I think this is a bit of a weird topic. Animals as slaves? That seems a little harsh and akin to the vegan ideology to be honest. Do you disagree that millions of cats and dogs genuinely love to be in their homes with their humans? If you don’t think so, I think that’s a bit narrow minded.
We don’t own any pets right now but we’ve had a cat and I’ve had cats my whole life. They are pampered and enjoy a very nice and relaxing life with no wants. If you consider that a slave then I don’t know what you think is going on there lol.
We humans need to be stewards of our environment. That means keeping insect populations in check, hunting, tending to the land and using things to our needs. It is absurd to think that stopping killing insects, stopping hunting and other things will have a positive impact. We are making mistakes yes but it’s all about balances. Animal and insect populations are adapting and evolving to coincide with humans, those insect and animal species without contact of humans is largely extinct in many cases and many rely on us for many things, much in how we use or eliminate them for ours.
My balanced side isn't far from how you view things. That said, it seems an increasing number of peeps in my country are handling pets as objects. Whenever they want, they buy one. Whenever they become a nuisance, they get rid of them. Shelters are more than overpopulated and an increasing number of pets are dropped as garbage. Regarding the topic of wild and domestic animals: When most of the animals in our world are domestic, doesn't mean we shall continue to bread them for domestic use. I take a devil's advocate position when making the statement as I did, a role so to speak for others (and perhaps even myself) to properly think this topic through and not just assume it is normal for us humans to (continue to) hold pets and by that drive a whole industry including the breading of pets for human 'pleasure' and 'use'. Somehow I find it questionable why an increasing number of people are against zoos, while this doesn't count for holding pets. Objectively, I don't see the difference. Anyways, not an easy topic.
Ah, yes it’s good to see the argument from the other side! That’s often how we can discover new information. Thank you for doing that, truly. Not many people are strong enough to do that!
It is a difficult situation indeed though, zoo’s aren’t just for the animals that are captured or stolen. They are also for animals that cannot be released back into the wild such as ones with an injury that prevents them from hunting properly.
The same argument can be given for pets, most of them will not survive in nature anymore. But that can't be the argument to continue zoo's (and to continue holding pets for that matter). Before we had the internet, before we had magazines, a zoo may have served the purpose of teaching the public about all sorts of animals living around the globe, next to being entertainment. By now, I believe the teaching part can't be the argument anymore to continue zoo's.
Holding animals in a zoo, captive in a small-ish geolocation, behind fences and gates, isn't that much different to holding pets in and around our own home. Same same in that respect.