Abstract
Social movements often appeal to the politics of sight, meaning that if people knew about a given injustice, political transformation would follow. Jasmine English and Bernardo Zacka articulate two central premises of the politics of sight: “(1) exposing morally repugnant practices will make us see them, (2) seeing such practices will stop us from acquiescing to them.” Considering the case of slaughterhouse workers, Timothy Pachirat and English and Zacka challenge the previous premises. This article complements their contributions by theorizing what I call Western conceptuality/language and the role this plays in forming our subjectivities not to recognize violence on the one hand, and to be sovereign masters over animals on the other. I conclude by discussing the political implications of these arguments for the politics of sight, including the role of concealment and exposure, and the conditions needed for humans to see animals in their full ethical weight.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference67 articles.
1. For Multispecies Autoethnography;Gillespie;Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space,2022
2. Farmed Animal Sanctuaries: The Heart of the Movement? A Socio-Political Perspective;Donaldson;Politics and Animals,2015