This contrast is peculiar to the world of man: with other creatures—that is to say, with nearly all animals—there is a kind of justice and equality. Thus equality exists in a shepherd’s flock and in a herd of deer in the country. Likewise, among the birds of the prairie, of the plain, of the hills or of the orchard, and among every kind of animal some kind of equality prevails. With them such a difference in the means of existence is not to be found; so they live in the most complete peace and joy.
The animals live in “peace and joy” because they don’t think. They aren’t self-aware. The laws of nature reign supreme, and there is no questioning about the fairness of it. This is the difference. As humans, we dream, we think, we aspire, we desire, we create our own inner worlds. The animals are no more equal than humans, they just aren’t cognizant of the differences.It is quite otherwise with the human species, which persists in the greatest error, and in absolute iniquity. Consider an individual who has amassed treasures by colonizing a country for his profit: he has obtained an incomparable fortune and has secured profits and incomes which 274 flow like a river, while a hundred thousand unfortunate people, weak and powerless, are in need of a mouthful of bread. There is neither equality nor benevolence.
That being said, animals do have more equal access to resources, because the resources they use consist of earth and its products, and water, and since they can't speak, think, write, and create, they can't really gain an unfair advantage. While I understand the points very well, I find the concepts a bit naive for dealing with humanity problems without the presence of a fascist dictator who weilds a huge hammer.