The Animal Liberation Movement
About The Animal Liberation Movement
Peter Singer is a world-renowned moral philosopher, most famous for kickstarting the modern animal rights movement with his 1975 book Animal Liberation. In this follow-up essay/lecture, The Animal Liberation Movement, Singer lays out the moral and philosophical foundations of the animal rights cause in clear, compelling terms. Think of it as a rallying cry against what he calls “speciesism”—the unjustified favoring of human interests over those of animals, just because they’re not human.
Singer’s central argument is straightforward: if we believe that suffering is morally bad—and that all beings who can suffer deserve moral consideration—then we need to radically rethink how we treat non-human animals. He challenges the widespread practices of factory farming, animal experimentation, and species-based discrimination, not by appealing to emotion, but by using the principles of utilitarian ethics (which he helped make famous).
One key idea Singer emphasizes is the capacity to suffer as the baseline for moral concern. If a being can suffer, its interests matter—regardless of whether it walks on two legs, four legs, or has feathers or fur. This logic explodes the assumption that “being human” is the gold standard of moral value.
Throughout the piece, Singer also addresses common objections, like “Aren’t humans more intelligent?” or “Don’t animals eat each other in the wild?” His responses urge readers to hold themselves to higher ethical standards and to see animal liberation as an extension of other progressive social movements like feminism or civil rights.
Ultimately, Singer calls not just for kindness but for justice. His work continues to inspire activists, scholars, and everyday people who want a more ethical and sustainable relationship with the animals with whom we share the planet.
Before You Read
What’s your relationship to animals? Maybe you have a pet you adore, or maybe you’ve never thought twice about eating a hamburger. Either way, Singer wants to shake you up—not by being sentimental, but by being logical. He’s asking us to examine how we justify treating animals in ways we’d never accept if the victims were human. His argument doesn’t rely on cuteness or feelings, but on moral consistency: if suffering matters, then it matters for everyone who can suffer. Keep in mind that this piece was written when vegetarianism and animal rights were still on the fringe. Today, many of Singer’s ideas are mainstream—but they’re still controversial and ethically demanding.
Guiding Questions
- What is “speciesism,” and how does Singer compare it to other forms of discrimination?
- Why does Singer argue that the capacity to suffer is morally significant?
- How does Singer apply utilitarian ethics to our treatment of animals?
- What are some of the practical changes Singer calls for, and how might they challenge your daily habits?
Where to find this reading
This contemporary text is not in the public domain or shared with a creative commons license. Your college or university may have access to this reading through these different sources
- Link to journal where it was originally published
- Worldview link
