Peter Niesen : "Which all subjected-principle for animals ?"

The “political turn” in human-animal-studies has been an inspiration to many authors working in the field, but, philosophically and politically speaking, a halfway house. Its main proponents have suggested animals should be awarded membership rights, but have at the same time defended a moral and non-relational understanding of basic animal rights (Donaldson/Kymlicka 2011, Cochrane 2018, Ladwig 2020). A more thorough-going relational approach for at least those animals that are inextricably connected to interspecies habitations, practices and ways of life is called for to make the political turn both theoretically more consistent and politically more attractive. I argue that such a freestanding approach is to recognize civil, social and political rights entailed by or derived from animals‘ inclusion in social and political practices. For such purposes, the political theory of citizenship has offered a criterion of inclusion for resident humans: the “all subjected”-principle. Among the several variants proposed, I discuss how a revised version of the principle needs to be framed in order to cover animal political membership. This is then argued not to generate full political equality for animals, but more modest claims to effective representation in law-making.