In the summer of 2023, a video went viral showing a piglet trapped in a metal gestation crate so small it could not turn around. The comments section erupted, but the arguments were strangely divided. One group demanded "better bedding and more space." The other demanded "empty the shed entirely."
The question boils down to this:
If we are living with them —as co-sentients on a fragile planet—then the rights framework is our moral horizon. We may not reach total abolition in our lifetimes, but we can abolish the worst atrocities. We can grant personhood to the great apes. We can ban the industrial farm. In the summer of 2023, a video went
The philosopher Alasdair Cochrane argues that we don't need to choose. We can pursue rights for the few (primates, cetaceans) while enforcing welfare for the many (livestock). We may not reach total abolition in our
If we are using them—for bacon, for leather, for insulin, for zoo tickets—then the welfare framework is our moral floor. We must legislate the hell out of that use. We must demand the Five Freedoms with rigorous enforcement and severe penalties for abuse. The philosopher Alasdair Cochrane argues that we don't
To navigate the future of our relationship with non-human animals—from the factory farm to the research lab to the living room—we must first understand where these two movements converge, where they clash, and why it matters for the 8 billion animals slaughtered annually for food in the U.S. alone. Animal welfare is a utilitarian concept. It concedes that humans will continue to use animals for food, clothing, research, and entertainment. However, it insists that this use must be humane .
The only question—for you, reading this today—is how fast you want that circle to expand, and whether you will push the edge.