antispecism

The mechanisms of the domain

by Filippo Trasatti and Massimo Filippi
illustrations by Luciano Graziosi

To "study center libertarians", in Milan, October 29, 2011, a seminar was held on the antispecism.
We publish here the introductory report.

Our intention in this seminar is to present a thesis "strong" and seek as much as possible, to articulate it, showing that the research perspective that emerges here is open to a wide range of very promising developments, but the contours not yet fully defined. This thesis revolves around the notion of antispecismo, the notion that we can not take for granted or think to be able to fix in the cage of a definition is too rigid because, as we shall see, not only are there different ways of understanding antispecismo, diachronically and synchronically distinguishable ways , but also because what usually goes unnoticed under this term is a complex and continually changing.
Easier, then, from trying to say is not what the antispecismo. The antispecismo is not and should not be confused with, the animal rights in a broad sense, ie with a general attitude of interest, respect or protection of other animals and even with the desire and struggle for their liberation. There is, in fact, a animalism liberationist which is not necessarily antispecista, but for the way in which we understand it, there can be a antispecismo that is not liberationist. Not only for the obvious reason that the condition of the other animals on Earth is so terrifying that take your breath away, but also because this condition is the product of forces and devices of domination, and exploitation of imprisonment of life in its various forms, Once recognized and denounced for what they are, can only be countered.
The basic thesis that we support can then be formulated as follows: the antispecismo and the condition of the animals in our society have much to teach us about the domain intraspecific and, when used as a magnifying glass, allow us to see and work with more clearly the mechanisms of the domain which, by their nature, are carried out in multiple planes. In other words, in the long history of relations with other animals and in the ways we worked to exclude them as different from us, you can find a model, a paradigm, based on which we can then justify that makes even the speciation of other human of sub-human, or animal. And, more importantly, the history of our ways of construction of the animal shapes episteme, to put it in Foucauldian terms, of what is visible, speakable and thinkable as a human.

Shared Oppression

Conclusions

What has been said indicates a direction different from that envisaged dall'animalismo mainstream, we might call "inclusive", meaning they would extend the circle of moral consideration through mechanisms of assimilation of the other animals to the human sphere. The circle of moral consideration that spreads automatically and progressively wider towards the inclusion of those who always can be traced to the human will replace multiple lines of fracture in continuous remodeling under the pressure of historical force fields, where the problem is no longer on where you intend to draw the line of moral consideration, but the very fact that you think it is necessary to trace it. The alleged inclusivism progressive (and progressive) switching to a daily struggle against the reactionary forces always ready to help people withdraw from the positions acquired and the idea that one can not exclude in advance the potential of any "body", similar or dissimilar to radically us to terminate our persistence in being, without reducing the political urgency of a radical change of the animal condition which confront us with the scale and brutality of their daily holocaust. At the request of the abolition of certain practices of exploitation joins its desire for liberation of the disruptive potential of a misunderstood and thought and practice that we have the acceptance of a "community events" in which the wealth of individuals, species, the relationship, the meetings is in no way restricted a priori. The anarchist thought, with its strong political impetus and ethical rebellion against all forms of injustice, with his desire to dismantle the mechanisms of domination at all levels and with open minds, might entertain a fruitful exchange with the perspective outlined here and become antispecista one of the most important ingredients.