Oftentimes we explore the problem of “euthanasia” (generally
a euphemism for the killing of healthy dogs and cats) as a basic matter of morality
or rights ethics. I argue that we should also be exploring this as an extension of
anti-capitalist efforts as well. Norm Phelps has
argued that the dog and cat industry is a capitalist one, with consumers
encouraged to purchase designer dogs and cats and to dispose of them when trends or lifestyles change. “Shelters,” he argues, are to the dog and cat
industry as the landfill is to other material goods. Shelters exist to dispose
of unwanted dogs and cats who are continually produced, consumed, and disposed
of in a constant capitalist cycle. Euthanasia is an essential component to capitalism.
The arguments for euthanasia are really quite disturbing in
this light, especially given similar projects designed to eliminate unwanted
human populations that are a burden on the capitalist treadmill. I have heard
it argued that not killing dogs and cats waiting on homes is “a waste of people’s
time and money.” Ironically, I saw this
argument made in an anti-capitalist animal rights space. But this is the very logic
of capitalism, that is, to view sentient beings as disposable objects measured by their monetary
value. Strange, when it comes to privileged groups, where there's a will, there's a way. When it comes to devalued groups, killing is just "common sense."
When a sentient being is deemed a burden to the capitalist
system, that sentient being becomes extremely vulnerable to suffering and
death. Recall Jonathan Swift’s satirical essay A Modest Proposal for Preventing
the Children of Poor People from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country,
and for Making them Beneficial to the Public, which suggests that the
burdensome poor Irish could be repurposed for wealthy persons . . . killed and
served up as food.
Consider also “overpopulation” rhetoric which is promulgated
by wealthy Western nations who see the masses of poor in third world countries
as a burden on the capitalist system (similar programs have targeted poor women of color in the United States as well). “Population control” efforts invariably
target vulnerable poor persons, usually brown, and usually women. These efforts are intended to annihilate entire
groups of people—masked as “family planning,” they are often dangerous, non-consensual,
and life-threatening.
The notion that vulnerable
groups can be “euthanized” or “controlled” “for their own good” (a position held by privileged groups), that euthanasia is a "rational" matter to save “people’s time and money” is the language of oppression
. . . capitalist oppression. We should be critical of this line of
thought. It won’t get us any closer to
liberation. It only normalizes exploitation and objectification.
