By Sarah Zhou
Despite millions of cats and dogs cohabiting with humans in China, the country’s animal protection laws have lagged behind those of developed nations for over 180 years, lacking punishment for animal cruelty and comprehensive protection laws. A recent incident in which a child was attacked by a dog after reportedly harassing the dog has sparked online debates about the treatment of stray animals, resulting in stricter regulations on permitted dog breeds. This article explores the historical perspective of animal rights in China and the ongoing challenges in establishing animal protection laws.
It is particularly intriguing to discover that China has a historical and cultural background that emphasises compassion towards animals rather than cruelty. For instance, Daoism promotes kindness towards all living beings, and the Chinese Taoist philosopher Zhuangzi of the fourth century BC, advocates for compassion permeating relations between all sentient beings. Furthermore, Buddhism, the predominant religion in China, encourages vegetarianism and views caring for all sentient beings as a central ethical principle. Beyond these ideologies, archaeological evidence suggests that the early ancestors of modern China, over seven thousand years ago during the Neolithic age, kept dogs with the main purpose of protection. Although dogs were used for hunting, this had evolved into a luxury leisure activity for the nobility by the fourteenth century during the Ming dynasty, implying that dogs were rarely used as a source of human entertainment anymore. However, there are elements of China’s history that do not align with these ideas. For example, traditional Chinese medicine often incorporates the use of wildlife animals, which can lead to the mistreatment of animals such as bile bears, which are kept in captivity for the collection of fluids from their liver and gallbladder. Some people in China have continued to believe in consuming wildlife for health benefits without scientific evidence. Nevertheless, China’s cultural and historical background does not inherently promote cruelty towards animals but quite the opposite, which makes it more fascinating when we delve into how the narrative has changed throughout history.
Arguably, historical events have significantly changed societies’ perspective on animals, with a notable shift occurring during the Great Famine of 1958. During this period, the then Chairman of China, Mao Zedong, initiated the Four Pests Campaign, which involved the mass killing of Eurasian tree sparrows from 1958 to 1962, as they were believed to have stolen grain, revealing a certain degree of cruelty towards animals and the intolerance for their coexistence in society. Moreover, people may have become indifferent to animal cruelty due to indoctrination during Mao’s rule. Mao regarded the love for pets and the sympathy for the downtrodden as bourgeoise and counter-revolutionary, associating pet ownership with the exploiting class, suggesting that the proletariat should prioritise self-sufficiency. Therefore, even as the economic condition in China improved overtime, such indifference remained. The cultural evolution that took place between 1966 and 1976, in which Mao’s ideas were fervently idolised and a cult of personality formed, might have further entrenched his views on animal treatment in the minds of the people. Under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership after 1978, with many people no longer living in poverty, there remained a collective fear of hunger due to the traumatic experiences of the Great Famine. This led to a focus on food supply and an increase in productivity, overshadowing other concerns. Overall, Mao’s rule played a pivotal role in fostering an unconsciously insensitive attitude towards the treatment of animals. Factors such as the fear of hunger stemming from the Great Famine, Mao’s personal beliefs about animal treatment, and his iconic status as a heroic leader of the ‘New China’ during the cultural revolution contributed to this perspective.
China’s intricate twentieth century historical background has made it challenging to pass comprehensive animal protection legislation. In 1988, the Wildlife Protection Law was enacted with two objectives: wildlife conservation and the reasonable use of wildlife, which suggests that wildlife was still perceived as a natural resource for human exploitation, indicating a prioritisation of economic development. This economic emphasis is likely to persist in the foreseeable future. As the economy developed, various industries that exploit wildlife, such as bear farming became significant contributors to local economies, generating substantial annual revenue. This economic dependence on animal-related businesses made it difficult to regulate them, as many individuals, including officials and government entities, benefitted from these industries. Additionally, local officials often tolerate animal maltreatment to ensure the economic growth of their regions, as they were primarily assessed by Beijing based on purely economic statistics without considering the reasons behind the decline. China’s national identity, shaped by its turbulent twentieth century history, further hindered the development of animal protection laws. Some nationalists, such as Zhao Nanyuan, argued that animal cruelty was justified, labelling animal welfare as a ‘Western import’ and suggesting that animal rights activists were foreign agents. Given China’s recent history of constant foreign invasions, being associated with foreign interests was strongly ill-favoured. Furthermore, the importance of food in Chinese culture, with sayings like ‘food is the God of the people,’ and the memory of past famines, has created a strong attachment to food consumption, often diverting attention from animal welfare concerns. Overall, the intricacy of the cultural and historical background has made it difficult to educate more people regarding animal protection in China.
Rather than solely criticising China’s animal protection laws, I would like to end on a hopeful note. As the younger generation in China have not experienced the incidents that made the previous generations indifferent to animal cruelty and have vigorously opposed animal cruelty recently, the creation of comprehensive animal protection legislation could be hastened. In 2020, a public poll suggested that over 280,000 out of the 299,000 voters voted ‘yes’ for an animal protection law. Let us hope that one day, it will not be just a poll.
Bibliography
“China Has Embraced Pets, but Animal Welfare Is Still a Problem.” n.d. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/china/2023/08/31/china-has-embraced-pets-but-animal-welfare-is-still-a-problem.
Legalj. 2022. “How Long Will China’s Animal Cruelty Laws Have to Wait? – Princeton Legal Journal.” Princeton Legal Journal. April 30, 2022. https://legaljournal.princeton.edu/how-long-will-chinas-animal-cruelty-laws-have-to-wait%EF%BF%BC/.
Li, Peter. 2006. “Animal Studies Repository the Evolving Animal Rights and Welfare Debate in China: Political and Social Impact Analysis.”
Park, Miyun, and Peter Singer. “The Globalization of Animal Welfare: More Food Does Not Require More Suffering.” Foreign Affairs 91, no. 2 (2012): 122–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23217226.
Qin, Amy. 2020. “In Fight to Ban Dog Meat, China’s Activists Find an Ally: The Coronavirus.” The New York Times, June 23, 2020, sec. World. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/world/asia/china-dog-meat.html.
Tobias, Michael Charles. n.d. “Animal Rights in China.” Forbes. Accessed November 2, 2023. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltobias/2012/11/02/animal-rights-in-china/.
“Younger Generation Face Long Wait for Law-Change on Animal Cruelty.” 2013. China Dialogue. February 26, 2013. https://chinadialogue.net/en/nature/5740-younger-generation-face-long-wait-for-law-change-on-animal-cruelty/.
Retrospect Journal 