Reading Nathan Winograds important comments about developments of animal objectifying normalcy in academia and the kulturindustrie:
„In prior articles, I argued that Critical Race Theory — and its offshoots, Critical Gender Theory, Critical Social Theory, and Critical Animal Studies — threatens animal protection. In books and journal articles, professors of race, gender, and sexuality have argued that … “ > https://nathanwinograd.substack.com/p/crt-professors-have-yet-to-meet-an [access 26.06.2023]
I conclude so far that … :
These are precisely the reasons why sound differentiation and morally independent thinking make a difference.
Interestingly and tragically, following ethical canons and sticking to the status quo carries the danger that social developments turn into the opposite of what they seemed to make possible in the beginning.
This happens at the moment when – parallel to the explicit desire to break up entrenched and oppressive structures – obviously rather subliminal but recognizably problematic currents undermine the thinking and actions of any processes that are only just beginning to emerge, that elude or/and counteract the power system on the part of established power mechanisms.
And in this consequence it is identical whether such power mechanisms are enforced by those affected by oppression or by those exercising oppression. In theory, the „problematic currents“ will pose a continuing test in terms of conflict and destructiveness analysis; in practice, one is likely to encounter more and more pitfalls in the search for the unraveling of oppression.
I thank Nathan Winograd for his important highlighting of basically persistent problems within differring and conflicting approaches to ethics/rights/lib, etc. … . Seeing such argumentations as quoted in the articles cited, reveals an array of parallels between groups which otherwise stand in conflict to each other … .