Me, Personally

The future of the L.H.S.

As the Front Range of Colorado continues to grow, the Longmont Humane Society is planning on needing to serve a continuously growing community, especially as municipalities such as Niwot continue to expand. As the shelter expands, so will their animal care and clinic capabilities, as well as their ability to do outreach projects in the community. In order to continue to further the cause of animal rights and wellness, they need to dedicate more resources, staff, and volunteers to expanding their education programs. They exist, but they could use serious expansion. Within these programs, they also need to begin to incorporate tougher and more controversial topics, such as a true redesign of our societal priorities and how to view animals as equals. This content may be controversial, but will spark the conversation and dissent that we need to experience great change.

Further recommendations include the use of science in common discourse more frequently, to support ideas such as that animals experience pain and emotions. If more research is needed in a particular area, that should be prioritized. By incorporating science into the search for a holistic solution, it is more likely to be viewed as legitimate in the civil society, economy, and state. The most important aspect though is to not get complacent with the progress that has already been made: it may seem significant, and it certainly is, but that should not be enough to satisfy us. As soon as the people pushing for animal equality back off, the discourse ends. Animals cannot voice their dissent on their own, and need us to push them onto our platform.

The impact on me, personally

By volunteering at the Longmont Humane Society, it has become clear to me that there are many people out there who want to make a change in the human-first hegemonic system, but are not sure how to begin or if they will be taken seriously. Based on my supplemental research, it is clear that as things stand in our world, many people who vocally push for animal equality are mocked, ignored, or punished. While undoubtedly some organizations that attempt this strategy might not be taking the exact right approach, the premise is still there: humans do not want to listen to other humans tell them to make room for other living beings as our equals.

Because of this, I realized that I had truly been living in a bubble in regards to research, change, and people. I've always heard the saying of "people hate change", but I never realized how seriously we take both ourselves as a species and the status quo regarding that power. People are so complacent being the top predatorial (and destructive) species on the planet that they won't even listen to people tell them about why we could and should give other living beings more rights. Everybody seems to believe that change is a zero-sum game, meaning that in order to get something new or different, we must lose something we already had. In reality, the transition to a world where animals are truly our equals would not need to look that much different than our world today, but the difference would be the reduction of suffering for other living things.

In terms of becoming a better critical thinker and solutionary, this volunteer work and project has helped me understand the absolute importance of interdisciplinary study and the anthropological perspective. The idea that hierarchy is not necessarily natural is an incredibly tough root issue to address in our society, and without the perspectives of everybody, we cannot possibly find a solution that benefits all of the living beings that share this planet. Because everybody is so resistant to change, in order to support it they need to feel heard, respected, and included. This means that we need to seriously expand and revise the discourse that happens in the public sphere. As it stands, we as a nation and a planet are more divided than ever, despite digital connections that should be revolutionizing the civil society. We use these connections to harass, put down, solicit, beg, and generally incite hate when these tools could be used to create some of the most holistic solutions we have ever seen as a species. This means that we need individuals to begin setting an example for utilizing these tools to create more productive discourse and ensure that everybody has their dissent voiced and incorporated into the solution.

After this project, I've decided to change how I view the world. I no longer have a reason to take things at face value, and realize that there is always further investigation to be done. I realize that people may mock me for this, or say that I am looking too deeply into things, but it is clear to me that this is the only way to make change. We will need to start small, as the local governments are more likely to listen to growing groups of people, and it will certainly take time to research and persuade for change on any topic. I will need to constantly think of ways to ensure that I take every perspective into account for solutions, and to ensure that I am setting an example for how to voice, and hear, dissent. This project has changed how I will interact with the world, and my new goal is to set about ensuring that we can collectively better the planet for all (and see some cute animals along the way).

Further questions for future solutionaries

How does our deep-seated, contemporary idea of power and dominance (eg. colonialism, hierarchy, privilege, etc.) contrast to what we say that we want from a society?
What is the scope of the solution to animal rights and equality? Do we need to individualize it based on location, or can we truly come together as a planet to find one holistic solution?
How is it truly possible to incorporate everybody's voice? Technology can be helpful, but we cannot forget about those in parts of the world who cannot voice their opinions via technology: what can we do to hear everybody (and everything, to use speciesist language)?

Note: I know throughout this website, there will be plenty of terminology that can easily be identified as speciesist and part of the human-first hierarchical mindset. I wanted to acknowledge this, and state that it is not my intention to use this but that it is only a byproduct of our societal priorities and customs. I truly believe that all living beings are our equals (or, if you will, that we are truly the equals of all living beings), and anything phrased throughout that may oppose that sentiment is unintentional.

Google Sites

Report abuse