Mr Rohit, ABOVE ALL, I m NOT engaged in any sort of contest/competition here, nor am I interested, in the LEAST. Whether YOU - or anyone else - is, is of no concern to me whatsoever.
ALL the domestic servants in India OUGHT NOT be killed. why? There are 2 things here- 1)understanding the cause. 2)understanding the consequences. Lets leave the CAUSE part of it to a later date. It wud involve the question of JUSTICE, & is too complex. Consider the CONSEQUENCE part, which is enough to convince ME.
1stly, it is very simple to see that killing ALL domestic servants is NOT the solution. The soltn wud be to either remove the very INSTITUTION of domestic helpers - i.e, there shud be no more servants (as was done in case of slaves); - or to ensure their socio-economic progress. The path followed by most societies is steady development. As the std of living rises, so does the no. of servants - as they are found in India - REDUCE. That wud lead to a positive, direct benefit to the society/country AS A WHOLE - in terms of productivity/innovation/prosperity etc. Investement in human resources, managed properly, wud make TREMENDOUS difference - not only to that specific country, but to the whole world. It wud be foolishness to destroy such potential. On the other hand, you can spend MILLIONS of dollars on _STRAY_ dogs, but it is not going to add a grain of rice to anyone's plate, or an anti-tetanus into a single injured child's arm.
2ndly, it would lead to UNPRECEDENTED CHAOS in society. Society wud just fall apart & collapse. That shall not happen even if you kill ALL the stray dogs in the world. There is no reason to. Their death isnt going to make any ANY difference to anybody or anything. People wud not remember them 3 months after their extermination. Not the other strays themselves. This is not said out of "SADISM" or callousness. It is a simple, self-evident truth.
3rd, if chronological appearance on the planet were the criteria for having rights to use MAN-MADE products, then reptiles, snakes & giant lizards wud have greatest right to use them, not pariah dogs.
If I live in a house as a tenant, I do not become the owner of the house, but neither does the lizard on the wall, which has lived there much before I moved in. The house wud STILL belong to the landlord. I do not know who is the LANDLORD in ur example. The analogy given is, thus, not correct, bcoz in one case we r talking about UNCLAIMED, GIVEN RAW material/elements (the earth, forests, rivers etc) & in the other, abt a distinctly MAN-MADE product (WITH A SPECIFIC OWNER) which is NOT POSSIBLE without man's mind, & to which no stray dog has contributed an atom.
The question of dominance on Earth & taking up other space previously used by other species is a lengthy but easier one. Briefly, MAN, Human consciousness & Reason - are ALL a part & parcel & a development of nature. NATURE CHANGES HER RULES WITH EVERY NEW STEP SHE TAKES IN HER EVOLUTION. From mineral to plant, plant to animal/bird & so on. One plant does not eat another plant - but animals arrived, & laws changed. Now one LIVING creature HAD THE RIGHT to feed on another LIVING creature. Something which wud seem a gross injustice from the pt of view of PLANTS. Similarly, Nature's rules changed when she evolved MAN out of the mammal.
The right to dominate & control nature has been given to man by nature herself, as much as she has given the RIGHT to the lion to kill & eat the deer/buffalo.
With the emergence of HUMAN consciousness, NATURE - mind u, it is NATURE HERSELF - WHO HAS EVOLVED A DIFFERENT BASIS FOR COLLECTIVE & INDIVIDUAL LIFE, SOCIETY, RIGHTS, OWNERSHIP & THE UNIT'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WHOLE (UNIVERSE). Man is not OUTSIDE nature, but as he is, not AUTOMATICALLY in perfect harmony with it either. His job is to discover what this perfect harmony is, & where does it lie. Since he isnt born with the knowledge of how to build an aeroplane or to establish a system of jurisprudence, NATURE has ordained that this path is a tortured process of trial & error. For that u have to accept that Nature has a certain underlying PURPOSE (not acceptable to atheists, I m sure) or at least moving in a DEFINITE direction - & is finding more efficient vehicles to fulfil her purpose. She has left behind the wolves, squirrels, crocodiles - i.e, INFERIOR forms of consciousness & an inferior code of life - and evolved a form of CONSCIOUSNESS far more efficient in dealing with nature, & a superior code of life. That of Man. (This code is not programed into his brain, so he makes terrible mistakes in DISCOVERING it.)
The question of Rights is the MOST important one. On that, & others pts, maybe another post after few days. Time's up.
