I suggest a social structure based on competition (wich has winners, thus increases injustice) decreases empathy, solidarity. This makes both animals and humans suffer. The incentive to change said structure (wich is always opposed to the work/risk it requires) is higher, the more it improves the chances of life getting better. Human life is more powerfull in that sense, compared to animal life.
In other words: It is more likely to get humans to (severly) improve the world for humans. We are stronger wired for empathy with humans.
Empathy with animals should not be a substitute for missing empathy with people. Does that make sense?
I suggest a social structure based on competition (wich has winners, thus increases injustice) decreases empathy, solidarity. This makes both animals and humans suffer. The incentive to change said structure (wich is always opposed to the work/risk it requires) is higher, the more it improves the chances of life getting better. Human life is more powerfull in that sense, compared to animal life. In other words: It is more likely to get humans to (severly) improve the world for humans. We are stronger wired for empathy with humans. Empathy with animals should not be a substitute for missing empathy with people. Does that make sense?