Marxist Animalism
- This topic has 973 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
robbo203 wrote:John Oswald wrote:Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, for all their revolutionary ideas, also toed the old nature-conquest line. …
Hmm. Not too sure about that, John, sympathetic though I am to your line of argument. Here for example is something that Engels wrote that would rather contradict the above…. “Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first….— Friedrich Engels, The Part Played by Labor in the Transition from Ape to Man
Not too sure about that or calling 'Animalism' as 'Marxist-animalist'. Marx in the German Ideology proposed a particular sort of lifestyle presumably not a vegetarian or animal friendly one'to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening,'Engels of course enjoyed fox-hunting for pleasure but opposed mans dominion over nature?
This does place Marx and Engels severely at odds with animal-friendly predecessors, as well as successors. Socialists regularly ignore Shelley on these matters with a paternalistic smirk, if often kindly because of his socialism. Even so, the 20th and 21st centuries have made great strides in ethology, and to me it shows Marxists (and I am a Marxist myself!) who ignore this to be limited and anachronistic in their human supremacism.Whether one is a human supremacist or whether one includes fellow animals under the umbrella of universal respect, it makes no difference to the political case for socialism, of course, which is why I`ve rejoined the Party. However, just as I am conscious of the failings of "animalists" who are not socialists, I`m also conscious of the failings of socialists, to my mind, who are human supremacists caught in the rut of the old ladder view of evolution.I can live with those who, like Comrade Adam Buick, believe we have a duty to protect endangered life, such as wild animals, and are opposed to gratuitous cruelty, although I consider this view as falling far short of my own. What I really despise, though, are Marxists who, whilst politically correct, mock, ridicule and bait those who are not human supremacists."Animalism" is not my term. It was in place here before I joined.Engels` title I would question these days, but not in his own. We are not descended from apes; we ARE apes! Modern apes of the other three branches of ape are just as modern in their way as we are in ours. We share common ancestors. I refer you all to Carl Sagan, and to Dawkins` essay on our apehood.The ladder view of evolution was the only model Engels had at the time. It is sorely anachronistic today. Popularly, it still stands in for the old Judaeo-Christian mythology which appeals to human arrogance, stemming from the West`s monotheistic and patriarchal traditions.
http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2016/01/animal-lib.htmlFor John to use where he thinks fitting(i would have pasted the pic here but it seems unwilling to let me. I hope the new upcoming website has a forum that permits members to upload photos and videos much more easily)
John,All the time the medical research lobby tells us things have improved, are improving, will improve, yet stories such as this one keep emerging to demonstrate nothing has improved.http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/01/24/447191/Australia-Frankenstein-primates-monkeys—-/
I can but refer you to the three books by Hans Ruesch: SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENT; NAKED EMPRESS (THE GREAT MEDICAL FRAUD) – both in the SPGB Library – and 1000 DOCTORS AND MORE AGAINST VIVISECTION. Also, Prof. Pietro Croce (a former vivisector): VIVISECTION OR SCIENCE?
Also of interest, this fact:Even if we establish world socialism and thus emerge into our social maturity (which seems unlikely for the moment), thus ruling out the dangers that capitalism poses to our existence, we humans are still a species ripe for extinction in biological terms.Were we to get rid of capitalism, we may have about a million years of existence; if we don`t get rid of capitalism, this century ought to finish us off.Biologically, though, we are ripe for extinction, together with our branch of life (the Great Apes).This is because evolutionary "success" is all about diversification. The Great Ape Branch, of which we are part, has come to the end of the possibilities on this score (see Gould), with further diversification having largely if not completely exhausted itself. When this happens, branches die, to make way for those with possibilities for further diversification.Our extinction is imminent either way – if in biological terms one considers a million years "imminent." That gives our time here about 2 million years in total – a mere evolutionary sneeze.
"Engels of course enjoyed fox-hunting for pleasure " …We know he was a bourgeois bastard, regardless of his socialist insights, and this confirms it.We must avoid making idols, even of socialists.
In a society where only the lives of human relatives matter, and in which the death of a beloved dog, cat or other fellow animal is seen as mere loss of a "thing" ("Gettin` anuvver one mate?"), it was moving to see on a recent documentary the very different reactions of the Maori people to, in this instance, the finding of a dead orca on the beach.They hugged each other and wept, and took charge respectfully and sensitively of the corpse. They forbade any mutilation of the body, even for scientific examination into the cause of the tragic death.Many of those here would sneer, I should think, and say "silly sentimentality."One could sneer in response at the often hypocritical solemnity here at human relatives` funerals – at which eyelids are lowered to conceal the £ sign often to be glimpsed in many retinas!
Quote:Universities account for around half of all animal experimentation in the UK. UK’s leading universities are responsible for testing on almost 1 million animalsQuote:Monkey experiments conducted at some universities were said to involve animals being deprived of food or water, having electrodes implanted in their skulls or limbs, and being blasted with loud noise while trapped in a box. Other “disturbing” experiments allegedly included rats being injected with acid to cause brain damage, and pregnant sheep injected with testosterone twice a week or having their ovaries punctured during surgery.HUMAN ARROGANCE AGAIN: PROJECTIONS.1) Reincarnation. Always "I was …. (a human) in another life." "I was a soldier in WW1." "I was in Bonaparte`s army." etc. Never "I was a bucket of maggots back in 1640", or "I was a family of earwigs during the battle of Crecy", or "I was a tapeworm in Roman times."2) UFOs etc. Always "people" from outer space! We don`t respect our fellow beings on Earth, nor understand how to communicate with them – yet we see life-forms from outer space as humans! Not only unlikely, but impossible. Replay the tape of life on Earth and we humans wouldn`t be here!
Some more "Food for thought" ?https://theconversation.com/if-meat-could-talk-would-you-still-eat-it-54497
Making a difference – language: When referring to nonhumans, don`t say "animals", say "fellow animals." Don`t use the names of species as abuse, such as "you cow!" or "she`s a bitch!" or "You pig!", or "he behaves like an animal!" etc. Don`t refer to E.T. life as "people from outer space."
Economical exploitation is a human relationship between capitalists and workers, it has nothing to do with animals or vegetables. I do not know if that is a stand of News and Letter, but I do not doubt it either, because they have taking many wrong stands on Marx and socialism, personally, I think that Raya Dunayeskaya was always a Trotskyite. I think CLR James was right when he said that there was nothing revolutionary on Hegel, his only problem was that he was unable to break away from Leninism There was a split from News and Letters, and Peter Hudis formed or joined a new organization with Andrew Killman, and then, they separated from him and they formed another organization with Kevin Anderson. Personally, I do not think that there are any profound differences between both, it is like any other left wing group which come into contradictions based on small details, or fighting for leadership
Matt wrote:Some more "Food for thought" ?https://theconversation.com/if-meat-could-talk-would-you-still-eat-it-54497Yes I would still eat it, is the short answer.I hear they do fantastic pork chops at The restaurant at the End of the Universe
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.