What do you think?
Rate this book
The Politics of Total Liberation: Revolution for the 21st Century
This book argues that there is an ongoing planetary crisis, in both the social and natural worlds, that is of urgent importance. This demands a new politics, a politics of total liberation, one that grasps the need to unite the disparate movements for human, animal, and earth liberation. In the book, Best outlines a way forward despite challenges.
202 pages, Hardcover
First published November 6, 2014
8 people are currently reading
206 people want to read
About the author
Steven Best
20 books43 followersSteven Best is an American animal rights advocate, author, and associate professor of philosophy at the University of Texas at El Paso. A writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education described him in 2005 as "one of the leading scholarly voices on animal rights."
Best is co-founder of the Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS), formerly known as the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs (CALA). His academic interests are continental philosophy, postmodernism, and environmental philosophy. He is known for his post-structuralist notions of revolution, based equally in animal rights and sexual liberation. He is the editor, with Anthony J. Nocella, of Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? Reflections on the Liberation of Animals (2004), which has a foreword by Ward Churchill, and the companion volume on revolutionary environmentalism, Igniting a Revolution: Voices in Defense of the Earth (2006).
In December 2004, Best co-founded the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, which acts as a media office for a number of animal rights groups, including the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), though he has said that he is not himself an ALF activist. He came to public attention in 2005, when the British Home Office told him it intended to use counter-terrorist measures adopted in light of the July 2005 London bombings to prevent him from addressing an animal rights rally in the UK. Best responded by alleging that Britain was becoming a police state.
Excerpted from Wikipedia.
Best is co-founder of the Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS), formerly known as the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs (CALA). His academic interests are continental philosophy, postmodernism, and environmental philosophy. He is known for his post-structuralist notions of revolution, based equally in animal rights and sexual liberation. He is the editor, with Anthony J. Nocella, of Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? Reflections on the Liberation of Animals (2004), which has a foreword by Ward Churchill, and the companion volume on revolutionary environmentalism, Igniting a Revolution: Voices in Defense of the Earth (2006).
In December 2004, Best co-founded the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, which acts as a media office for a number of animal rights groups, including the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), though he has said that he is not himself an ALF activist. He came to public attention in 2005, when the British Home Office told him it intended to use counter-terrorist measures adopted in light of the July 2005 London bombings to prevent him from addressing an animal rights rally in the UK. Best responded by alleging that Britain was becoming a police state.
Excerpted from Wikipedia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 16, 2024
The book is primarily concerned with the relationship of humans to non-human animals. This is characterized by species superiority (speciecism), which, according to Best, once began with hunting. Best considers speciecism to be the oldest and most ignored form of social oppression. And not only among the conformist part of humanity (which tends to ostracize similar problems), but also in the diverse left-wing milieu that tends to espouse progressive ideas. But what is progress?
Best, coming out of the postmodern and posthumanist branches of philosophy, sees progress as a process full of contradictions. Human history has been shaped by a hierarchical but also egalitarian (complementary) culture that has been increasingly marginalized since the transition to sedimentary societies. However, even this culture is often oblivious to the non-human world. Leftist anthropocentrism and speciecism are still common attitudes.
The left tends to relegate veganism, but also other practices (attitudes towards domestication and the like) to the realm of morality and consumption. It sees them as shifting responsibility onto the shoulders of individuals, which does not harm capitalist structures in any way, quite the opposite. As if the human oppression of non-human world is not a transhistorical problem that will not simply disappear with the transition to a non-capitalist socio-economic order. Which, by the way, also applies to gender relations.
Today we have a lot of scientific knowledge about the behaviour, sentience or thinking of non-human animals. This knowledge has erased people's idea of a sharp boundary between human and non-human animals, which were supposed to be inferior to humans because of their "inferior" cognitive abilities. We know about the sixth species extinction and disrupted biodiversity. Yet speciecism and anthropocentrism are the dominant practices in the relationship between humans and non-human animals. And it is incomprehensible that this is happening even in the non-authoritarian leftist movement. As can be seen, even "egalitarianism" can exhibit a certain superiority and set limits to inclusion.
Best, as a leftist, recognizes the necessity of changing a capitalist and hierarchical society that is based on the exploitation of human and non-human animals and all of nature. He therefore directs his criticism also to the ranks of the animal protection or rights movements, which are known for their emphasis on education and their naive belief in a just state.
How, then, to bring about change? Best seeks to combine both moral and systemic critique. He proposes that the human, non-human animal, and Earth liberation movements connect and support each other in their various struggles. He calls this interconnection a politics for the "total liberation" of all sentient creatures and ecosystems. "Total liberation" does not give a concrete idea of what a future society should look like, because it is a process full of discussions that will take place in different places. And in different places, ideas about society will take different forms.
Best cites the coming together of suffragettes and the abolitionist movement, or radical environmental movements and workers' struggles, as historical examples of movements working together. He also calls for support for the animal liberation movement and its struggles in the form of direct action. It is from this movement that many people tend to support various struggles for human or Earth liberation, linking efforts for moral change with systemic critique. In this way, it provides some idea of what a movement for "total liberation" might look like.
From the perspective of class struggle, we are familiar with the argument that struggles against various oppressions divide us in terms of class position and so weaken the struggles of workers, who are the only ones capable of changing exploitative relations of production. But are we to ignore other forms of oppression because of this? And are there collective workers' struggles today that challenge capitalism as such? Hardly. In such a vacuum, are we to wait until something similar happens? Or do we try to work with those who are doing "at least something" for change? Or will we eventually give up altogether? These are questions that each and every one of us should answer. But every second of hesitation and doing nothing brings a lot of suffering and destruction. But how many people care where current social practice will take us?
As Best mentions, if we don't change anything, we are playing with the collapse of civilization or the extinction of humans – which would be nothing extraordinary from the perspective of the extinction of the species. Moreover, from the perspective of non-human animals and ecosystems, the extinction of Homo sapiens sapiens (as we currently know it) would be the best possible event – and the sooner the better.
-------------------------
Kniha sa primárne zaoberá vzťahom ľudí k mimoľudským zvieratám. Ten charakterizuje druhová nadradenosť (speciecizmus), ktorá podľa Besta začala kedysi lovom. Best považuje speciecizmus za najstaršiu a najviac ignorovanú formu spoločenského útlaku. A to nielen u konformnej časti ľudstva (ktorá zvykne podobné problémy vytesňovať), ale aj v rôznorodom ľavicovom prostredí, ktoré sa zvykne hlásiť k pokrokovým myšlienkam. Čo je však pokrok?
Best, vychádzajúci z postmodernej a posthumanistickej filozofickej vetvy, považuje pokrok za proces plný rozporov. Ľudskú históriu formovala hierarchická, ale aj rovnostárska (komplementárna) kultúra, ktorá je od prechodu k usadeným spoločnostiam stále viac vytláčaná na okraj. Aj táto kultúra však často zabúda na mimoľudský svet. Ľavicový antropocentrizmus a speciecizmus sú stále bežným postojom.
Ľavica zvykne odsúvať vegánstvo, ale aj iné praktiky (postoj k domestikácii, vivisekcii a podobne) do oblasti morálky a spotreby. Chápe ich ako presun zodpovednosti na plecia jednotlivkýň a jednotlivcov, čo nijak neublíži kapitalistickým štruktúram, skôr naopak. Ako keby útlak ľudí voči mimoľudskému svetu nebol transhistorickým problémom, ktorý nezmizne len tak s prechodom na iné ako kapitalistické spoločensko-ekonomické zriadenie.
Čo mimochodom platí aj pre rodové vzťahy.
Dnes disponujeme mnohými vedeckými poznatkami o správaní, cítení či myslení mimoľudských zvierat. Toto poznanie zmazalo predstavu ľudí o ostrej hranici medzi ľudskými a mimoľudskými zvieratami, ktoré mali byť ľuďom podradené kvôli ich „nižším“ kognitívnym schopnostiam. Vieme o šiestom hynutí druhov a narušenej biodiverzite. Napriek tomu sú speciecizmus a antropocentrizmus dominantnou praxou vo vzťahu ľudí k mimoľudským zvieratám. A je nepochopiteľné, že sa tak deje aj v neautoritárskom ľavicovom hnutí. Ako vidno, aj rovnostárstvo môže vykazovať určitú nadradenosť a stavať hranice inklúzii.
Best, ako ľavičiar, si uvedomuje nutnosť zmeny kapitalistickej a hierarchickej spoločnosti, ktorá je založená na vykorisťovaní ľudských i mimoľudských zvierat a celej prírody. Preto smeruje kritiku aj do radov hnutí za ochranu či práv zvierat, ktoré sú známe svojim dôrazom na vzdelávanie a naivnou vierou v spravodlivý štát.
Ako teda dosiahnuť zmenu? Best sa snaží o spojenie morálky aj systémovej kritiky. Navrhuje, aby sa hnutia za oslobodenie ľudí, mimoľudských zvierat i Zeme prepojili a pri rôznych bojoch vzájomne podporovali. Toto prepojenie nazýva politikou za „úplné oslobodenie“ (total liberation) všetkých cítiacich tvorov a ekosystémov. „Úplné oslobodenie“ neposkytuje konkrétnu predstavu o tom, ako by mala vypadať budúca spoločnosť, pretože ide o proces plný diskusií, ktorý sa bude odohrávať na rôznych miestach. A na rôznych miestach budú predstavy o spoločnosti nadobúdať iné podoby.
Ako historické príklady spolupráce hnutí Best uvádza spojenie sufražetiek a abolicionistického hnutia či radikálnych ekologických hnutí a bojov pracujúcich. Vyzýva tiež k podpore hnutia za oslobodenie zvierat a jeho boja v podobe priamych akcií. Práve z tohto hnutia zvykne mnoho ľudí podporovať rôzne boje za oslobodenie ľudí či Zeme, čím prepája snahy o morálne zmeny so systémovou kritikou. Takto poskytuje určitú predstavu o tom, ako by hnutie za „úplne oslobodenie“ mohlo vyzerať.
Z perspektívy triedneho boja poznáme argument, že boje proti rôznym útlakom nás z hľadiska triedneho postavenia rozdeľujú a tak oslabujú boje pracujúcich, ktorí ako jediní dokážu zmeniť vykorisťovateľské výrobné vzťahy. Máme však kvôli tomu ignorovať ostatné formy útlakov? A existujú dnes kolektívne boje pracujúcich, ktoré spochybňujú kapitalizmus ako taký? Len ťažko. Máme v takomto vákuu čakať, dokým sa niečo podobné udeje? Alebo sa budeme snažiť spolupracovať s tými, čo robia pre zmenu „aspoň niečo“? Či to napokon celé vzdáme? Tieto otázky by si mala zodpovedať každá a každý z nás. Každá sekunda váhania a ničnerobenia však prináša množstvo utrpenia a ničenia.
Koľkých ľudí však zaujíma kam nás súčasná spoločenská prax dovedie?
Ako spomína Best, ak nič nezmeníme, zahrávame sa s kolapsom civilizácie či vyhynutím ľudí –, čo by však nebolo nič výnimočné z perspektívy hynutia druhov. Navyše, z pohľadu mimoľudských zvierat a ekosystémov, by vyhynutie Homo sapiens sapiens (ako ho v súčasnosti poznáme) bolo najlepšou možnou udalosťou – a čím skôr, tým lepšie.
Best, coming out of the postmodern and posthumanist branches of philosophy, sees progress as a process full of contradictions. Human history has been shaped by a hierarchical but also egalitarian (complementary) culture that has been increasingly marginalized since the transition to sedimentary societies. However, even this culture is often oblivious to the non-human world. Leftist anthropocentrism and speciecism are still common attitudes.
The left tends to relegate veganism, but also other practices (attitudes towards domestication and the like) to the realm of morality and consumption. It sees them as shifting responsibility onto the shoulders of individuals, which does not harm capitalist structures in any way, quite the opposite. As if the human oppression of non-human world is not a transhistorical problem that will not simply disappear with the transition to a non-capitalist socio-economic order. Which, by the way, also applies to gender relations.
Today we have a lot of scientific knowledge about the behaviour, sentience or thinking of non-human animals. This knowledge has erased people's idea of a sharp boundary between human and non-human animals, which were supposed to be inferior to humans because of their "inferior" cognitive abilities. We know about the sixth species extinction and disrupted biodiversity. Yet speciecism and anthropocentrism are the dominant practices in the relationship between humans and non-human animals. And it is incomprehensible that this is happening even in the non-authoritarian leftist movement. As can be seen, even "egalitarianism" can exhibit a certain superiority and set limits to inclusion.
Best, as a leftist, recognizes the necessity of changing a capitalist and hierarchical society that is based on the exploitation of human and non-human animals and all of nature. He therefore directs his criticism also to the ranks of the animal protection or rights movements, which are known for their emphasis on education and their naive belief in a just state.
How, then, to bring about change? Best seeks to combine both moral and systemic critique. He proposes that the human, non-human animal, and Earth liberation movements connect and support each other in their various struggles. He calls this interconnection a politics for the "total liberation" of all sentient creatures and ecosystems. "Total liberation" does not give a concrete idea of what a future society should look like, because it is a process full of discussions that will take place in different places. And in different places, ideas about society will take different forms.
Best cites the coming together of suffragettes and the abolitionist movement, or radical environmental movements and workers' struggles, as historical examples of movements working together. He also calls for support for the animal liberation movement and its struggles in the form of direct action. It is from this movement that many people tend to support various struggles for human or Earth liberation, linking efforts for moral change with systemic critique. In this way, it provides some idea of what a movement for "total liberation" might look like.
From the perspective of class struggle, we are familiar with the argument that struggles against various oppressions divide us in terms of class position and so weaken the struggles of workers, who are the only ones capable of changing exploitative relations of production. But are we to ignore other forms of oppression because of this? And are there collective workers' struggles today that challenge capitalism as such? Hardly. In such a vacuum, are we to wait until something similar happens? Or do we try to work with those who are doing "at least something" for change? Or will we eventually give up altogether? These are questions that each and every one of us should answer. But every second of hesitation and doing nothing brings a lot of suffering and destruction. But how many people care where current social practice will take us?
As Best mentions, if we don't change anything, we are playing with the collapse of civilization or the extinction of humans – which would be nothing extraordinary from the perspective of the extinction of the species. Moreover, from the perspective of non-human animals and ecosystems, the extinction of Homo sapiens sapiens (as we currently know it) would be the best possible event – and the sooner the better.
-------------------------
Kniha sa primárne zaoberá vzťahom ľudí k mimoľudským zvieratám. Ten charakterizuje druhová nadradenosť (speciecizmus), ktorá podľa Besta začala kedysi lovom. Best považuje speciecizmus za najstaršiu a najviac ignorovanú formu spoločenského útlaku. A to nielen u konformnej časti ľudstva (ktorá zvykne podobné problémy vytesňovať), ale aj v rôznorodom ľavicovom prostredí, ktoré sa zvykne hlásiť k pokrokovým myšlienkam. Čo je však pokrok?
Best, vychádzajúci z postmodernej a posthumanistickej filozofickej vetvy, považuje pokrok za proces plný rozporov. Ľudskú históriu formovala hierarchická, ale aj rovnostárska (komplementárna) kultúra, ktorá je od prechodu k usadeným spoločnostiam stále viac vytláčaná na okraj. Aj táto kultúra však často zabúda na mimoľudský svet. Ľavicový antropocentrizmus a speciecizmus sú stále bežným postojom.
Ľavica zvykne odsúvať vegánstvo, ale aj iné praktiky (postoj k domestikácii, vivisekcii a podobne) do oblasti morálky a spotreby. Chápe ich ako presun zodpovednosti na plecia jednotlivkýň a jednotlivcov, čo nijak neublíži kapitalistickým štruktúram, skôr naopak. Ako keby útlak ľudí voči mimoľudskému svetu nebol transhistorickým problémom, ktorý nezmizne len tak s prechodom na iné ako kapitalistické spoločensko-ekonomické zriadenie.
Čo mimochodom platí aj pre rodové vzťahy.
Dnes disponujeme mnohými vedeckými poznatkami o správaní, cítení či myslení mimoľudských zvierat. Toto poznanie zmazalo predstavu ľudí o ostrej hranici medzi ľudskými a mimoľudskými zvieratami, ktoré mali byť ľuďom podradené kvôli ich „nižším“ kognitívnym schopnostiam. Vieme o šiestom hynutí druhov a narušenej biodiverzite. Napriek tomu sú speciecizmus a antropocentrizmus dominantnou praxou vo vzťahu ľudí k mimoľudským zvieratám. A je nepochopiteľné, že sa tak deje aj v neautoritárskom ľavicovom hnutí. Ako vidno, aj rovnostárstvo môže vykazovať určitú nadradenosť a stavať hranice inklúzii.
Best, ako ľavičiar, si uvedomuje nutnosť zmeny kapitalistickej a hierarchickej spoločnosti, ktorá je založená na vykorisťovaní ľudských i mimoľudských zvierat a celej prírody. Preto smeruje kritiku aj do radov hnutí za ochranu či práv zvierat, ktoré sú známe svojim dôrazom na vzdelávanie a naivnou vierou v spravodlivý štát.
Ako teda dosiahnuť zmenu? Best sa snaží o spojenie morálky aj systémovej kritiky. Navrhuje, aby sa hnutia za oslobodenie ľudí, mimoľudských zvierat i Zeme prepojili a pri rôznych bojoch vzájomne podporovali. Toto prepojenie nazýva politikou za „úplné oslobodenie“ (total liberation) všetkých cítiacich tvorov a ekosystémov. „Úplné oslobodenie“ neposkytuje konkrétnu predstavu o tom, ako by mala vypadať budúca spoločnosť, pretože ide o proces plný diskusií, ktorý sa bude odohrávať na rôznych miestach. A na rôznych miestach budú predstavy o spoločnosti nadobúdať iné podoby.
Ako historické príklady spolupráce hnutí Best uvádza spojenie sufražetiek a abolicionistického hnutia či radikálnych ekologických hnutí a bojov pracujúcich. Vyzýva tiež k podpore hnutia za oslobodenie zvierat a jeho boja v podobe priamych akcií. Práve z tohto hnutia zvykne mnoho ľudí podporovať rôzne boje za oslobodenie ľudí či Zeme, čím prepája snahy o morálne zmeny so systémovou kritikou. Takto poskytuje určitú predstavu o tom, ako by hnutie za „úplne oslobodenie“ mohlo vyzerať.
Z perspektívy triedneho boja poznáme argument, že boje proti rôznym útlakom nás z hľadiska triedneho postavenia rozdeľujú a tak oslabujú boje pracujúcich, ktorí ako jediní dokážu zmeniť vykorisťovateľské výrobné vzťahy. Máme však kvôli tomu ignorovať ostatné formy útlakov? A existujú dnes kolektívne boje pracujúcich, ktoré spochybňujú kapitalizmus ako taký? Len ťažko. Máme v takomto vákuu čakať, dokým sa niečo podobné udeje? Alebo sa budeme snažiť spolupracovať s tými, čo robia pre zmenu „aspoň niečo“? Či to napokon celé vzdáme? Tieto otázky by si mala zodpovedať každá a každý z nás. Každá sekunda váhania a ničnerobenia však prináša množstvo utrpenia a ničenia.
Koľkých ľudí však zaujíma kam nás súčasná spoločenská prax dovedie?
Ako spomína Best, ak nič nezmeníme, zahrávame sa s kolapsom civilizácie či vyhynutím ľudí –, čo by však nebolo nič výnimočné z perspektívy hynutia druhov. Navyše, z pohľadu mimoľudských zvierat a ekosystémov, by vyhynutie Homo sapiens sapiens (ako ho v súčasnosti poznáme) bolo najlepšou možnou udalosťou – a čím skôr, tým lepšie.
Read
July 24, 2020Tutto vero e condivisibile e veemente al punto giusto MA
essendo per lo più un pamphlet poteva durare - e ripetersi - un pochino di meno.
essendo per lo più un pamphlet poteva durare - e ripetersi - un pochino di meno.
October 7, 2023
Importante punto di partenza (anche se di non facile lettura, occorre qualche rudimento di filosofia) per chiunque voglia approfondire il tema dell'antispecismo e dell'intersezionalità delle lotte. Per essere tutti liberi dobbiamo combattere il grande nemico comune, il capitalismo, padre di tutti i mali.
December 25, 2014
A must read for all people interested in the state of animal movement.
February 16, 2025
incendiary appeals without a robust enough theoretical apparatus to back them up
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews