Not to destroy, but to control by keeping alive

Even in primitive times, humans did not harm nature beyond meeting their needs. They killed to survive and to protect themselves from wild animals, but otherwise, they managed to live in peace with nature within it.

Establishing dominance over nature and gaining power by destroying it became the fundamental ideology of capitalism. The destruction of nature became the price paid for the disposal of every type of input and waste in factories. The greed of capitalism reached such significant dimensions that humans became slaves to money, almost completely forgetting nature, which is the source they were born into and the fundamental source of their lives.

If only it stopped there. Destroying nature has almost become an ideological stance. People have turned toward sending ideological messages to one another through the slaughter of nature. Unfortunately, a significant portion of the power struggle between people has come to function through the massacre of nature. Most tragically, the massacre of nature has gained legitimacy within cultural structures. While there is no scientific basis for viewing certain plants as symbols of good or evil in different societies, or for associating animals with good or evil in the same way, it is possible to address them within their ideological contexts.

Yet, it is a requirement of civilization, of civilized humans, and of a civilized society to transform the struggle with nature into a logical relationship based on mutual contribution. Under normal conditions and when thought about from the rational perspective of a civilized human, all living beings within nature—plants, animals, humans—may not be of equal value, but they should have an equal right to live. No living being in nature, including humans, can be inherently associated with values like good or evil. Plants and animals in nature cannot be associated with any belief or ideology. Belief and ideology are fields of meaning produced by the thinking being, that is, the human. Therefore, the human attitude toward living beings that find life in nature should be limited only to providing benefit and meeting needs. This is what is expected of a civilized human. If we are killing our animals, burning our forests, or cutting down our trees just for pleasure or to send certain ideological messages to others, it means there is a serious problem somewhere.

For the past few days, I have been preoccupied with the issue of civilization and barbarism over the dog massacre that has occupied the media agenda. Who are we, really? Have we received our share of civilization, or have we not? Why did we abandon so many animals to the streets in the first place, and now that we cannot cope, we find the solution in slaughtering them? If we cannot feed a few animals and find the solution in beheading them, woe to us.

Planned reproduction, keeping them alive in suitable conditions.

If the intention is to solve the problem, it is possible to do this in a much more humane way. If stray animals are not a problem for other countries, let us go and look, research, and understand how they solved the problem. Let us see where we are making mistakes. I was in Azerbaijan recently. I did not see a single cat or dog on the streets or avenues; I asked where they were. Planned reproduction and keeping them alive in suitable conditions in shelters. It is that simple. The same situation applies to European countries. Planned reproduction and suitable housing conditions. Why can we not do it?

Nature conservation responsibility projects should be carried out

You might say that it is too late, that suitable housing conditions are not possible for such a high number of animals. I think it is possible. There is so much empty land outside the cities. Shelters can be built there. There are so many restaurants in the cities, and a lot of food waste is thrown into the trash every day. Non-governmental organizations, universities, municipalities, and other institutions can cooperate to keep these creatures alive in a planned and programmed manner. Wouldn't it be a more humane solution to at least keep those currently alive, and to take precautions for the future and bring reproduction under control? Just as social responsibility projects are carried out, nature conservation responsibility projects can be carried out in the same way.

No matter how it is done, killing cannot be seen as a solution. In the civilized world, a civilized society is obligated to find humane solutions to problems. Not to destroy, but to keep alive—and to keep alive well—is a requirement of being a civilized human. A civilized human is one who has been able to transform their relationship with nature into mutual production, contribution, and development. A civilized human is one who can manage nature without harming it. The solution should not be to destroy, but to control by keeping alive. This is also what humanity requires.