Segregative approaches

Question about segregative approaches, such as found in the discussion here, where conservationist approaches typically stand in conflict with the concepts of animal rights, for a large part by ignoring aspects affecting nonhuman life as a whole.

We come from a radical antispeciesist approach, hence we need to raise a few questions:

Question 1 about the saving biological diversity approach:

  • Are they for captive breeding programs to halt the extinction of some species? If yes, how do they see the problematics of zoos? Do such problematics matter in the discussion about extinction, its causes and how the driving forces behind natural destruction can be addressed?

Question 2 about the saving biological diversity approach:

  • Life is a net, yet equally individual lives are meaningful (with humans and nonhumans). Positively seen we understand how life is built as an interdependent net. Yet oppressive mechanism also function as a “net”, yet one of destructiveness, meaning: Wildlife stands amidst mechanisms of a systemic zoocide and ecocide. When we name the net of life, we should also discuss the destructive mechanisms of the socio-political scale and not just highlight biological functioning.

Question 3 about the saving biological diversity approach:

  • When we face destructiveness that targets and sacrifices biological diversity, why do we exclude the nonhuman lives that are barred from the natural spaces and locked into machineries? Why is the connection of destructiveness towards life being treated in a segregative way? For the sake of keeping up the notion of taxonomical richness? Definitely not for nonhuman life itself.

Antispeciesist Animal Sociology

2 thoughts on “Segregative approaches

  1. Pingback: Animal Rights Ethical Bird Protection: The Ortolan Bunting or Hortulan – Tierrechte

  2. Pingback: Segregative approaches – Tierrechte

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *