Principle 4: Ask “What do we owe non-human animals?”
Humans are the perpetrators of non-human animal oppression so it is natural for animal rights advocates to focus on how to convince humans to change their actions. This is seen in many of the movements’ resources being poured into trying to convince people to become vegan. This often means the question informing advocacy becomes “what will make the most vegans?”. Unfortunately, the answer to this question often involves making compromises to the message in attempts to be more agreeable and appealing to those we are trying to convince to change. Activists believe non-human animals all have a right to their life and freedom but may find themselves recommending Meatless Mondays, cutting back on “animal products” slowly or temporary 30-day challenges all under the belief that a clear message about anti-speciesism is too “off-putting” or “radical”.
Challenge Speciesism seeks to use a different question to inform our advocacy (and therefore gets a different answer). The question cannot be asked from the oppressor’s perspective; so rather than ask what appeals most to humans, we ask “what do we owe non-human animals”? The answer to this question is a clear unequivocal call for justice for non-human animals. It also means that we are always seeking to eliminate speciesism from our own advocacy. It is our belief that if a social justice movement for non-human animals operates from the oppressor’s perspective or in a speciesist way it will only undermine itself and more deeply entrench the problem of non-human animal oppression.