After reading "Am I Blue" and first few chapters of Dreaded Comparison, I reached a new conclusion: in many cases, comparisons between animal oppression and human oppression are just and appropriate. I used to think that comparing humans to animals is an insult to humans, but now I realize that belief in itself is speciestic. Hence, only people who consider humans to be superior to the rest of the animals will be insulted by such comparisons. On the other hand, according to Spiegel, "In many cultures, such a comparison was an honor" (Spiegel 15). Many cultures such as the Native American culture used a comparison to an animal to praise one's significant attributes. However, such a comparison became turned into an insult when the settlers reached the new world: "And about the Indians, considered to be 'like animals' by the 'settlers' (a very benign euphemism for what they actually were), who did not understand their description as a compliment" (Anthology 316).
Animals used to be sacred
Slaves are branded "like animals"
Darwin's idea of evolution is often misused to enforce racism. Until recently, many charts depicting the evolution of primates with a black person as a penultimate stage and a fully erect white male as a last stage. Spin-off from this idea was the misinterpretation of the idea of "survival of the fittest." People implemented Darwin's idea to societies and called it "Social Darwinism"-although Darwin himself never approved the idea. Social Darwinists believed that classes, ranks, and races as process of natural selection, in which rich and high rank people will survive and prosper. They used this idea to further oppress slaves and other races and justify their sadistic actions.
It is interesting to see how racism and speciecism are so closely related. It appears as if racism is yet another form of speciecism.
