Animals Matter

On not being silent about moral issues

My topic is animal welfare, and one reason we do so much less to protect nonhuman animals than we should.

May I start by telling you a personal story?

In 2009, President Barack Obama nominated me to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The Administrator of OIRA, as it is called, helps to oversee the issuance of regulations by the U.S, government.

To get the job, I had to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The confirmation process turned out to be surreal, unimaginable, hilarious at times, and also at times a personal nightmare (complete with a credible death threat, which arrived one day at my unlisted apartment).

A key reason was that I was said to be an “animal rights zealot” with a “secret aim to push a radical animal-rights agenda in the White House.” I was described as “a rabid supporter of animal rights,” who would issue regulations forbidding meat-eating and banning fishing and hunting.

At least I made it onto the ESPN website, a lifelong dream, though not for athletic achievement: https://www.espn.com/outdoors/hunting/news/story?id=4451898

Here’s something I didn’t particularly love: Former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate (and now U.S. Ambassador to Israel) Mike Huckabee threatened me, on national television, about the “reaction” I would not “enjoy” if I ever visited south Arkansas on the opening day of deer season. https://www.mediamatters.org/sean-hannity/huckabee-jokes-about-reaction-sunstein-would-enjoy-if-he-proposed-hunting-ban-s-ark

Here’s something that I found unimaginably surprising: The talk show host Glenn Beck repeatedly described me as “the most dangerous man in America” – and also as the “most evil.”

After many months, and meetings with Senators and private groups concerned about my views about animals, I did get confirmed. The vote was pretty close: 57-40. (https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/dems/cass-sunstein-confirmed-by-full-senate/) Rahm Emanuel exclaimed to me in the moments after the vote: “A landslide!”

From 2009 until about 2017, I didn’t say a whole lot about animals and animal welfare. I am not proud of that.

Of course I was in the government for a chunk of that time, which meant that I didn’t say a whole lot about anything. But when I left, I was quite quiet, for a long time, about nonhuman animals.

One reason, I confess, was that I didn’t love the death threats; it wasn’t the most fun to be subject to so much anger and rage. Despite the silence, I believed, and believe, that the unjustified and unjustifiable suffering of nonhuman animals is among the most pressing issues of our time.

(As I write, Finley and Snowy, Labrador Retrievers, are sleeping on two couches next to me. They are my friends. They can do a lot of things I can’t do. They make me smile; they keep me company; they warm my heart.)

Here is the point: Many human beings think that on moral grounds, it is not possible to justify current treatment of nonhuman animals. They want much less in the way of suffering and much less in the way of cruelty.

But they shut up, because they think that some other people, or many other people, will laugh at them, think less of them, see them as zealots, ostracize them, or just think of them as part of some group of fools, sentimentalists, or radicals.

This, then, is a situation in which widespread moral convictions are far less visible than they might be. The reason is that in many places, something like a taboo is in place. People who believe in animal welfare, or really care about it, are in some kind of closet.

That is a problem, but it is also a terrific opportunity.

When people believe that something is not right, or is wrong, but silence themselves, all they need is a green light or a permission slip. When they start to get it, things can change, possibly in a hurry. We see cascade effects, in which small trickles become floods.

You can think of your favorite examples. The civil rights movement of the 1960s is an illustration; so is the feminist movement; so is the attack on affirmative action and DEI; so is the rise of gun rights; so is the pro-life movement.

With respect to animals, coming out of the closet can make a difference. Animal welfare cascades are happening every day. They are reducing animal suffering in ways large and small.

Jeremy Bentham wrote this:

The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. . . . A full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day, or a week, or even month, old. But suppose the case were otherwise, what would it avail? the question is not, Can they reason? Nor, Can they talk? But, Can they suffer?

That’s a good song. More of us should be singing it.