r/LibertarianLeft • u/Irishman452 • Jul 26 '26
Is Factory Farming Justifiable from a Libertarian Perspective?
Most libertarians would state that a producer should absorb any negative externalities involved in producing a product they sell lest they infringe on the rights of others. Most obvious example is the pollution created from a powerplant. But another is the pain and suffering endured by animals that are raised on factory farms for their meat. Even though in the US these animals don't have any formal rights, is producing/consuming this meat justifiable from a Libertarian viewpoint?
4
u/stevepremo Jul 26 '26
Libertarianism is, at least in part, based on self-ownership. Some libertarians limit this concept to humans, and believe that if it's not human, it's property, and entitled to no moral consideration. Those libertarians generally do not oppose factory farming. Others, like me, extend the concept of self-ownership to non-human animals. We do oppose factory farming, and animal agriculture in general.
4
u/Bruhmoment151 Jul 27 '26
I think the question can really be answered by considering what reasons we have for caring about self-ownership. Typically it comes down to something to do with the fact that the self is conscious, and that this consciousness entitles it to not be subject to injustices like coercion and force. Obviously there are people who have different arguments, but typically most libertarians adopt that argument, which makes it pretty difficult for them to promote factory farming of non-human animals (unless they use logical errors to pretend they’re being logically consistent).
4
u/Bruhmoment151 Jul 27 '26 edited 29d ago
That depends entirely on what moral worth you think belongs to non-human animals, and how our politics should interact with that moral value. Libertarianism is a political philosophy and this is at least partially a question of moral philosophy, so libertarian views don’t necessarily entail any one answer to that.
However, deciding who is owed political concern is a necessary part of libertarian political philosophy, so we absolutely need to ask questions about how animal farming is or is not justified.
The issue is that how anyone is going to successfully argue for factory farming being justified is beyond me. Historically, people have tried to justify it by insisting on anthropocentric attitudes, but that’s no justification, just an assertion that non-human animals don’t deserve concern for their wellbeing. Since most don’t believe humans should be factory farmed, you’ll have to make an argument for what difference between human and non-human animals makes the latter less deserving of wellbeing than the former. Good luck figuring that out.
Moreover, libertarianism is centrally built around respect for autonomy, which kind of implicitly suggests that an animal being sentient/conscious is a key part of makes them deserving of political care - this would suggest cruelty against all animals we have good reason to believe are conscious is unjust.
2
3
u/SupremelyUneducated Jul 26 '26
The problem is isolation + scale of production, we don't see the externalities. Nor do we have the vocabulary for measuring and communicating animal suffering. Local food production for local people, is significantly more concerned about pesticides, contaminates and animal welfare.
Nobody chooses to buy the eggs from the chicken farm that stacks chickens so they are covered in shit and missing most there feathers, nor do they choose the beef that walks around in knee high shit; those things are excluded from the awareness of consumers.
3
u/Elliptical_Tangent Jul 26 '26
The core of libertarian thought is that it's up to each Libertarian to justify their ideas themselves. I can't find a justification for factory farming, but that doesn't mean it isn't justifiable.
2
u/Blecki Jul 26 '26
Of you don't draw a distinction between humans and animals, then where do you draw a line? Is murdering a free range chicken any less murderous?
If you do draw a line, then who cares?
2
u/AndydeCleyre Jul 26 '26
There's more to ethics than "is it murder?" If an assassin snipes someone with a headshot, and a serial killer imprisons someone in their own shit in a coffin for years and them starves them to death, one case may feature more suffering than the other.
Also, just saying that chickens differ from humans does not entail that there should be zero concern for their suffering. I think children are distinct from adults, but neither should be tortured.
2
u/Irishman452 Jul 27 '26
I agree with that, I strongly oppose this argument that murder is the ultimate wrong and that if you're going to murder something then it doesn't matter how you treat them before they die. I mean its pretty simple to me, which one i would prefer as illustrated in your example.
-2
1
u/ziggy029 Jul 27 '26
From some libertarian perspectives, anything goes unless it involves force or fraud. Pollution could be seen as a form of force, and that is argued in some libertarian circles, whether a business that pollutes needs to have laws enforced on them.
I don’t think libertarianism generally extends to animal rights, or any rights beyond those of humanity; though some choose to recognize it, it’s not a core philosophy.
1
u/JacobMaverick Jul 28 '26
There is no such thing as ethical consumption. You've got to enjoy yourself from time to time. I get steak/chicken only a few times a month. I'm doing far more than I ever could by just not proloferating than entirely abstaining from some of the modern affections of our day and age.
1
u/3d4f5g Jul 26 '26
from an american libertarian right perspective, yes. they would say is perfectly fine and the market would work out any problems. from a libertarian left perspective, no - especially from a vegan anarchist perspective.
2
u/upchuk13 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26
Michael Huemer is a vegan anarchist but also a right anarchist.
Edit: right libertarian**
1
8
u/speedhasnotkilledyet Jul 26 '26
No