Animal Liberation and Atheism

by Kim Socha

Religious arguments for animal rights and liberation are fairly common in the literature on the animal question and the animal condition. Meanwhile, arguments considering animal liberation from a deliberately secular perspective are virtually nonexistent. In Animal Liberation and Dismantling the Procrustean Bed, Kim Socha initiates the conversation by exploring how the concept of religion is inherently antithetical to animal liberation. She also challenges secularists to view the world differently, free from religion's cultural baggage. Finally, Animal Liberation and Atheism is a call for everyone to consider developing a system of ethics disengaged from anthropocentric and speciesist mythologies so that needless violence against all beings and the environment may diminish.

Genres: Philosophy

267 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 7, 2014

Reviews

[PJ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Given the wealth of recent publications focusing on how most world religions prohibit cruelty to animals (Lisa Kemmerer's and Matthew Scully's excellent books come to mind), this analysis fills a glaring gap. Kim Socha shows how religion (namely monotheistic religion, though she addresses others) is inherently at odds with animal liberation due to its inherent hierarchy. Socha takes on the religious community as well as freethinkers such as the New Atheists to show why relinquishing religion is a necessary step towards more humane treatment of nonhuman animals. Her argument is airtight. As Scott Hurley says in the Afterword, "She has thrown down the gauntlet. I wonder if it is too heavy to be picked up."

[Rachael Ford · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book challenges ones concept one is free thinking as one thinks, it systematically proves the new atheists are not in spirit atheists but have failed to shed religious conditioning because while they acknowledge human supremacism and anthropocentrism as derived from judeo-christian belief systems along with a binary and heirarchical approach to relationships and while each new athiest has issued statements showing intellectual grasp of the full implications of rejecting such belief structures in context of animal interests, yet still they remain cannibals of non homosapiens. Their justifications when hauled up about their internal contradictions are pitiful ones I'm all too familiar with when I lapse to criminal feeding patterns, that it tastes good and is convenient. And that eating the deceased has been culturally normalised and is so pervasive that it is hard not to conform. Well she did not have to even mention it but I saw the parallels between myself and the good germans who went along in WW2. It's not about intelligence, quite the reverse.
She drives home how efforts to build secular ethical systems seem to inevitably show derived influence of the unformly anthropocentric west and east major religions eg these all give airtime to human rights alone (bar token passages), hence we have atheist advocats of secularity world building on the presumption the only isms that matter are racism, sexism, classism etc. Specesism as per Singer gets no consideration yet it s the ism resulting in more deaths and torture globally than any other, in more net suffering. i felt she went too soft on indigenous "spirituality" - PC.
So given our secular compassion is highly self interested can it really then be termed compassion or be a dependable asset, the take out being that until we understand compassion as a state of mind (which would by default generalise to animals) we will only ever give it lip service. I have never believed in any religion or deities yet this book made me see the damage from how living in a culture infected by religion historically has shaped my thought pattern to enable me to occasionally resort to eating deceased high life forms and rationalise that... and get over the guilt within hours. It is horrible and confronting, and this book destroys the hope a little that increasingly secular societies will naturally evolve to reject flesh consumption, as religious imprinting lingers. It is probably doing so by design, I guess secularity that melds atheist and the faiths into a less differentiated and more global culture will have its "interest group" masterminds steering.
Books like this offer the only hope to open the minds of influentials to the fact what they munch on was a product of repeated rape, yes I learnt some new facts I'd preferred ignorance of - like how dairy cows are anally raped on a regular basis by someones arm going up them to reposition the uterus to receive the sperm of the calf that will be taken from them and killed at 4 days, just so you can have cheese with your wine. It is obscene the atrocity of farming is seen as ok, we need Kim to rewrite her book in an atheist childs edition, as we adults just may be too far gone - the godless just as much as magical thinkers.
In this book Kim offers lots of light bulb moments by showing how non free thinking and blatantly depraved our diet is. Intellectually clears the cobwebs but emotionally humiliating... if you are not vegan. If you prefer reality to myths, its the book for you. Starts dry with the procrustean bed rant but continues brilliantly by offering fresh sound scholarly insights. Thankyou for extendng understanding.

[Camille Marino · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is an essential read for anyone wanting to gain a deeper understanding how religion has established the systems of patriarchy and hierarchy, in general, that drive all forms of oppression. I am both a vegan and an atheist. And as I read, I found myself thinking "yes, I knew that," but the author provides a depth that allowed my own thoughts to come into focus. I would highly recommend it.