#929 Violence Against Animals

Brain Food for Pioneering Spirits: Which forms of violence against animals are known to us, can they be justified, and what can we do about it? That’s the question we explore in Room #929 of the Deep Talk Club, under our overarching theme of “Power & Violence.” Listen in on the examples that came up and the perspectives that emerged in dialogue…

Note: This session was recorded live in German as part of the Deep Talk Club, so the video above is German-language audio only. What follows is an English translation of the conversation, lightly edited for readability — the back-and-forth between the moderator and participants is preserved, but the original timestamps and speaker names have been left out.

A very warm good morning to you all. Today we’re continuing with the topic of violence against animals, under the overarching theme of power and violence. And the question we want to look at this morning is: which forms of violence against animals are actually known to us? Can it be justified in some way? Or rather, what can we do about it, so that we open up both poles here, so to speak? And yes, I’m really curious which direction the room takes again today. So you’re all very warmly invited to join in, to step into the exchange, to simply mention the first aspects that come to mind on this topic, so we can work our way along together, so to speak, and see what comes of it, and what other aspects come to mind for us in the exchange. And yes, every morning the room gets recorded the whole time. That means anyone who joins automatically agrees that this will be published afterward too. And we have three small room rules: a profile photo where you’re recognizable, then first and last name, and at least one sentence in your bio. If for whatever reason you don’t want to agree to that, would rather stay anonymous, or can’t speak right now because it’s too loud in the background or something like that, you of course also have the option to join in via the chat today too, so we can look at picking up one thing or another there as well. So, with that, I’ll mute myself for now and just see who’d like to open this morning’s reflection round with me.

A very warm good morning. A very warm good morning.

Yes, what do you have to say on the topic? Violence against animals, which forms of violence against animals are known to us? Can it be justified? Or rather, what can we do about it, that’s today’s question. I actually just joined the room, and I was surprised there was absolute silence here. And I thought, maybe I can help you, because I thought something had happened. I don’t really have a proper opinion on this topic, honestly. I’ve had up to ten animals at home myself. Nine of them were more or less spread around in or around the house. The tenth animal lived elsewhere — that was a horse, it didn’t fit in the house anymore. My husband was so incredibly fond of animals, he was better with animals than with people. And gradually, I was able to scale that back down again. That means some animals, cats, left the house, or died of old age. I wasn’t allowed to have animals as a child, for whatever reason. And that reversed itself for me in adulthood. I had an absolute desire to have at least one animal at home. That was a little cat. And afterward the cat had kittens at some point. And then we also had a dog. And someone told us, well, one dog won’t do, you need two dogs. So then we had two dogs. On the other hand, now that I’m alone, with the two dogs and two more cats, who are outside a lot though, I’m very tied down, and a lot of things other people can just do without a second thought, like a weekend trip or something, I can’t do that. But on the other hand, I know that the animals, in a lot of situations — well, now I have to be careful, some people will turn their noses up at this — have been like partners, or were partners, during a time when I was very, very alone, animal partners of course. And they’ve helped me get through certain things in certain situations. They’ve protected me, and they still do today. I have an Akita Inu, that’s the Hachiko dog, very focused on people, and he just has to look at me and knows exactly whether I’m sad or not. On the other hand, I make sure myself, on walks in the woods or similar, not to hurt animals, or let my dogs hurt them, or… that’s really important to me. On the other hand, I do also enjoy a piece of meat now and then. There are people who say even that is already a violation of animal welfare. Those are borderline, or somewhat borderline, things for me that I find really hard to reconcile. Yes, because humans are omnivores after all. Given that, I believe we have about 95 percent genetic similarity to pigs. And pigs eat everything too. So if we don’t do that, we run into difficulties, then we have to work with supplements or similar things to keep our bodily balance somewhat under control. That’s why it’s always such a difficult story for me. I’ve massively changed my diet, definitely. I eat much less. But a nice steak tartare roll, nobody’s going to pull me away from that. And that’s probably already a discussion for some, when it comes to violence against animals. So violence against animals, I find that terrible. We have a family here in the neighborhood — this is my own assessment too — who raised a young dog into what I always call a “fence runner.” Really terrible. The little dog was really cute, came over and wanted to play with my two dogs. And then he got locked in a cage in the yard for two or three days. I could still hear him whining from a distance, and I talked to him. I said, if you’re very good and don’t whine, you’ll be let out again soon. And then he came out, and from that day on he ran from one corner to the other along the fence and barked furiously at my dogs. To this day he comes jumping around the corner and startles me every single time. I could really scream sometimes from fear or fright, because it happens so suddenly. And I tell myself, this dog — well, violence was done to this dog, because the person wanted the dog to be that way. The danger behind it, or the danger, isn’t the dog, it’s the person behind it. Those are small things, maybe others can relate, and I was able to get the discussion going a little.

Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. There were already so many aspects in there. So basically, we can open the door a bit toward looking at what the function, so to speak, or what animals are actually used for, in quotation marks, in connection with humans. We’ve had examples now, keeping them as pets, for instance. Because you opened up this aspect, that animals can also provide comfort in certain times, so to speak, it made me think that animals also get used in therapy, for example. Then there was the protective aspect too — animals that might be kept for protection, to secure an apartment or a house, for example, all the way to the topic of breeding, essentially. You can look more closely at that too, what kinds of breeding there are. On one hand there’s maybe private breeding, because it just happens, on the other hand maybe breeding as a way to generate additional income, in the sense of also operating as a business here. But I think there are also a lot of, let’s say, listings, if you think in the direction of eBay or something like that, where there are actually quite a lot of breeders who don’t necessarily do it as their main profession, but do it on the side and offer animals for sale on these platforms too. And then I also found this aspect with meat consumption really interesting, that humans are omnivores. The first impulse that came up for me in that context is, well, we keep saying, and we’re relatively proud, in quotation marks, to say that there are certain aspects that set humans apart from other species or creatures, and we usually use that in a positive connotation to argue for what sets us apart, maybe even, in quotation marks, “elevates” us, for one person or another, depending on how you define the terms there. And at the same time, here’s this argument, humans are omnivores. And that gave me the impulse, well, there are also animals that eat feces, and yet we don’t eat, or don’t consume, feces as a rule. So to what extent are various arguments, simply because they’re culturally shaped, through how we grew up, how we were socialized, experienced as normal to some extent, which leads us to develop one opinion or another about it — but we could certainly use opportunities like this to question one thing or another too. And especially when it comes to things like factory farming, animal cruelty in meat production — there’s quite a bit of discussion about that too, which we might come across through the media or similar. And to look more closely at that too, and bring that into this discussion as well. And with that, I’d like to warmly welcome Sabine into the round first, and then we can gladly draw cross-connections too. A very warm good morning, dear Sabine.

Yes, good morning everyone in the room. On the topic of animals, it occurred to me too that we sometimes do violence to animals even when we don’t want to at all. An example came to mind. We also have two cats, and for me it was similar to Maria — as a child I had to bring a cat back that I’d simply brought home, because no animal was allowed in our house. Then a stray came to us, which was okay, because you didn’t really have to take care of it much. It was around during the normal day, but when we went on vacation, it just stayed with the neighbor and then came back. That was of course convenient, it wasn’t an obligation. By now we know it’s an obligation, it’s a responsibility, you have to take care of it. And one of ours sadly died during Covid, or rather, we had her put to sleep because she had a tumor. And then we got a second one again, because we simply didn’t want the one to be alone. So we went to the animal shelter, and they said, we don’t have any animals at all right now, we have almost no animals. The only one I could offer you would really be this one. We have her now too. Then I said, but the whole room is full of animals. They don’t want any of those. We recently got those from a hoarder’s house that got dissolved, and they don’t know which animal is related to which how. So we need some time first to get them ready for humans, and then at some point they’ll be given to a family again, but right now that’s impossible. And I think that’s the point too, that you’re not even aware, when you take on an animal like that, what kind of responsibility you’re taking on, and, in quotation marks, indirectly doing violence to them. What else comes to mind for me regarding violence are all the animal testing done for pharmaceuticals and so on. I mean, that’s always a question, is that okay or not okay? I’d say, if it can help humanity, then it might still be okay. But where is the whole… the connection just dropped out for a moment. Yes, but those were the two points I wanted to bring in. Right, the last thing we heard was, where’s the actual limit here? Yes, that was the comment about the area of makeup, cosmetics, leather clothing, or whatever, why do we need to research on animals for that? I’ve had that discussion often with my daughter too. She says she’s vegetarian to save the world, roughly speaking. On the other hand, she wears leather clothing. Then she tells me, she wants to have a bit of fun too. That’s something I sometimes have a problem with. Same for me, how far should research be allowed to go, and torment animals for it. Or, I mean, animals are sometimes bred specifically to be tormented. Of course there’s a limit somewhere. Yes, that was my comment.

Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. And above all, this brings us to this aspect of legitimization, so to speak. That means, on one hand it’s certainly an ethical question, to discuss this fundamentally in the first place. And on the other hand, it’s also, like in many other places, that one thing or another gets legitimized, or becomes legitimized, legally, for example, through societal development. So of course also against the background of ethical discussions that take place, but that’s separate, so to speak, from discussing legal aspects that already exist or don’t exist, versus discussing ethical, moral principles. The other thing is maybe to look, against this background, at this formal aspect too — that laws, which essentially form a framework here, can also constitute an official legitimization, or a ban, on something. So that’s also really interesting to look at from this angle too. Ria, go ahead.

I have to, and can, tell you about an example where we suffered a lot as a family. This was around, we moved into the house in ’97, around the turn of the millennium. As a young girl I said, if I ever had a house, I’d get a dog. And back in GDR times, it wouldn’t have been possible for me, as a teacher, to build a house at all. But at some point the Wall came down, and this possibility arose, and we built in 1997, and my husband was so obsessed, he said, we’re going to fulfill exactly this wish of yours now, let’s go look at a dog. And then we got ourselves a cute dog. This dog was listed in a GDR dog guide as a family dog that doesn’t bark, but has strength, and defends its family too — an American Staffordshire terrier. And as dog owners we were very inexperienced, and we’d found someone nearby who had these kinds of animals. And there was a puppy we liked so much, we would have loved to take him home right away. We picked him up a few weeks later, so a month after we’d moved into the house, we had a dog too. And I was the happiest child in the world in that moment. And my children were happy too, and my husband was happy. And then we raised this dog, with all the mistakes you can make as a young dog owner. And two years later, the dangerous-dogs legislation came in. And this breed was on the list. We thought we’d misheard. What’s the problem with this dog? Until we found out, and googled it too — oh, the bite strength, the bite force, and yes, but our dog was never conspicuous in any way. And even though we didn’t have much of a clue, he never made a fuss. He never showed stress, nothing. He’d run around with sticks. He’d hold a thick branch, run through the woods with it, and when the branch was too long because he wanted to go between two trees, he’d run so hard against both trees with the branch until either a tree fell over or the branch broke. Sometimes we’d even put the branch he was hanging onto over our shoulder, and the dog would pull until the branch snapped. So he definitely had strength, we knew that, but we joked around and played with it, we just found it funny. So, then it came up that we needed a red tag, and we needed this certification, and we had to do this with the dog and take the test still. We did all of that. And then we were also told, well, he just walks past the bakery, it smelled so good, he didn’t say “moo” or bark, because otherwise we wouldn’t have done it. Sure, he can smell something, but that’s not his thing. And then we got all the paperwork. And then there was a situation where the predecessor of this so-called “fence runner” barked at us with his head through the fence. And our dog’s protective instinct kicked in, and he nipped his ear, sort of like, “shut up, these are my people.” And in that moment we were incredibly shocked, because he’d never done that before. We didn’t really understand what was actually going on in that moment either, and went to the vet we’d gotten the dog from. And the vet said, this won’t hold up. In the last six months I’ve had to put down so, so many lovely dogs, because in the time they had to be kept the way they’re now required to be kept, they broke down. And that will happen to him too, and if this happens again, you’ll be fined up to 10,000 euros. We have to put him down. They don’t have a chance. If you give him to a shelter, he’ll become a really vicious dog, and he doesn’t deserve that. And then — I still get goosebumps — we had this dog put to sleep. Four years old. We both cried our eyes out, and then said, what do I do with him now, do I take him for a walk tomorrow? And the vet said, drive to Bornwasser. We just brought in dogs from a neglected apartment there, and there are some really cute puppies among them. Get one of those, and do something good. And that’s what we did. Three days later we had a new dog. A fox-wild-boar-dachshund mix. And these laws are made by people who don’t have a clue, or who don’t have a heart for animals. I keep noticing that people who are afraid of dogs, who were raised to be afraid, when given the chance to trust these dogs and recognize what’s really behind it, become the biggest dog lovers. But if that fear remains… it’s like with grandparents, either you love them or you hate them. But I feel sorry for people like that. Thank you.

Yes, thank you so much, and above all a completely different perspective too, one that might not always be so accessible to us. We might spontaneously think of a lot of news stories, in quotation marks, about dogs attacking children in strollers and so on. The media plays a huge role here too. And yes, for a lot of pet owners, that was quite a challenge too, when all these legal regulations came in. And above all, in quotation marks, it’s simply based on breed, without any further distinction — there are basically certain requirements, let’s call them that, to be met, and essentially every animal, in quotation marks, gets lumped together. Of course you can open up this discussion fundamentally too, and consider whether it really makes sense for every breed of animal, regardless of whether it’s a dog, cat, or whatever, to be considered suitable as a pet in a household within society at all. These are all fundamental discussions too, which probably can never really be judged as simply right or wrong, black or white. Sabine, you wanted to follow up too.

Yes, I can completely relate to what you just shared. But I also have to say, with the cats we were often at the vet too, for what you have to do, vaccinations and so on. And when I sometimes saw what kind of people were sitting there, with what kind of dogs, I felt sick too. I’ve also asked myself sometimes, I mean, everyone can do what they want, but if I’m sitting in a small apartment with two huge dogs, maybe even in the middle of the city, those are of course things that are very difficult to handle. And I go jogging every morning now. I’ve already been attacked by a dog twice. I didn’t fully see it, because I have my AirPods in, but it was a huge beast. I don’t know much about dogs. It jumped right at me, and the owner said, oh, he doesn’t do anything. I nearly had a heart attack. Since then I always run far away from dogs, across the street. I believe he doesn’t do anything and that the owner has him under control. The question is always, who has them under control and who doesn’t. And I have to say, the moment other people’s space gets affected… I also have a lot of friends with dogs, who went to dog training school, and everything’s fine there too. But the question is always whether everyone does that. And the same goes for my encounter with the shelter model… the connection is a bit shaky right now, Sabine, we can’t hear you anymore. You can repeat that, Sabine. Can you hear me now? Yes, now we can hear you again. That’s typical for the highway coverage in Germany. I just wanted to say — what did I want to say, I confused myself. In Mannheim there was a law that anyone who has a cat has to make sure it gets spayed or neutered. Because they were multiplying uncontrollably. That came about because a lot of people don’t do it, and it becomes an overpopulation problem again. That’s certainly a double-edged sword.

In this context, a lot of questions are, yes, it’s difficult to find answers there too. And ultimately we have quite a few aspects, if we pick up all the other points again. So, on one hand, it varies a lot who keeps dogs. You can’t allow it for one person and forbid it for another. Of course you could think about something like, you just mentioned dog training school or something, that there are certain framework conditions for keeping animals too, that you say, there are certain things you have to go through or similar. And especially what I’ll call the free market here, when it comes to animals and pets, leads to the fact that, even though there might be legal frameworks that don’t allow certain things at all, unofficially a lot still happens in this area anyway. I’m thinking of examples like certain dog breeds, when they’re still small, even having their ears surgically cut to shape and so on, so that they conform to a certain beauty ideal, in quotation marks, that humans have about the breed. I find that pretty brutal, honestly, because there’s no need at all to operate on animals just to make ears stand up or something like that. But you could really open up so, so many aspects here. If we look in the direction of consuming animals too, for instance — I ask myself, if we’d grown up in a society, or in a family, where it’s completely normal not to eat animals, for example, would it still feel as strange to us, or would we still tend to have the urge, in quotation marks, to eat a steak now and then? That would be a question. So a societal shift is happening here too — while younger generations now tend, quite quickly and on their own, to give up eating animals entirely, it seems to be noticeably harder for generations who grew up differently to fully give up consuming animals. And there are also really big differences culturally, if we look at that. You notice that pretty quickly — while there are cultural spheres where insects get eaten, or kangaroo gets served, or similar, it feels completely absurd to us, because we grew up in a cultural sphere where that’s just not the norm. So it’s very obvious that a lot of this is simply learned through socialization, and accordingly we can of course question a lot of it and consider whether it really has to be that way, or whether it’s even okay at all. And just because it’s not forbidden to eat meat doesn’t mean it’s necessarily justified, even if it’s legitimized in some way societally — so we’re back on the ethical level again. And the thing about animal testing, I find that a nice example too. In a lot of places we don’t even know where animal testing is involved, and we might not even think about it at all. All the way to consuming animals — animal farming for consumption is a huge part of this area too. And this is also the context for things like the various seals and labels, like organic labels and so on, meaning that animal husbandry is handled differently. But that too is ultimately a kind of certificate, and if you try to look behind the scenes more closely, you’re often surprised that you don’t actually get what you might expect. And I’m curious what you all think about that. Ria, Sabine, would you like to follow up?

I don’t know if you saw this yesterday. Penny is now running an ad where, for a week or two I think, they sell organic products at the price they’d actually have to cost if you factored in all the downstream costs — even down to the CO2 that the pig or cow produces. And then a few sausages cost six euros. And they have these big green signs up in various stores now. They know they won’t sell it. They just want to demonstrate what something would cost at full cost. I found that pretty funny. I think they wanted to do it for two or four weeks. And definitely with products that have a longer shelf life, and then afterward they lower the price back to normal. I thought that was almost like something out of a marketing stunt, honestly — but I thought it was a good idea. Doesn’t have that much to do with violence, that just came up for me in connection with research and violence and animal welfare. I actually wanted to say too, again with my kids, I have this discussion when I buy organic now — I do buy organic by now — and they look at it and say, that’s still nothing. Where’s the actual line, what’s okay and what’s not okay anymore? The average citizen can hardly understand what’s actually okay. I mean, we even have a store nearby, I’ve shopped there too, it’s basically like a pharmacy for food. I can’t buy everything there. And the question is, do I buy meat there? Not anymore? Where do I, internally, for myself, draw the line of what’s good and what’s not good anymore? Yesterday they also reported that a lot of families can’t even afford fish once a week anymore, which I find hard to imagine, because if you shop the way we do, you can get it affordably too. Maybe twice a week even. But I don’t quite believe what they’re claiming there either. But it’s of course also a question of which perspective I’m starting from. So, really, really difficult discussions, I’d say, that you can hardly even properly answer for yourself.

Yes, thank you so much. I actually heard about that too yesterday, because I was in the car with the radio on, and heard about this campaign. It maybe indirectly has something to do with the topic of violence — though that’s probably not the main intention, it’s probably about something else, why they’re doing this. But exactly what you mentioned, meat is, in quotation marks, relatively cheap to buy here at least. It may be that overall, in recent years, it’s gotten more expensive, and people are cutting back more compared to before, at least depending on how much income is available monthly and so on. But ultimately this meat consumption is also connected, to some extent, to how cheap or expensive meat is to access. And the moment it’s more expensive from the outset, that would lower consumption, in quotation marks. And so that could actually be a quite deliberate, or specifically applied, “steering tool.” But because the industry in this sector is booming, it’s actually been the opposite trend over recent decades — that it’s become relatively cheap and accessible, so that really everyone can afford it, and basically eat meat every single day. If we look at this historically, in the past it wasn’t actually that pronounced that every family had meat on the table every day, in quotation marks. So this is really interesting to look at too, because pricing plays a role here too, in how often, for example, this consumption actually happens. Ria, would you like to follow up here too?

We’ve had a huge number of thoughts now, but they have relatively little to do with violence against animals, and more with what we eat. And I just— I don’t know if I— I’ll just do it. I read something once, it must have been an academic paper. There’s this academic work by Friedrich Engels, about the significance of the thumb for the development of apes into humans. And then I read something similar, about the significance of humans starting to eat meat, and how that changed the entire jaw and, with it, the digestive system, and how that gave us the ability to store much more energy in the body, and thereby the ability to step out of the savanna and walk upright. We’re actually not really built for upright walking at all — our spine is quite unstable in that regard. The best gait is the one we know from great apes, but of course they have completely different arms now. Their arms are much longer. But in exchange, they can’t do this precision grip. That’s the first thing that came to mind. The second thing is violence against animals in connection with nutrition. We do violence to ourselves as humans in exactly the same way there. Because what we believe is sausage made from meat is actually sausage glued together with enzymes and various meat scraps. That’s why I’ve become really cautious with these processed foods, because I notice none of it tastes right anymore. And it’s not at all what I remember as a child with blood sausage or liver sausage or something like that. Those are completely different things. And with that, you can of course force people, if they know this, to use other foods. At the same time, what gets offered to me as vegan is, in a lot of situations, in terms of ingredients, from my perspective just as critical, or even more so, from the other perspective. Violence against animals came to mind for me earlier too. You said, people change the appearance of animals according to personal taste. Docking tails and cropping ears has, I believe, been banned in Germany for some years now. I think that’s right too. What’s not banned is breeding. And when you have breeds that get bred to the point where they very, very quickly develop joint problems, or breathing problems, then that’s, for me, already another kind of violation of the living creatures we have in the animal world. Those are various things that came to mind for me.

Maybe there are others who’d like to add something to that too.

Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. Those are really interesting aspects. And above all, another impulse just came to mind for me too — whether things like deforestation and similar aren’t ultimately violence against, or toward, animals too, indirectly, so to speak, because we’re constantly encroaching further into their habitat, and they have to live under different conditions as a result, and so on. That could also be a form of violence. And you just said that docking ears and tails is banned in Germany.

Yes, that’s true. But it doesn’t mean it gets prevented. Because I know cases where animals get imported from abroad and similar. Or it just gets done anyway, even though it’s banned. I don’t know, if someone finds out, there might be consequences.

The question is to what extent, in terms of staffing and so on, this actually gets enforced, in quotation marks, if it apparently still happens so easily despite supposedly being banned in name. So is the legislation that’s been introduced here simply not sufficient to actually prevent it. And with that, I’d also like to welcome Ralf into our round, and then we can gladly draw cross-connections again too. Ralf, a very warm good morning.

Well, good morning first of all, and I already have to apologize, because I’m certainly not going to make any friends in this round now. Let me start like this: I’m not a 100 percent vegan. That unfortunately doesn’t quite work out with my daily schedule, because I unfortunately have a very stressful daily routine and don’t always have time to prepare food the way I’d actually like to. So, as I said, 100 percent doesn’t work out. There’s the occasional slice of cheese in there too, or something. Okay, otherwise, let me just throw in my two cents here. Eating animals is violence. An animal doesn’t voluntarily jump, sliced up, shredded, minced, seasoned with spices, flavor enhancers, and dyes, onto my plate, into my pan, onto my grill, because the animal enjoys it. There’s no animal welfare or anything like that involved in first breeding an animal so that it brings someone as much fun, joy, and yield as possible, so that a pig ends up looking like a mutant out of some science fiction movie. And the whole thing gets topped off with some label saying it’s an organic pig, it had a wonderful life. Because it had two and a half square meters of space to live in instead of two meters, like a normal, non-organic pig, and lived its entire life in some kind of pseudo-freedom, until at some point it gets its head cut off. Violence is violence. Anyone who eats animal products accepts the violence that comes with it. And you can spin that however you like. I’m over 60 years old by now. I believe I’m someone who eats very consciously, who goes through life very consciously. I move, whenever possible, in my limited free time, a lot with my dog. I take him along. He’s here with me right now too. He’s in my studio. He always sits with me. Doesn’t take his eyes off me for a second. I eat, whenever possible, as I said, vegan. I definitely have no nutritional deficiencies. I’m capable at any time — this sounds exaggerated, this sounds crazy, I know. For me, the benchmark, even though I do have my physical wear and tear by now, which comes with a certain age, is that I’m still capable, out of my training, or what people call training — I move for about an hour every day, walking, hiking with my dog — I’m capable of doing an Ironman on a weekend without wrecking myself. Without preparation, without swim training, without bike training, without anything, simply because it’s in my constitution, because I’m simply healthy, and because I know, if I regulate my pace, it works. If I eat sensibly, it works. If I keep the framework conditions under control, it works. I don’t take supplements. I really eat according to very simple rules — green, vegetarian, everything colorful, peppers, tomatoes, green, yellow, red, lots of salad, everything that grows in some way, lots of legumes. I get my protein, I get everything — carbohydrates, fiber, it’s all there, and I definitely have no deficiencies. I had huge discussions with my family doctor, who also said, when I started switching to vegan — this is now a good ten years ago — I’d die of deficiencies and who knows what, my hair would fall out. Well, I’m already bald anyway, so that doesn’t matter. But none of that happened, and in all the check-ups, I’ve beaten all his patients’ values for my age group. And two years ago, I even did a test at a clinic that examined me before I took on a somewhat longer challenge. There’s a second dog squeaking in the background right now, I’m fostering one today, and he’s trying to bug me a little bit right now. For this challenge I had to do several long-term ECGs, similar things, stress ECGs, and so on, just to see how my cardiovascular system is doing, how my body reacts, how I handle stress. And I had the best values, at almost 60 years old, that had been measured in that clinic for people my age, and achieved an average comparable to a mid-30s athlete. It works without nutritional supplements, it just takes a bit of thinking and putting together a sensible diet, and the will. If I don’t want to do that to other living beings — there’s even something in the Bible, I believe, about not killing — then there’s a way. Sorry, but in my youth and childhood, we didn’t have meat on the table every day. That was maybe on the weekend, and on Friday there was fish, and maybe on Saturday a sausage and a roast, then on Sunday. That was normal, and none of us had any deficiencies, nothing. And now it’s changed to the point where meat has to be there every day, and it has to be cheap. And in the end, we cause this suffering because we tell ourselves, out of a certain arrogance, that we can do this, we’re allowed to do this. We’re supposedly the pinnacle of creation. We’re not. At the moment, in my eyes, the way we behave toward the animal world, we’re, at best, an embarrassment.

Yes, thank you so much, dear Ralf. You can tell you’re fully emotionally invested in this. Sorry, I know. On the topic of nutritional supplements and so on, I can maybe add briefly — you’re welcome to mute yourself so it’s not so loud in the background, that would be lovely, Ralf. Ralf, could you please mute yourself, that would be great, thank you — because otherwise it throws me off while speaking, and it’s audible in the background for the recording too. I had a traumatic experience as a child related to fish, and because of that I eat absolutely no fish, and nothing that comes from the sea, and I kept hearing from my mother how bad that was, and about supposed deficiencies and whatnot, that it would be totally unhealthy not to eat any fish at all. And at some point I took the time to actually research this, and found that it’s quite possible to consume other foods instead. If you look very closely at what the positive aspects, or the positive components, of fish actually are that are important for the human body, and where else you can find them, you’ll find — and this isn’t just true for animal or fish products, by the way, but for a lot of other products too, where you might hear it’s super healthy, but you just don’t particularly like the taste — if you actually research it, you’ll find in a lot of places that there are always other foods, not supplements, but actual foods, where you can find much, much more of these substances, the ones that maybe led people in the past to say it’s essential and should be consumed. And the second point I’d like to bring in here, maybe as a book tip too, there’s the China Study — I don’t know who among you already knows it. The subtitle is “The Scientific Case for a Vegan Diet.” I won’t say more, you should read it yourselves and decide for yourselves. But I found it really, really interesting. A long-term study was done there, and they ultimately arrive at the conclusion that even small amounts of animal products can have a negative effect on our health. That’s one of the main findings that came out of it. It’s really, really fascinating to look into, maybe also to get some new impulses, to question one thing or another that we’ve simply taken for granted growing up too. That means, whether someone wants to go vegan or not, everyone can decide that for themselves in the end. But I think it’s important to look at both sides and engage with these topics, to see — and at this point I’d also like to mention, I’m not vegetarian or vegan myself, and yet I find it all the more important that awareness gets created here, and that you make conscious decisions for yourself here too. And that requires, again, we’re back at the topic of education, that we of course also engage and deal with different topics consciously and actively to some extent, and against the background of our own research, arrive at a conclusion for ourselves, and maybe derive a decision from that. With that, I’d like to give Jürgen the chance to contribute too, and then we can gladly move into the closing round, drawing cross-connections on one hand, and on the other, holding on to a highlight of the room for ourselves. Jürgen, a very warm good morning.

Good morning, dear Yasemin, and good morning everyone in the room. I’ll anchor my statement to the question in the subtitle, about justifying violence against animals. And for me, the difficulty of taking a clear position on this topic already starts when you look at our legal basis in the Federal Republic of Germany. The difficulty already starts with the fact that, if I remember correctly, since the end of the last century it’s been defined in the civil code that animals are not things. On the other hand, our criminal law, our criminal law still treats, in quotation marks, offenses like animals killing each other — aggressive dogs attacking other dogs — not as murder, but handles these incidents in criminal law on a property-law basis. So, in relation to your question, dear Yasemin, a really detailed legal dissection of each individual case is actually necessary already, just to specify — I’m talking about the legal side now — are we talking about humans, human-like beings, so to exclude it negatively, about non-things, or are we still talking about things? That’s one point. And the other point, regarding the discussion of using animals for human purposes — that was actually also the basis for humans becoming settled at all, and practicing agriculture, in order to cover the necessary protein needs by keeping animals. Grazing animals could also be, or basically already is, a form of violence. It’s worth taking a look at what dimensions we’re actually talking about here though. According to current information, humanity produces and consumes 320 or 330 million tons of meat. Now let’s factor in some loss, let’s leave that open, we’re talking about at least a triple-digit million figure representing people’s nutrition. And if I postulate today that this food source no longer exists, if I don’t, in quotation marks, violate animals, then this food source disappears. I’m just putting that out there. That’s one thing. The second thing is the economic aspect — I can’t provide the exact source anymore, unfortunately, but I’m on relatively safe ground with this figure. More than a quarter of the world’s population is involved in some form with the keeping, production, processing, and supply of meat. If there were no buyers for this meat anymore today, that would mean, with 25 percent of the world’s population, we’d have a problem employing them and getting them wages and bread. I don’t want to belabor this, but given the time, I just want to put this out there, to outline a dimension of what we’re talking about. And for me, this topic is on the same level as the climate problem. Of course we can set moral standards in our own personal way of treating living beings, whether human or animal. That’s correct. But, as you already mentioned, dear Yasemin, we should be far from assuming that it’s the same in all other cultures and countries in the world. And accordingly, for me, the lever for change gets sized differently too. Let me just say one more thing to close. As a highly technologized nation, we’re working on in-vitro technologies, we’re growing meat from cells, and we now have research stations where we’re breeding insects in a kind of factory farming as a protein substitute. We can do that. But the majority of humanity, whether in Africa or in large parts of Asia, can’t do that, technologically, financially, or maybe even in terms of moral understanding. It’s a huge problem, and again, I say, it doesn’t stop us from finding solutions, but on the other hand, we always have to keep in view what effects this has, not just for us, but worldwide. Thank you for this admittedly long speech.

Yes, wonderful, thank you so much, there were a lot of impulses in there, and especially this aspect about protein that you brought up — that’s also one of the aspects addressed in this China Study too. There’s animal and plant-based protein, and the results touch on this too, that they found in the study that, for example, animal meat proteins tend to promote things like cancer and similar diseases, while plant-based protein is actually much healthier for humans. So it’s really worth engaging more intensively with these topics too. Not just in the sense of, is this violence against animals, yes or no, but also against the background of, is it actually that healthy, or do we really need it? Questioning all of that too, or whether it’s not also connected to aspects like what you just mentioned, this economic aspect, Jürgen — that it might also be against the background of a huge industry that makes money from this, so not just this aspect of what would happen if we curbed this or similar, what consequences that would have, but also to what extent this industry has an interest, so to speak, in us continuing to consume it, and whether it’s really that healthy, in quotation marks, for humans. And the second point I’d like to pick up, which I forgot to mention earlier before we move into the closing round, is also on the aspect — because Ralf said earlier that no animal would voluntarily jump onto my plate, I’m basically with you on that in principle. Still, the question remains for me on this aspect, is that violence or not? Or at what degree does it become violence? Or how do we classify that? I’d like to bring that in as an impulse too. I mean, in nature everything is interconnected. We’ve opened this up in other rooms too, in different contexts. There are always cycles at play. And we wouldn’t classify carnivorous animals as violent or something like that — that’s simply in their “nature,” that they’re carnivores. Now, of course, because we can basically consume everything, we have the option to differentiate here, or something. But maybe, as an impulse, to open up the thought — if we didn’t consume in these mass quantities, but if we still kept animals in the garden, so to speak — I’m exaggerating now to make my point — and didn’t get meat from the supermarket, but instead, say, kept chickens ourselves or something similar, on a small scale, just for occasional consumption, and not all this animal cruelty behind it. If you watch documentaries and things like that, it really makes the hair on the back of your neck stand up, what animals have to go through to end up on our plates. So if it were on this small a scale, where, just like with other animals — I don’t have an issue when I look at other animals that eat animals too, that’s part of nature too — then I wouldn’t classify that as violence per se, to begin with. The question is, at what point does it become human violence against animals? And here it has a lot to do with this mass consumption, with animal farming, with animal testing, and so on, which, taken together, have a truly “violent” scale — and there we’re back at the word “violence” in its scale of magnitude again, and maybe that’s another impulse you can take away from this. I’m really curious, maybe you’d like to draw one more cross-connection, and at the same time, please also give your closing word for today’s room. Ria, Sabine, Ralf, Jürgen, in that order, go ahead, Ria.

It was a really interesting and multi-layered room. I would have had a few more things to add, but that would blow the time now. I just have one thought I’d like to share. Buddhists, when they set out on a path, sweep the path in front of them so they don’t have to kill anyone. And that doesn’t just include large animals with eyes, it includes insects too. And I find that a really lovely, philosophical, really lovely philosophical image. And with that I just want to give you something to keep thinking about. I think I’ll eat a little less meat, but whether I’ll give it up entirely, I don’t quite know. But that’s everyone’s own business. We’re in a room here where there’s tolerance, and clarity, and also the possibility to make decisions for yourself. I thank you so much for this interesting morning, all of you. Thank you.

Thank you too. Thank you so much. Sabine.

Yes, the highlight for me was just your comment. It reminded me — we were once in Austria, somewhere in the middle of nowhere, up in the mountains, and there was a farmer who had two little, cute piglets. They ran around free, and he said, yes, in the end they’ll come. I think those piglets really had a good life. But they end up in the pan too. The second thing, I thought it was great again, Jürgen, how you summarized everything. I think that’s kind of the crux of it. This morning I also heard about a climate expert who said, yes, we could technically achieve the 1.5 degree goal, only we probably won’t manage it, simply because not everyone participates. And I think that’s the crux of it, and that connects a bit back to what Jürgen just said — we’re great when it comes to technology, but the world is just a bit different. Thank you for the really lovely room. Thank you.

Thank you too, Ralf.

Just two brief comments — first, to Jürgen, on protein and meat. A small can of kidney beans for 69 cents gives you a protein content that’s actually better absorbed and not harmful to health, unlike rump steak. So for all the rump-steak lovers out there, a can of kidney beans does the job just as well. Maybe it gets a bit trickier, but in principle it works. And the second thing, about animals being nature — and of course it happens that one animal kills another. We have that here too. I do have an objection there too though, it’s all a bit conflicted. We have a problem here, for example, on the edge of the Spessart, where wolves are slowly starting to show up. I’ve even seen one myself once — like hitting six numbers in the lottery. Tomorrow, my little local newspaper has “Wolves in the Spessart” as its front-page topic, and I already know I’ll get a huge backlash, because I try to make the case for the wolf, for this animal staying in the forest, and I know for sure my phone will be ringing off the hook tomorrow, because the local hunters will of course be up in arms, saying this dangerous predator has to be eliminated and driven out immediately, because it has no business being here, and all the other animals in the forest and on the pasture and wherever else will die, and nobody will be able to go into the forest anymore. What nonsense. So, we make up our own stories, however we need them. That’s it. Thanks for the conversation, by the way.

Yes, thank you so much. Jürgen?

Yes, thank you all so much for this topic, which really only made me sensitive to it over the course of your contributions. Let me try to draw a light-hearted arc over this topic. For me, basically, this is my opinion, it’s about the question — not what we’ve already had as a room topic, human dignity, but about our treatment, the topic of how we treat the dignity of living creatures. That’s the big arc for me. And there are many clues, if you look back at our development, that give us a hint. Let me just ask one question — why did Noah, not Moses, why didn’t Noah take humans onto the ark, but animals? You could lean toward the view that he knew he had to and wanted to survive, and that animals secured his survival. And on the other hand, something else we know too — that a lot of peoples, in their ethnological development, showed these living beings, these animals, the necessary respect and dignity, because they knew about their value and their place in existence, in human existence. And now you can debate at length whether this dignity, and this dignified, respectful treatment during the animal’s life cycle, also includes, at some point, a more or less violence-free death of the animal for further use. That’s the crux of the matter for me. And I think, with this topic too, it’s good that there are different opinions, that there are positions that move us forward in our development, but that also show us our limits. Thank you again for today’s room, and a lovely day to you all.

Yes, thank you so much. And I actually thought, in the meantime, about the treatment of living beings and so on, and about these rooms, and under the topic of dignity, where we opened up various topics again too. And the thought came to me especially at the point where you mentioned it, Jürgen, with insects and insect farming. The question that first arose was, why are insects actually being bred for this protein in the first place? You could also consider growing plants instead, vegetables and so on, to bring plant-based proteins into our food as ingredients, given there are so many findings in this area too that proteins can be very, very sensible, and that it doesn’t necessarily require, in quotation marks, animal products for protein. So, on one hand, this rethinking, and at the same time, I was reminded of these rooms, whether that’s really so much better, in quotation marks, because one of the results from that room, if I remember correctly, since we discussed that too, was, what about the plant world, for example — did we end up concluding, a living being is a living being, whatever it is, whether animals, plants, or anything else. So it’s really, really fascinating here too. And there’s no right or wrong per se, but rather always trade-offs, facets that we’ve opened up, which becomes really clear too. Ultimately, I think we can all step into reflection to some extent, handle certain things more consciously, both with this topic and with other topics. And to make conscious decisions requires, again, engaging consciously with these topics, and not just continuing what we’ve learned, so to speak, but questioning one thing or another that seems self-evident. Because only through that can we initiate change. How we shape that for ourselves is, of course, up to each of us. If everyone here does a little bit something, in quotation marks, then something’s already been gained too, in the sum of it all. So I found that really, really fascinating, and I think it might keep resonating with one person or another, to actually become active themselves afterward, whether that’s research, there were some book tips, and then to make decisions for themselves again. I’m really looking forward to continuing with you all tomorrow — we’ll continue with power in the economy, with the question, how do companies and markets shape power dynamics. And at this point I’d also like to mention that we’ll probably be traveling again at some point today, if we manage everything as planned. That means we’re driving toward Turkey again by car. If there are slight delays or technical challenges over the next few days, I just wanted to give you a heads-up. Of course, if something with the technology comes up right before showtime, I might shift the room’s time by a few minutes, just so you’re a little forewarned or aware. There might be a few challenges over the next few days. Nonetheless, the Deep Talk will still take place every morning at 8am over the next few days. If one thing or another doesn’t work out 100 percent, I just wanted you to know in advance. And I’m looking forward, in any case, to welcoming you back here tomorrow. With that, I wish you all the best. Until then. Ciao.