Memes portray him wearing a beret similar to the one worn by socialist revolutionary Ché Guevara. One caption declares: “Accept our existence or wait for resistance… an otter world is possible.”
My academy focuses on animal-human relationships through the prism of social justice. From what I’ve seen, the public’s glee about ruined surfboards and yachts hints at a sort of schadenfreude. At a time marked by severe socioeconomic inequalities, white supremacy, and environmental degradation, casting these marine mammals as revolutionary seems a reflection of desires for social justice and livable ecosystems.
A look at the work of some political scientists, philosophers, and animal behavior researchers adds weight to this playful public dialogue. The field of critical animal studies analyzes structures of oppression and power and considers ways to dismantle them. These scholars’ views challenge the common view that nonhuman animals are passive victims. They also challenge the common assumption that non-human animals cannot be political actors.
So while meme lovers project emotions and perspectives onto these particular wild animals, critical animal studies scholars argue that nonhuman animals are actually engaged in resistance.
Inhumane animal protests are everywhere
Are non-human animals in a constant state of challenge? I can say without a doubt that the answer is yes.
The entire architecture of animal agriculture testifies to the stubborn resistance of animals to confinement and death. If it were not for the tireless rebellion of animals, there would be no cages, pens, pens and tanks.
Chickens flap their wings furiously, even when suspended upside down in conveyor sheds, and bite, scratch, peck, and defecate on line workers at every stage of the process leading to their deaths.
The hooked tuna resist to the end, panting and writhing violently on the decks of the ships. If fish allowed passive collection, there would be no need for hooks, nets and traps.
If they were willing to undergo repeated impregnation, sows and cows would not need to be tied to “rape racks” to prevent them from trying to escape.
If they had no objection to having their calves permanently removed from them, there would be no need for dairy cows to be blinded with headgear to prevent them from biting and kicking while the calves are being removed; They wouldn’t bellow for weeks after each incident. I argue that failure to recognize their bellows as protest reflects “human denial,” what ethologist Frans de Waal calls the denial of apparent continuities between human and nonhuman animal behavior, cognition, and emotion.
The prevailing view of nonhuman animals remains that of the 17th-century philosopher René Descartes, who viewed the movements of animals as purely mechanical, like those of a machine. From this perspective, the will of these non-human animals to prevail can be dismissed as unintentional or merely instinctive. But political scientist Dinesh Wadiwel argues: “Even if their challenge is futile, the will to choose life over death is a primary act of resistance; perhaps the only act of dissent possible for animals subjected to extreme forms of control.”
Creative escape from artists
Despite the massive efforts of humans to suppress them, non-human animals still manage to escape slaughterhouses. They also escape from zoos, circuses, water parks, stables and biomedical laboratories. Tilikum, a captive orca at Sea World, famously killed his trainer; this is an action that at least one marine mammal behavior expert describes as intentional.
Philosopher Fahim Amir suggests that depression among captive animals is likewise a kind of emotional rebellion, a rebellion of the nerves, against unbearable conditions. Dolphins will injure themselves, such as hitting the walls of the tank, or they will stop eating and hold their breath until they die. Sows, whose body-sized cages prevent them from turning to make contact with their piglets, repeatedly slam themselves into the metal supports, sometimes succumbing to their injuries.
Critical animal studies scholars argue that all these actions arguably demonstrate nonhuman animals’ longing for freedom and aversion to inequality.
As for the sea stars of summer 2023 memes, fishing gear could entangle and harm orcas. Sea otters were hunted almost to extinction for their fur. Marine habitats have been degraded by human activities such as overfishing, oil spills, plastic, chemical and noise pollution, and climate change. It is easy to imagine that they might respond to human actions, including bodily harm and intrusion into their territory.
What is solidarity with non-human animals?
Sharing memes that cheer up wild animals is one thing. But there are more concrete ways to show solidarity with animals.
Legal scholars support the resistance of nonhuman animals by proposing that their current property classification should be replaced with a personhood or entity classification.
Nonhuman animals, including songbirds, dolphins, elephants, horses, chimpanzees, and bears, are increasingly appearing as plaintiffs claiming they have been subjected to extinction, exploitation, and other injustices.
For nonhuman animals, citizenship is another means of social and political participation. This would guarantee the right to challenge arbitrary restrictions on the autonomy of domesticated nonhuman animals. It would also impose legal duties to protect them from harm.
Daily actions can express solidarity in the same way.
Boycotting industries that oppress non-human animals as vegans is a powerful action. This is a type of political “counterbehavior,” a term coined by philosopher Michel Foucault to describe practices that challenge dominant norms of power and control.
Creating roadside memorials for nonhuman animals killed by motor vehicles encourages people to view them as beings whose lives and deaths matter, not simply as “roadkill.”
Political scientists recognize that human and nonhuman animals’ struggles against oppression are intertwined. At different moments, the same strategies employed against non-human animals have characterized segments of the human species as “sub-human” in order to exploit them.
The category of people is constantly changing and ominously excluded. I argue that as long as there is a classification of “animalism” no one is safe. It raises awareness about legally and ethically tolerated forms of extreme violence.
Could an ‘otter world’ be possible?
I believe the jokes about the cetacean rebellion reflect an awareness that our human interests are intertwined with the interests of non-human animals. The desire to build sustainable relationships with other species and the natural world is clear to me in memes and media coverage. And this is happening as human-caused activities make our common living spaces increasingly uninhabitable.
Solidarity with non-human animals is consistent with democratic principles; for example, defending the right to welfare and opposing the use of force against innocent subjects. Philosopher Amir proposes an expansion of the idea that there can be no freedom unless there is freedom beyond the species divide: “Although we cannot yet fully imagine what this means, there is no reason why we cannot begin to imagine IT”.
This article is republished from The Conversation, an independent, nonprofit news organization providing facts and authoritative analysis to help you understand our complex world. Did you like this article? Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.
Written by: Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond, University of California, San Diego.
Read more:
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond does not work for, consult, own shares in, or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond her academic duties.