On (Re-)Reading “A Modest Proposal”

I thought I’d update this oft-neglected blog with some musings on my recent (re-)reading of Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” for my Restoration literature class. I first read it in high school, years before I went vegan. For those who don’t know, the proposal is that to solve the Irish hunger crisis, the infants of lower-class families should be sold at a year old to upper-class families as food. Poor people would have money and there would be less hungry children to feed – problem solved. (This actually isn’t Swift’s most shocking work. That title has to go to his poem “The Lady’s Dressing Room”, which one should not read on a full stomach.) The essay was intended to draw attention to the seriousness of the situation in Ireland with the stoic attitude of the proposer towards his extremely absurd solution.

But why is it absurd? Why are we so horrified at the prospect of selling human babies for food, when killing babies is one of the backbones of the animal agriculture industry? Male chicks ground into cattle feed less than a week after they’re born, veal calves killed for a supposed “delicacy”, broiler chickens manipulated to grow at obscenely fast rates so they can be killed at seven weeks old…What are we doing if not exactly what Jonathan Swift is ironically proposing? We kill the babies of a marginalized and powerless group in order to feed the dominant group. My favourite line is near the end of the essay: “I can think of no one Objection that will possibly be raised against this Proposal.” Well, why should we object? We already do it. In fact, Swift intentionally likens his proposal to the practices already used to raise animals for food: babies are overfed so that they’ll be plump when it comes time for slaughter; he refers to their bodies by words like “carcass” and “flesh”; and in his scenario more males will be killed than females to ensure good “breeding”. Swift’s proposal isn’t just absurd in itself. It draws attention to the absurdity of animal agriculture.

Swift didn’t make the connection, but we, fortunately, can.

Past Readings

The following is a list of past readings that was up on the old site. Feel free to browse, but we should be having new readings coming up soon. If anyone has any questions about anything specific, please post them in the comments section and we will try and answer them shortly.

READINGS:

Not all of the following readings are ideologically supported by VARI, but rather, they provide interesting philosophical insights. So, that said, if you are looking for readings which are, in VARIs view, very important and reflect our philosophical underpinnings, read the books asterisked at the bottom of this page.

2006

WEEK 1: October 19^th, 2006
INTRODUCTION TO NONHUMAN ANIMAL ETHICS
Singer, Peter. All Animals Are Equal.

WEEK 2: October 26^th, 2006
ANIMAL LIBERATION OR ANIMAL RIGHTS?
Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights.

WEEK 3: November 2^nd, 2006
ANIMAL RIGHTS FRANCIONE STYLE
Francione, Gary. A Brief Intro To AR: Your Child or the Dog?

WEEK 4: November 9^th, 2006
AN INTRODUCTION TO ANIMAL WELFARE VS. ANIMAL RIGHTS
Singer, Peter. The Longest Journey Begins with a Single Step: Promoting Animal Rights by Promoting Reform.

Francione, Gary. Abolition of Animal Exploitation: The Journey Will Not Begin While We Are Walking Backwards.

WEEK 5: November 16^th, 2006
ANIMALS AS PROPERTY
Francione, Gary. Personhood, Property and Legal Competence, Section 1: Legal Rights for Great Apes and Section 2: Animals as Property

ALSO, IF YOU’RE INTERESTED

Criminal Code of Canada, Part XI: Wilful and Forbidden Acts in Respect of Certain Property, Sections 444, 445, 446 and 447 Cattle and Other Animals and Cruelty to Animals

WEEK 6: November 23^rd, 2006
LAST MEETING OF 2006, NO READINGS.

2007

WEEK 1: January 17^th, 2007
FIRST MEETING OF 2007, NO READINGS