Delhi is a city of dog lovers, or at least one would like to believe so. The order passed by two Supreme Court judges to remove all street dogs from their territories and cage them permanently in shelters for the rest of their lives resulted in spontaneous protests all over the city and its neighbourhood, spilling over to some other parts of the country as well. These protests were not organised or mobilised by any political party. These were truly citizens’ protests. However, like any complex society that cannot have an uniformity of opinion, there are a large number of people who welcomed the judgment and did not take kindly to these protests. As heated arguments poured across the social media, the voiceless defenceless creatures continue to roam the streets, totally oblivious to their fate. As the nation awaits a final verdict by the new three-member Supreme Court bench, that will decide the destiny of 8-10 lakh street dogs in Delhi-NCR, and several lakhs more because the order would then be applicable all over India, it’s important to examine it within the larger context of humans’ relationship with all other species. In 1970s, philosopher Richard Ryder coined the term “speciesism”, which was popularised by another philosopher Peter Singer. To put it simply, it’s an assertion of human “superiority” over all other species; hence justified in having more rights; control over resources, and having power that legitimises exploitation, inflicting suffering, even annihilation of other species for human benefit. Similar to racism or sexism with respect to discrimination and exploitation, but different in the sense that while the former are social constructs, “speciesism” has perhaps been part of human evolution process in its quest for survival and domination over other species. Yuva Noval Harare, historian and best-selling author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, argues that humans are the earth’s deadliest species. As per him, Homo Sapiens killed off at least six others human species and drove to extinction countless other species. Within a span of 1,000 years of arrival in Australia 45,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens caused mass extinction of 23 out of 24 large native mammals and hundreds of other flora and fauna. Our evolutionary history is not very clean. However, in the 21st century, we have or should have moved far away from our destructive ancestors. It’s no longer a question of survival or domination for us. We have moved beyond it eons ago, establishing our species as the most powerful one. With power comes responsibility. We are now responsible for the survival and welfare of other species. If not for the reason of kindness, we must do it for our own survival in future. Climate change and its consequences are right before our eyes. The excessive exploitation of natural resources in the name of development for human benefit are resulting in devastation, causing not only loss of human lives and economic damage; but loss of thousands of insects, birds, fishes and larger animals. The ecological impact of this is causing further damage to nature and Mother Earth. We seem to be trapped in a vicious circle. The apex court’s order is an example of speciesism at its worst as it doesn’t even serve any real benefit for humans. We have lessons from recent history that mass removal or culling of dogs doesn’t solve the primary problem of rabies and dog bites, but can lead to other unintended and unwanted consequences. In 1994, the Surat municipal corporation carried out mass killings of stray dogs. Not a single one was spared. Within two weeks, plague broke out as there was an infestation of rats due to the absence of dogs, who helped keep a check on the rodent population and are also natural scavengers. Romania faced a similar experience in 2013-15 after a mass culling of dogs. It didn’t face a plague epidemic as it had better infrastructure, but there was an upsurge in leptospirosis diseases. It can be argued that cities in developed countries don’t need stray cats and dogs for rat control. But unlike Delhi-Gurgaon, those cities don’t get regularly waterlogged with an hour of rain due to the lack of adequate drainage, and don’t have heaps of garbage strewn all over. A lot has been written about scientific methods like vaccination, sterilisation, regular feeding at designated spots (hungry dogs can get aggressive, just like hungry men) which have proven to be far more effective and humane. Lucknow and Jaipur are examples. These are more in tune with our core civilisational values of compassion and peaceful coexistence enshrined in our Constitution. The Supreme Court would truly uphold justice if it rejects knee-jerk reactions which are unethical, illogical and logistically untenable. It should fix responsibility with the agencies whose job it is to carry out vaccination/sterilisation programmes instead of putting lakhs of defenceless souls through unimaginable suffering, slow starvation and death. Perhaps it’s time to discard speciesism and truly embrace humanism. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas were accompanied by a stray dog on their way to heaven. Only Yudhishthir, accompanied by his canine companion, could reach its gate. He was asked to leave the dog behind to gain entry to Swarga. He refused, saying he couldn’t abandon the dog who was with him till the end. The dog turned out to be Dharma himself, who was putting Yudhisthir through a final test. The question is: will we uphold Dharma or will we abandon our most loyal companions for over 30,000 years? This court order will not just seal the fate of these dogs but also decide for humans whether the doors of heaven will be shut forever for us or whether we will make this earth itself a living hell through an ultimate act of betrayal towards humans’ best friends.
Source link
