Two Problems for the Political Inclusion of Animals

ABSTRACT In recent years, the field of animal ethics has taken a political turn, with scholars arguing that sentient nonhuman animals should be included in the political sphere. This article explores two key challenges arising from this turn towards the political inclusion of animals: the Conflict Problem and the Numbers Problem. The Conflict Problem highlights the difficulty of resolving conflicts between humans and animals, and among individual animals, who often have competing interests (such as predators and prey). The Numbers Problem arises because animals vastly outnumber humans: if animals were to be fully included in political decision‐making processes, their representatives would form majorities that would likely predominate, potentially to the detriment of human interests. We assess four potential responses to these two problems: (i) discounting animal interests; (ii) revisiting principles of political inclusion; (iii) granting group‐differentiated rights; and (iv) adopting a bicameral system. Each response, we argue, involves significant ethical trade‐offs. Ultimately, we conclude that proponents of sentientist political equality may need to bite the bullet with respect to the Conflict Problem and the Numbers Problem. For those who think otherwise, we claim that the onus is on them to develop more viable solutions.