Slavery

The PETA display and the statue of MLK were connected to each other because both were against immoral issues. MLK was against racism, which ties back to slavery. African- Americans were thought inferior to the white race because of the stereotype that black slaves were like animals. PETA is against speciesism. Both issues are identical. “Racists violate the principle of equality by giving greater weight to the interests of members of their own race when there is a clash between their interests and the interests of those of another race... Similarly, speciesists allow the interests of their own species to override the greater interests of member of other species.” (280) Slavery happened because of the idea that the color of a human’s skin made them less important than another. This way of thinking was speciesism. When slavery ended the speciesist way of thinking was still there, so racism brewed.

The comparisons of animal cruelty to slavery were disturbing for one to realize, but true. “Slaves were often branded in order to identify them as property…Cows are often branded in order to identify them as property.” (Branded PETA display photo)We came to realize that slaves were human beings with feelings just like us. They were not inferior; they were not beings that did not know the meaning of pain and suffering. Why it that many still can’t realize that animals are not our slaves? They have feelings just like us. They are beings that should not be seen as property. Branding an animal is just as immoral as it was in branding a human being many years ago. “Just as we have progressed beyond the blatantly racist ethic of the era of slavery and colonialism, so we must now progress beyond the speciesist ethic of the era of factory farming, of the use of animals as mere research tools, of whaling, seal hunting, kangaroo slaughter and the destruction of wilderness.”(311G)

As a plantation owner who has become aware of the cruelty the slaves I own have endured, I would take action to end it. Realistically, the mentality a slave owner had of its slaves was that they were seen as objects, property to be exact. However, slaves were what made the profit of the plantation so torturing them will hurt the plantation owner. I would end the abuse. To have ethics in this situation, as a plantation owner to make a good choice they must consider the question: “Can they suffer?” (313) The abuse has been hidden from because I was not there; plantation owners hired people to look after the slaves. Pain in any beings eyes is obvious. Slaves were seen as beasts. In Am I Blue?, the narrator makes the connection with Blue saying “if I had been born into slavery, and my partner had sold or killed, my eyes would have looked like that.” (316B) A human being can see misery in an animal’s eyes; it would be second nature that a human can see misery into another human’s eyes. I would be able to see the suffering in their eyes other than the obvious physical torture and abuse. I’d stop the immoral treatment on the slaves. A sensible person would know that it would be the right thing to do.

MLK said “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Animals are suffering injustice under the hands of humans. We are cruel beings because “man is the only creature that inflicts pain for sport, knowing it to be pain.” (311D) A huge impact needs to be made for animals to have justice, just like a huge impact was made to destroy slavery and bring justice to African Americans. However, it won't happen anytime soon if "secrecy and distancing are...used to protect the very profitable institutionalized cruelty to animals." (Spiegel 334) The plantation owner was hardly around the slaves to witness the abuse. It wasn't until people began to raise awareness that the cruelty inflicted on these people was wrong. As a society we can not distance ourselves from the dilemma at hand or keep it a secret any longer.