Socialist Societies Slaughter Fewer Animals Than Do Capitalist Ones

Critics of socialism are quick to point out that current socialist societies, as well of those of the past, have horrific records in their treatment of animals.

However, even unintentionally, socialist societies are kinder to animals than are capitalist ones.

Fewer animals die under socialist governments than die under capitalist governments. Per capital consumption of animals is ALWAYS less under socialism than under capitalism.

The lack of incentives to kill animals and to promote the uses of their corpses is the primary reason for the substantially lower slaughter rates. Inefficiencies in central economic planning and bureaucracy are no doubt factors as well. All combine to the benefit of animals which do not die under socialism, even in socialist countries that are hostile to animals.

Future socialist governments will likely be even more beneficial to animals. That is because global warming and climate change are threatening the very existence of the human race, and animal agriculture is responsible for more greenhouse gas affect than the entire world’s transportation sector, including all cars, trucks, buses, railroads, ships, and airplanes on the planet.

Centrally planned economies under socialist governments will be able to restrict or ban animal agriculture to head off massive human depopulation or even extinction. Such decisive action could never occur under capitalism. Nor could it occur under legal systems which value private property over the common good.

Grain fed to animals trapped in the food system is enough to eliminate world hunger. Diverting grain to feed the world’s starving would be consistent with socialist values, and yet another reason to ban animal agriculture.

Contrast that moral imperative with capitalists profiting on the suffering of both human and animal victims.

Socialism places human need over human greed, while capitalism caters to greed over need.

Socialism has been demonized in America for almost 150 years. The millionaire class that originally opposed socialism has become the billionaire class that currently opposes it.

Their complaints are the same, and are true. Socialism would end wealth disparity, it would end the billionaire class, it would end corporatism, it would hand power over to the people. It would guarantee minimum and maximum incomes.

For animal activists, the defining issue is: what would happen to the animals under socialism? The answer can only be speculated, but we know one thing for certain: Nothing could be worse for animals than living under the ongoing, never-ending, slavery and extermination program that is capitalism.

The question for animal activists now becomes: Which is more important to you, the animals or some other agenda?

If your answer is that animals are more important than your lifestyle, your religion, or your politics, you will join with us to end capitalism.

It is the the only hope for the animals.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Socialist Societies Slaughter Fewer Animals Than Do Capitalist Ones

  1. This is a typical example of the utilitarian philosophy, from Bentham to Singer, which has become the dominant ideology of self-proclaimed vegans. The crisis for animals is mass extinction. The numbers of animals killed for food vastly outweighs the number of wild animals, and especially the number of endangered species, precisely because endangered animals exist in such low numbers.

    As humanists, socialists have long supporting taming the environment to better exploit it for human use. Eliminating the profit motive merely affects who benefits from the exploitation. Socialists also neglect the problem of human overpopulation, seeing it as a problem of distribution of resources. There is no reason to believe that eliminating the profit motive would decrease exploitation of animals and their environment.

    Has wildlife fared any better under governments run by socialists? I see no evidence of this. The Russian culture has always promoted hunting, before during and after the Soviet Union. Perhaps you should apply your critique of culture to socialist movements, instead of blindly accepting vegan utilitarianism.

    Like

    • I know of few other vegan utilitarians advocating for socialism. To grow that movement is my purpose in life.

      Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer both posited that the greatest good for the greatest number should apply to the treatment of animals as well as people. Socialist societies meet those criteria better than capitalist societies do.

      The rape of the environment has been committed by both capitalists and socialists. As science has documented the damage inflicted upon the environment, and the need to protect the environment has become apparent, socialist governments are better prepared to deal with the problem than are capitalist governments. Capitalist governments are largely controlled by the polluters and exploiters of the environment, while socialist governments have sweeping authority to require the environment be protected.

      On the subject of human population growth, central family planning can only be effected by governments with the power and resolve to implement such restrictions on human reproduction. Capitalist societies welcome unfettered population growth as increases in markets and labor.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s