Two Forms of Abolitionism and the Political Rights of Animals: A Case Study

摘要

Political theorists advocating the abolition of instrumental uses of groups of animals are divided with respect to how they evaluate welfare reforms. Radical abolitionists maintain that welfare reforms are only dubiously described as moral improvements while pragmatic abolitionists maintain that welfare reforms are moral improvements, even if the conditions they permit are unjust. This article examines Wy chaffs interest model against the case of a Cincinnati coalition's efforts to reform the local food chain. This article argues that the coalition's program of choice is a welfare reform and that the interest model must evaluate the program as a moral improvement. This article con- dudes that if the interest model is the most appropriate political theory of animal rights, pragmatic abolitionism is philosophically more appropriate than radical abolitionism.