A Society That Fails Its People Will Fail Its Animals Too

I want you to read this story of a man and his dog from Gaza. Hamed met and befriended an abandoned German shepherd last year in Gaza City. They saw it all: skies raining bombs and missiles, destruction of everything they called home. Somehow, they survived the genocide together.

The big magazines of the Arab world and the West made their heartwarming story go instantly viral. But as Hamed notes in a Facebook post, everyone wanted to know about the dog, but there was not much interest about him. "I was the one living in that torn tent, a place not even suitable for a dog."

There are innumerable photos of people using their pets as props to gain attention, beg for mercy, and help on social media. In one instance, when a Gaza man’s cat died, his donations dried up.

Read this post by Maha Husain from Gaza:

“If countless photos of starving, skin-and-bone children, elderly people, HUMANS in Gaza haven’t appealed to the world, maybe a before-and-after of animals will? This is Tom, my cat, before Israel’s genocide, and just moments ago, in the midst of its deliberate, systematic starvation campaign.”

If countless photos of starving, skin-and-bone children, elderly people, HUMANS in Gaza haven’t appeal to the world, maybe a before-and-after of animals will?

This is Tom, my cat, before Israel’s genocide, and just moments ago, in the midst of its deliberate, systematic… pic.twitter.com/jVpQrUqSjh

— Maha Hussaini (@MahaGaza) July 19, 2025

What does it tell us about human empathy, you might want to ask yourself.

For the past two days, I have closely followed the outrage following a Supreme Court order that seeks the banishment of all dogs in the NCR. It is not that dogs don’t need saving, but there’s something unsettling about these protests that I want to point out.

It is turning into an issue that has divided people who mostly agree with each other and united people who disagree on almost everything else.

My good friend and former colleague, Naomi Barton, with whom I started The Wire’s Heartland Hatewatch project in 2021, wrote a compassionate takedown of the Supreme Court order and this intense partisan debate on this issue.

Also read: Should the Dogs Go to Pakistan?

It’s hard to agree with the logic of the Supreme Court. As Naomi says, confining dogs in a specific area to be put into ‘shelters’ might actually spread more disease, and this knee-jerk response from the top court might do more harm than good.

Naomi argues that we cannot fight for human rights without fighting for animal rights.

I believe that we cannot fight for animal rights without fighting for human rights first. Take the examples from Gaza I cited above. Almost the entire population of animals – pets and strays alike – is being wiped out. Yet the genocide of animals in Gaza is just collateral to the genocide of humans in Gaza. You can’t stop the former without resisting the latter.

In my view, the premise of this debate is flawed. I believe that criticism needs to be aimed not only at the Supreme Court but also very strongly at the people who are vocal for dogs at this point. Their voice creates social pressure. We can see how a court which is often apathetic to the situations of mass detentions of migrants, the grotesque violence against Muslims and the disenfranchisement of humans in this very country could be pushed to quickly refer this case to a new bench. 

What does it say about the quality of our justice system, and where does this leave us as a society?

It leaves us with the uncomfortable reality that Indians, if they want to, can hit the streets and raise slogans for dogs but not for their fellow Indians. And it is the sentiments and opinions of just these Indians that affect the system.

I am not saying that the poor cannot love dogs or other animals, but it is the tears of the affluent that move our courts, government, and big media. That this is perhaps the first time in a long time that India Gate saw spontaneous protests is another testimony that the government will allow you to protest if you are protesting for the 'right reasons'.

But leave aside the affable dog, the holy cow in whose name people are lynched routinely, and even the pigeon, can get people on the streets. These outpourings force us to realise that in our social hierarchy there are some whose rights are easy to ignore indefinitely. 

For many in this city, dog lives do matter more. You might have come across this video of an angry reporter resigning from a popular right-wing news channel for dog rights. This is the same channel which has attacked and destroyed the lives of so many Indians and supported the most violent and jingoistic narratives in the past decade, targeting marginalised groups. You have to wonder if none of this affected the reporter.

The dogs are, in this case, just another instrument for some people to discriminate better.

There are areas in this city where dogs can roam, but Dalits and Muslims will not get a house on rent. In some societies, a dog can use apartment lifts, but the house helps, cleaners, and delivery workers cannot. This is also the same city where thousands of homes were demolished without a whisper of resistance in the last two years. 

This is the same city, on the outskirts of which Bengali migrants are chased and hunted down like cattle. Do remember what people were outraged about then. Trash! "If these people go, who will collect my trash?" was their concern.

I am sure that there are many good dog lovers in this country, but at a time when not one tear is shed on the street when humans are harmed in sinister ways, the dog has become their first direct competition in the struggle for empathy. This is why I believe that the complaint against this flood of love for dogs, especially from those quarters which remain indifferent to human suffering or, worse, support such suffering, is neither whataboutery nor an attack on animal rights advocacy.

For the man who lost his home, for the migrant who was forced to flee to Bengal, for the kin of those who were lynched, what’s the takeaway from this outrage? That a section, if they want to, can force the court to rethink their decision about dogs but not their fellow humans?

Some argue that we can protest for both – animal rights and human rights – at the same time. What they conveniently forget is that most people don’t protest for both. Apologies to the good dog lovers who actually care about everyone’s rights, but a society that fails its people will surely fail its animals too.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.