#I don't think it's automatically wrong and evil for humans to benefit from animals

[catherine-clover]

Alright. Time to finish this draft.

@sophieinwonderland

Rejecting dehumanization isn't some lofty moral virtue or a form of tone policing. It's a safeguard against self-deception. This stance isn't to protect others. It's for your own benefit.

Sure, at this moment, you feel confident in your understanding of the world. You stay informed and can clearly distinguish right from wrong. But confidence today will blind you tomorrow, when the boundaries of truth start to shift.

Something new will always come up. New challenges and perspectives constantly emerge. The intense convictions you hold are liable to backfire over time. Mistakes are inevitable. You will be wrong, and eventually, you will stand on the wrong side of history. The question is how quickly you'll get back. But if you've already decided that everyone who disagrees with you is lesser than an animal, that's going to take a long time.

To repeat the old trope, there are a lot of former hippies who are now senior conservatives. Or to point at a more recent example, all the middle-aged TERFs/FARTs taking power. Dehumanization breeds closed minds. This is why it is so often used by closed minds.

And relatedly, no matter how disgusting or horrifying it is to think about, those people are part of the same species as you. They are running the same jelly hardware as you. Many of them are, in a neutral sense, just as intelligent as you, or more so. ("Um actually they're automatically less intelligent because they believe-" No True Scotsman Fallacy.)

This is not calling for "appealing to a shared humanity" I am stating a biological fact that is very important not to forget. That common phrase is shorthand for an appeal to shared human virtue. And if there is none to appeal to, then fine. There are some "low roads" that are effective and necessary tools. But there are many more cursed ones like this that will always fulfill "live long enough to see yourself become the villain".

Do not confuse what humans ought to be with what they are or must be, or what defines them. A human is a living organism of the species Homo sapiens. Refusing to acknowledge your own potential for cruelty and prejudice, even and especially unto the extreme, is much like ignoring your vulnerability to manipulation into a cult, or any scam: losing awareness makes you more susceptible than ever.

This mindset also incentivizes you to drag anyone who opposes you into the dehumanized "other" category. It makes them a lot easier to deal with, because you can do anything, very cathartic things, to an evil subhuman. You will justify your actions as righteous, and be confident in your righteousness.

The real danger isn't hating them. The real danger is how good it feels to hate them. Once you decide your cruelty is righteous, you'll keep escalating to chase that high. And you won't even notice the lock clicking shut on your own mind.

I'm sure you've already heard all of that, of course. I'm sure you've seen these kinds of points made plenty elsewhere. I don't expect to change your mind with a single post. But I'd like to see you defend yourself against this bulk of reason. And when you've finished writing out your response, overbloated as always, I want you to give it a long, slow read and really consider the kinds of arguments you're making.

It's not different when you do it.