In our December 2025 issue, we published a text criticizing the notion of anti-speciesism. This article seeks to address some of these criticisms, particularly through the concept of alliance and by exploring a nuanced form of anti-speciesism, especially concerning the issue of animal farming. ---- In his article "Beyond Speciesism and Anti-speciesism"[1], Thomas Wendelin critiques the limitations of the conceptual tools used by the anti-speciesist movement, such as the notions of "animal class" and "human class." To address the question of animals, the author rightly recalls the compass of materialism and proposes alternative avenues for political development to anti-speciesism.
For libertarian communists, materialism remains an essential tool and must be used to analyze the animal question and attempt to integrate it into a coherent political platform. As the article mentions, ethology[2]has, for example, made it possible to scientifically confirm the empirical observations made throughout history by those who live with domestic animals. This applies both to their sentience and their capacity to develop individual personalities based on their life experiences. This contribution has thus made it possible to scientifically challenge the Cartesian theory of the "animal-machine," a harmful theory that has justified the denial of the value of animal lives, even within the progressive camp.
But science also allows us to refute many other misconceptions about the supposed "human exceptionalism" (see sidebar below), which Thomas Wendelin's article nevertheless relies on and which are still widespread in the labor movement: it is on this principle that the definition of "work" as it is taught within the CGT (General Confederation of Labour) in the induction programs for new members is still based today.
Political ecology has made a decisive contribution to the progressive camp by raising the question of coexistence between humans and other species within ecosystems that we are forced to share in a context of planetary boundaries. The essential contribution of anti-speciesists is to highlight what we have in common with animals on an ontological level[3]and to position our questions at the level of the individual animal. The libertarian communist movement has incorporated the achievements of political ecology; why shouldn't it now incorporate the positive achievements of the anti-speciesist movement? But how? While we share common traits with animals, justifying our considering them as political subjects, we also have differences that invalidate the critical tools we usually use to characterize oppression within the human species alone. Yet it is often in attempting to extend these critical tools to the question of animals that we stumble, as Thomas Wendelin aptly demonstrates in his article.
For example, does sheep farming constitute a form of "exploitation"? If we consider a sheep as we consider a wage laborer in capitalist society, sheep farming is certainly one of the most atrocious forms of exploitation. But sheep are not wage laborers, and the rich and profound social relationships they build among themselves do not fall under the capitalist system. Our worlds intersect, but they are distinct. The concept of "alliance," originating in scientific ecology and adopted by political ecology, can be a key to extending beyond humanity what class unity allows us to characterize within it.
Once reconsidered as an alliance between humans and mouflon (the wild species from which all domestic sheep breeds are descended), livestock farming can then be described as a relationship that has enabled the mutual evolutionary success of both humans and mouflon, whose descendants have thrived together across the planet, far beyond their original ecological niches, thanks to the mutual benefits derived from their coexistence. By considering the individual value of the life of each sentient being, anti-speciesism can help us deepen this alliance beyond its purely ecological dimension, by positing as a progressive perspective the evolution of current farming systems towards a new form of relationship based on the full consideration of the individual well-being of sheep and, reciprocally, the well-being of the humans who live with them. Such a perspective of transcendence, making anti-speciesism and animal husbandry compatible but incompatible with a competitive economy, could allow for the use of wool for clothing and building insulation, the abandonment of slaughter, milk production limited to the surplus not consumed by lambs, and the use of leather and meat from animals that die naturally.
Capitalism prevents us from conceiving of a healthy relationship with animals and encourages the development of only an industrial vision of animal husbandry.
Unsplash/Taylor Brandon
The animal cause holds a unifying potential for our class, as Thomas Wendelin mentions. It also holds revolutionary potential: within the human species, private property and social classes emerged with the appearance of animal husbandry in the Neolithic period; modern capitalism, however, rests on the excessive exploitation of the ecosystems in which wild animals live and results in an intensification of violence against domestic animals to an unprecedented level in the history of humankind. Developing a revolutionary strategy based on a dialectic between class struggle and alliance with animals can be a relevant political framework for libertarian communists, as well as a path of convergence for anti-speciesists: it will never be possible to organize the overcoming of capitalism without questioning our relationship with animals, and it will never be possible to abolish violence against animals without dismantling capitalism.
Felis Nigra (UCL Montreuil)
A "HUMAN EXCEPTION"?
Is the human species the only one capable of transforming its environment and influencing its living conditions? The knowledge acquired through zoology and ecology demonstrates the contrary. The examples are countless: beavers, capable of transforming river systems on a large scale; moles, experts in shaping the subsoil; and cnidarians, builders of coral reefs.
Is human exceptionalism found in the capacity to think about the world and to base all actions on a critical perspective? Science, on the contrary, demonstrates the capacity for abstraction in many animal species, from insects to mammals, and the importance of aesthetic tastes in many bird species.
Is human exceptionalism found in its social structures? Animals, too, build societies-diverse societies with complex, stratified organizations, governed by rules, and evolving dynamically. Primatology, based on the study of species closely related to humans, provides essential data. Far from being human exceptions, patriarchy and xenophobia are documented in chimpanzees, as are behaviors we consider anti-social, such as murder and war, or, conversely, altruism and friendship.
Validate
[1]Thomas Wendelin, "Debates: Beyond Speciesism and Anti-Speciesism," Alternative libertaire no. 366, December 2025.
[2]Ethology is the scientific study of animal behavior.
[3]Ontology is a branch of philosophy that seeks to define what being is.
https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Debat-Lutte-des-classes-et-alliance-avec-les-animaux
_________________________________________
Link: (en) France, UCL AL #369 - Politics - Debate: Class Struggle and Alliance with Animals (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten