the suffering of fish due to their lack of similarity in expression. Sea creatures are by far the most exploited and killed animals, by number eclipsing the suffering of any other, yet are also the least talked about in activism. They deserved their own section and Singer provided.
Singer says that in the past he was against the argument that giving animals a good life is enough justification for killing them equaling net good, but has now revoked that viewpoint. This falls perfectly in line with his ableist comments around disabled children. He believes that so long as someone can anticipate the future and make plans for it, such as most adult humans, killing is wrong, but in the case of non-human animals, infants, and severely mentally disabled humans, who are not aware of the future or planning, killing can be justified.
This is an abhorrent argument, and any sensible person would recognize that killing a human baby is not justified just because they are unable to be aware of their own future. In approving of this, of course Singer can approve of killing happy animals. From his clear arguments against speciesism, we can recognize that taking their lives prematurely simply for our own pleasure can never be moral, just as killing a disabled baby is immoral, no matter how much Singer advocates it. Singer's ableism further ironically cements the connections between speciesism and ableism and why total abolition must be applied to animal agriculture. His defense of the rape of disabled people and his defense of bestiality similarly go hand in hand.
Reading the book in isolation, unknowing of his viewpoint toward disabled people, it is an excellent text, and I can see why it had such the influence it did. But the animal liberation movement needs to move on from Singer.