This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

Micro-Landscapes of the Anthropocene

Capitalocene and Ecocide

Response to: https://scalar.usc.edu/works/micro-landscapes-of-the-anthropocene/the-capitalocene?path=sonderweaving-and-the-sonderweb

The term Capitalocene links well to the concepts Anthropocide and Ecocide. Through these two frameworks, Capitalocene crucially positions other ecological issues that validates the processes of capital accumulation. An issue sensitive to this is the production of meat and dairy products in which studies of the production of happiness in animals was seen to create higher quality of meat.

Although this idea is not new and does not only consider the happiness of the animals since other factors such as environment, genetics, fat percentage and aging are considered. Despite this, the studies is also motivated by the belief that animals have rights. Wild animals have been difficult to apply to the study since the science of animal happiness is applicable to domesticated animals. When subjecting domesticated animals to the study, questions such as:

Have we taught animals to be happy?
Are domesticated animals becoming more like humans?

These questions are being raised to investigate animal welfare further. Despite this, the meat industry undeniably generates large amounts of waste every year. The study of happiness in animals that create higher quality of meat are found to be exploitative and harmful. There is a societal denial of linking the availability of cheap and abundant meat with exploitation in animal agriculture (Bruckner et al, 36). A growing awareness of these issues have surfaced and led to a small niche of “alternative” foods or artificial meats. These niche foods are catalysed by a growing concern for animal welfare within farms.

Such concerns provide affordances for people to express and learn connections and disconnections between humanity and animals. This brings attention to the possibilities of becoming more compassionate humans when interacting with animals in the environment and consumption.

Additional readings for this topic:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/nov/13/if-only-they-could-talk-
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2007/oct/19/happymeat

References:
Bruckner, Heide K, et al. “Naturecultures and the Affective (dis)entanglements of Happy Meat.” Agriculture and Human Values, vol. 36, no. 1, Springer Netherlands, 2019, pp. 35–47, doi:10.1007/s10460-018-9884-2.

This page has paths:

Contents of this path:
2. Parramatta River Nature surrounds us wherever we are. In this image taken at a hike I did at Parramatta River, I was fascinated by how a place like this could exist in a populated city. The rocks, dirt, trees, and few animals live freely in this area giving a unique sense of liveliness no where seen in the bustling city. No signs of human interruption are present in the image other than the one taking the image. I felt as if I was intruding and was not supposed to be there. Despite this, I took the image to capture the traditional naturalness of the river and the life that surrounded it that was so peaceful.