'Earthlings': what kind of film did Zelensky order to advertise a terrorist in Lutsk

Man on the morning of July 21 took hostage passengers of a regular bus in Ukrainian Lutsk, demanded that officials, deputies and church representatives record a video admitting that they are “terrorists in law,” and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky demanded a video message calling for them to watch the film “Earthlings,” writes Air force.

Photo: Shutterstock

On the evening of Tuesday, July 21, Zelensky complied with the demand - he recorded an appeal with the words “The film “Earthlings” of 2005, everyone should watch” and posted it on his Facebook. Less than an hour later, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine reported the release of the hostages and the detention of the criminal, and Zelensky’s video disappeared from his page.

The invader turned out to be a 44-year-old resident of Ukraine Maxim Krivosh. He was convicted twice for fraud, banditry, extortion and illegal carrying of weapons and spent about 10 years in prison. In recent years, according to friends, Krivosh has been volunteering and protecting animals.

What kind of film did the criminal order to advertise to the President of Ukraine?

What is this movie?

"Earthlings" is a 2005 documentary film by American director and activist Shawn Monson, dedicated to the problem of animal exploitation.

Its authors strive to talk about various manifestations of human dominance over animals - their use as pets and food, for making clothes and cosmetics, entertainment and scientific experiments - and call for switching to veganism (this refers not only to diet, but also to the rejection of any exploitation animals).

At the beginning of the film, its key term is explained - “species discrimination” or “speciesism”. This term, coined by philosophers Richard Ryder and Peter Singer, refers to the infringement of the rights of one species by another, based on a belief in one's own superiority.

The film's running time is two hours. Most of the time is taken up by documentary footage documenting cruelty to animals, including their killing. This includes footage from nurseries, shelters for homeless animals, poultry farms, slaughterhouses, places where leather and fur are processed and sold, research laboratories, as well as from sports and entertainment events.

There are no synchronizations in the film at all - that is, fragments of direct interviews (for example, expert comments), which are usually an integral part of documentaries. Instead, there is a narrator - famous actor, environmental activist and vegan with 40 years of experience, Joaquin Phoenix. His voiceover comments in a neutral manner on what is happening on the screen.

The official website dedicated to the film contains quotes from people who watched it, including celebrities.

“Earthlings” is the greatest gift I have ever received. “I can’t believe how ignorant I was before,” actress Bryce Dallas Howard (“The Help,” “The Secret Forest,” “Black Mirror”) is quoted as saying.

According to the American philosopher Tom Regan, famous for his book “The Case for Animal Rights” (1983), “for those who have seen Earthlings, the world will never be the same.”

And philosopher Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation (1975), said: “If I could get every person in the world to see one movie, it would be Earthlings.”

What the film is criticized for

The film is obviously intended to produce a powerful emotional effect on the viewer, which should be followed by the adoption of a certain ethical position, and then the transition to further active actions aimed at changing the situation.

However, critics note that this scheme, which at first glance seems logical, may not work - and the emotional effect caused by brutal images may not lead to the consequences that the authors are counting on. For example, due to the fact that the viewer did not identify with the suffering animal.

As Arseny Khitrov, Ph.D. in Philosophy, Associate Professor at the Higher School of Economics, notes in his article, compassion when observing the suffering of another is not an automatic reaction that necessarily arises in a person.

“The viewer identifies with the suffering other, or, in other words, accepts the film’s contract if the chosen, including default, attitude allows it,” he writes.

Thus, according to Khitrov, the viewer can come to reciprocal suffering and subsequent adoption of an ethical and activist position only if he knowingly agrees with the arguments presented in the film.

In this regard, another complaint about the film is that it does not respond to possible rational arguments that may arise from viewers focused on resisting emotional pressure.

In particular, the film voiced the idea that all people would become vegetarians if they were forced to kill animals for food themselves, as well as if the slaughterhouses had transparent walls. Here, the viewer might have an objection about the existence of communities where people themselves kill animals for lack of shops or for other reasons, but the filmmakers ignore this aspect.

This lack of clarity, according to Khitrov, can prevent the viewer from moving from an emotional reaction immediately following the film to taking an ethical position and to further actions.

On the subject: Animals die out like dinosaurs: scientists say it threatens civilization

Khitrov also draws attention to the fact that the authors of the film are inclined to demand from other people a humane attitude towards animals, but are not inclined to demand a humane attitude of animals to humans or animals to each other, since they do not consider them to be moral agents. In this, the scientist sees signs of hidden specialism.

“The authors do not talk about the possibility of the existence of animal morality, that is, they recognize the right to talk about morality only for people. Thus, the statement that differences between animals and humans are irrelevant, aimed at overcoming species discrimination, contains hidden species discrimination,” he believes.

A little over a day after the release of the hostages, the official page of the film “Earthlings” appeared on Instagram. statement about the terrorist incident in Lutsk:

“Project Earthlings does not condone acts of terror as the film's message is one of compassion for all beings. The content of the film is the ongoing global slaughter of billions of defenseless animals, which not only harms human health, but is also a major cause of climate change. However, we do not create this to awaken terror in a person. Our hearts go out to all those affected by this ordeal, to their families, and to the authorities who ensured that no lives were lost. Let us move forward with non-violence towards everyone,” reads the message, signed by the name of Sean Monson, the film’s director.

Read also on ForumDaily:

Four and Lukashenko: candidates for presidency of Belarus who were allowed to run for election

A native of Ukraine and the main witness in the Trump case, left the US Army due to bullying

What Bolton wrote about in his memoirs, and why the White House is trying to ban their publication

I drank coffee in a cafe: Zelensky was fined for violating the quarantine

Do you want more important and interesting news about life in the USA and immigration to America? — support us donate! Also subscribe to our page Facebook. Select the “Priority in display” option and read us first. Also, don't forget to subscribe to our РєР ° РЅР ° Р »РІ Telegram  and Instagram- there is a lot of interesting things there. And join thousands of readers ForumDaily New York — there you will find a lot of interesting and positive information about life in the metropolis.