The name Corine Pelluchon may not sound familiar to you. But she is one of the most interesting contemporary philosophers. And one of the most committed to the animal cause and environmental philosophy. That is why today we want you to get to know her better.
Pelluchon, born 50 years ago in Barbezieux-Saint-Hilaire (France), is a philosophy professor at the University of Paris-Est-Marne-La-Vallée. Her specialty is political and moral philosophy, and she is an advocate of the animal cause because, in her view, it is the cause of humanity. Since it promotes a better, less violent, and fairer world.
Pelluchon became interested in this subject as a result of the profound trauma caused by becoming aware of the suffering to which, as a society, we subject animals. Since then, she has devoted part of her academic work to defending this cause, far from the caricature or parody that certain social actors make of the animal rights movement.
The philosopher believes that politicizing the movement in favor of animals is positive. Since it helps “organize coexistence between humans and nonhumans.” In this way, the interests of both become integrated into the idea of the “common good.” Only in this way can a less violent society be built. In this sense, it is logical to include animals in what she calls “the sphere of moral consideration,” because animals feel (we have already discussed that more than once) and this gives them the capacity to suffer, but also a desire to live, a fear of death, an expression of pleasure, and the will to form emotional bonds.
In this video, you can learn more about what she considers politicizing the animal issue:
That said, Pelluchon does not believe that animals are citizens. She recognizes them as members of our community and, by extension, political subjects. They are capable of communicating their interests and preferences, although they need us to decipher them (what she calls “dependent agency”). And she insists that this must be taken into account to establish a starting point from which to define animal rights. Rights that should not be the same as those humans receive, but different, depending on their status as sentient beings.
Meanwhile, until that moment arrives, Pelluchon maintains that our relationship with animals reflects the relationship we have with ourselves, both as a species and as individuals. And she believes that the ongoing violence we inflict on other species is connected to other forms of violence, such as racism and sexism.
In recent years, the French philosopher has been working on a book, Animalist Manifesto. Politicizing the Animal Cause, recently presented with strong ecofeminist overtones, through which she hopes to turn animal advocacy into a new, universal, and profound humanism. In it, she proposes two stages of political struggle. The first and more short-term stage should seek broad agreements on issues such as ending captivity, banning animal shows, and banning fur and foie gras (always ensuring the professional future of workers in the meat industry, circuses, and zoos). The second, which addresses the medium and long term, should work toward the total elimination of animal exploitation.
Let us hope her words inspire and enlighten those who have the power to make decisions. For our part, we will continue to give visibility to women like her and Pauleen Bennett, who are working tirelessly for the animal cause.