Kopnina Helen
Leiden University, the Netherlands.
Crit Anthropol. 2017 Sep;37(3):333-357. doi: 10.1177/0308275X17723973. Epub 2017 Aug 14.
Anthropologists have mediated between discriminated communities and outsiders, helping to influence public opinion through advocacy work. But can anthropological advocacy be applied to the case of violence against nonhumans? Ethical inquiries in anthropology also engage with the manifold ways through which human and nonhuman lives are entangled and emplaced within wider ecological relationships, converging in the so-called multispecies ethnography, but failing to account for exploitation. Reflecting on this omission, this article discusses the applicability of engaged anthropology to the range of issues from the use of nonhumans in medical experimentation and food production industry, to habitat destruction, and in broader contexts involving violence against nonhumans. Concluding that the existing forms of anthropological engagement are inadequate in dealing with the massive scale of nonhuman abuse, this article will suggest directions for a radical anthropology that engages with deep ecology, animal rights, animal welfare, and ecological justice.
人类学家在受歧视群体与外部人士之间进行斡旋，通过宣传工作帮助影响公众舆论。但是，人类学宣传能否应用于针对非人类的暴力情况呢？人类学中的伦理探究也涉及人类与非人类生命在更广泛的生态关系中相互纠缠和所处位置的多种方式，这在所谓的多物种民族志中有所汇聚，但却没有考虑到剥削问题。本文反思了这一疏漏，探讨了参与式人类学在一系列问题上的适用性，这些问题包括在医学实验和食品生产行业中对非人类的利用、栖息地破坏，以及在涉及针对非人类暴力的更广泛背景下的问题。本文得出结论，即现有的人类学参与形式在应对大规模非人类虐待方面并不充分，并将为与深度生态学、动物权利、动物福利和生态正义相关的激进人类学提出方向。
