Humanism is for the weak

Political scientist Dmitry Mikhailichenko discusses the causes and consequences of the inhumane solution to the issue of stray dogs:

“The resonant and tragic case of the death of a child who was mauled by a pack of stray dogs in Orenburg shows the vector of the authorities’ response to such problems.

Unfortunately, there are many such cases in different parts of the country. <…> The mayor of Orenburg, at a spontaneous gathering, directly proposed to catch such dogs and, if no one took them, to kill them.

In Moscow, the situation is fundamentally different: there are much fewer stray dogs, and the authorities can organize kennels and interact with animal activists, rather than brush them aside.

Well, on the regional periphery a simple and cheap solution is proposed - to catch and kill dogs. <…>

This is the price for the lack of effective, non-political/civil control over the activities of ordinary municipal officials. The costs of caring for stray dogs across the country have been quite significant in recent years. <…> But which zoo activist can control how these funds are spent? <…>

Considering the level of corruption, there are more or less enough funds for the normal maintenance of animals in captivity only in money-filled Moscow. And even then with significant reservations. In other locations, a harsh simplification is likely in the name of safety.

As the economic situation worsens in an atomized society with limited empathy potential, animal welfare issues will concern fewer and fewer people: mainly educated citizens with above-average incomes and young people. For the vast majority, there will be a mode of survival and demagogically framed and tough decisions, the effectiveness of which is almost always only apparent and temporary.

The potential for an ethic of nonviolence under these conditions is further reduced. Very soon, at the level of mass perceptions, society may decide that the ethics of non-violence or humanism is the position of weaklings and idiots.”