Wanted men: The Sea Shepherd eco-terrorists
Posted by ampontan on Sunday, September 21, 2008
IT’S ABOUT TIME: The Japanese government, according to this account from UPI, have asked Interpol to issue red arrest warrants for three members of Sea Shepherd, the self-appointed pirate-wannabe vigilante group that tries to prevent Japanese whaling in the South Pacific every winter. Arrest warrants already are outstanding for them in Japan.
Interpol is not yet prepared to go that far, however, but they did issue a blue notice, which means they are investigating the case further.
Regardless of their ultimate decision, this is a welcome step from Japan for two reasons.
First, it demonstrates that the Japanese government is now willing to take active steps to advance its interests internationally. It is a small sign that the passive, don’t-make-waves mentality of the post-war generation has run its course.
Second, let there be no mistake: By its attitudes and its actions, Sea Shepherd has clearly demonstrated that it refuses to behave as a responsible member of civil society, preferring to resort to the law of the jungle instead. This group has sunk 10 ships around the world, and its leader, Paul Watson, has done jail time in Canada and The Netherlands. It has also been reported that they carry AK-47s on board when they go to sea.
But more than that, Sea Shepherd is a symptom of a more serious illness sweeping the Western world. What too often passes for citizen activism today is in fact the barbarity of a hysterical, unhinged element that self-indulgently takes upon itself the role of judge, jury, and executioner. The structures of civilized society evolved and were created precisely to prevent activity of this sort.
That this disease has reached epidemic proportions in other parts of the world is undeniable from even a dispassionate observation of events in the United States during the past three weeks, to cite just one example.
If Sea Shepherd is ready to stand by its principles, they should have no problem serving time in a Japanese jail for them.
Japan should be commended for doing its part to curb this behavior.
Notes: Sea Shepherd has an annual budget of two million dollars. Most of their budget is supported by contributions from wealthy Hollywood actors, including Martin Sheen, Sean Penn, and William Shatner. Richard Dean Anderson (MacGyver) is (or was) on its Board of Directors. Pierce Brosnan is on its Board of Advisors.
Have you rented or purchased a DVD of one of Pierce Brosnan’s four James Bond movies? If so, you have directly contributed to keeping Sea Shepherd afloat.
kyklops said
Have you rented or purchased a DVD of one of Pierce Brosnan’s four James Bond movies? If so, you have directly contributed to keeping Sea Shepherd afloat.
This works two ways: Have you purchased any product whatsoever from Japan? If so, you have directly contributed to the continued slaughtering of whales.
This is exactly the anti-whaling approach, and it’s demonstrably more effective than the one you suggest. I have no especial love for whales, but: current methods inflict severe pain on whales; there is absolutely no sense of necessity (food source, etc.) involved in the Japanese whale hunt; a large part of the world (and I would agree, irrationally) believes the whale hunt to be evil; Japan’s interests are not served by killing whales (this is clearly demonstrable by opening any newspaper anywhere).
What is the point of continuing this? There is no point.
Tornadoes28 said
The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Environmental Liberation Front (ELF)in the US are the same. Fringe wackos that resort to terrorist attacks and intimidation. What’s amazing is that these idiots don’t realize they do more harm to their cause by driving away rational people who don’t want to associate with the environmental movement because they don’t want to be part of the same movement as those freaks.
PETA is another example but not as extreme.
mac said
Actually, their policies work very well which is why they continue with them and they are widely supported by a very large proportion of normal, reasonable and highly rational people; little old ladies, the young kids that are going to inherit this earth, straights in suits and hot, sexy fashion models.
Has anyone seen the new Peta ad with S&M celebrity actress Aya Sugimoto? Not bad for 40! I’d rather swing her way rather than with a bunch of grey-suited, lard-ass directors worried that the shareholder are bailing out on them …
http://blog.peta.org/archives/Aya%20Sugimoto%20photo%20shoot%20%282%29L.jpg
Now and again they step over the line, as we all do (don’t mention the War), but for the most part green activists are highly skilled and disproportionately effective media manipulators creating a widespread public opinion in support of increased animal and environmental protection. They achieve for their causes at the cost of a tiny percentage of what their opponent industries spend on PR far greater successes and are determining the play. I would say that economic damage is a fair line of defense against the economic exploitation of the commonwealth of natural resources.
Controversy sells … and, quite frankly, if I was to go sailing on pirate ridden waters around Asia, or anywhere in the reach of the French secret service as Greenpeace (will tell you), I would be packing stun grenades to go with them ’47s. You can’t call momma to save you when you are 3,000 miles out to sea.
No, they are not terrorists, silly. Think up a new word for yourself, not what the NWO would have you say. They are for the most part, fluffy, likable, agit-prop, do-gooder, Green Situationists saving the planet from conscienceless, capitalist, Robber Kings who would have it all a barren, life desert if there as there is a buck in it for them. Definitely the good guys.
Why would any green movement want turgid (or is that turd-age), skeptical recidivists bobbing around in its sparkling, clean and enthusiastic waters … I mean, if you can’t cope with being where the action is, there you can always puff smoke with the Sierra Club.
mac said
Oh … excuse me while I terrorise Ampontan for a moment to prove why we need these people. Does anyone you know still eat Spam? I understand it is very popular in Okinawa thanks to GI Joe.
An investigation of a Hormel pig factory farm in Iowa taped workers; kicking pigs maliciously, beating them with metal rods, jabbing clothespins and fingers into their eyes, slamming piglets against the floor to kill them, spraying paint directly up a sow’s nostrils, repeatedly urinating near crated pigs leaving urine running into the only area where food was dropped and animals could lay their heads and dead piglets’ entrails being removed, ground into a stew and set under heat lamps for bacteria to grow before it was then mixed with feed and fed to the sows …
And if that is not enough … here is a picture of piglets’ tails and testicles cut off without painkillers in a pile on the shed floor;
http://blog.peta.org/archives/Tails%20and%20Testicles.jpg
Whose side are you on?
Chris said
Paul MacCartney also seems to be a fan.
Cat said
The oceans need to be protected. I don’t see anyone else doing what needs to be done to stop these butchers who prey on innocent sea creatures.
The Sea Shepherds are doing what needs to be done. If someone was selling crack on the street corner or running over school children with their cars, I would not object to them being arrested or having their vehicles disabled to stop them.
As far as I’m concerned, Captain Paul Watson and his crew are heroes. The Sea Shepherds have my support.
Rick in Texas said
@Mac
There is a big difference in reporting a crime and committing one. It is alleged that members of the Sea Shepard knowingly and willingly endangered the lives of crew members on that whaling ship.
Oh, and as far as I’m concerned, PETA is a terrorist organization.
I present Penn and Teller’s BullSh!t on PETA:
Part 1 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0exLa6saV9o
Part 2 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAJ6-X7zvY
Part 3 – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gpEyHWXqQ4
nate said
I can’t argue with the general thrust of this post, but your abuse of the word “directly” is a touch absurd.
I’d have torouble thinking up a better example of “indirectness”. Video renters are no closer to this business than US taxpayers are to what any given US soldier does on his off duty time.
As for the whales, I just can’t figure out why they’re such a big deal for either side. No one in japan likes whale. And no self respecting vegetarian should so dramatically favor a cute ab
Animal over it’s less protected cousins.
mac said
Please look up the definition for despoil so you understand what I am talking about here.
I suggest you all read “Folk Devils and Moral Panics” by Stanley Cohen so as you can gain some insight on how your mind and thoughts are being manipulated and to recognize what part you are playing in a regular precondition social reaction. “Moral panics … deviancy amplification … moral indignation”, see below. Guys, you are on autopilot here, chirping like parrots, and not thinking at all.
I also suspect you wont be able to read it as part of your social and mental precondition is fear and moral outrage at having a mirror turned back on you so that you can look at yourself.
I have actually met some of the PETA. I would describe them as a collection of pretty damned cutsie chicks supported by some sweet dedicated middle aged old ladies into creating valuable social theatre. If you are afraid them … clown … you have some psychological issues.
The problem is “The Law” is not finished. Nor is it complete. Nor is it unbiased. And worse that that, since it inception to protect the property of the ruling classes, it has been corrupted even further to do just that; value and protect the property and wealth of the ruling class over all other principles. Animals, our shared eco-system upon which we all depend, have very little to no legal representation within either that system, our economics nor the political one they have bought.
The crimes, cruelties and unlimited environmental despoliation of the ruling classes, be they the capitalist corporations these days, are protected … whilst any other than submissive within the underclasses is violently punished under the guise of “justice” whether third world style (literally) or first world style (financial damage via lawyers).
A moral panic is sporadic episode which, as it occurs, subjects society to bouts of worry about the values and principles which society upholds which may be in jeopardy. In your case, the principle of conscienceless, untrammeled capitalist liberty to exploit living beings and the environment). “Folk Devils” are described as;
a condition, episode, person or group of persons [who] become defined as a threat to [those] societal values and interests … Those who start the panic when they fear a threat to prevailing cultural values, are known by researchers as “moral entrepreneurs”, while those targeted are known as a “folk devil.” [Cohen, 1987]
More moral panics will be generated and other, as yet nameless, folk devils will be created. This is not because such developments have an inexorable inner logic, but because our society as present structured will continue to generate problems for some of its members…and then condemn whatever solution these groups find … They are byproducts of controversies that produce arguments and social tension, or aren’t easily discussed as some of these moral panics are taboo to many people. [Cohen 1987]
Just think of them as middle aged society, threatened, and having hot flushed in envy of the rising libidos of young people expressing themselves to create the world culture they want (one with less suffering and less despoliation).
What are you for? More suffering and less despoliation in the name of financial returns … or less suffering and less despoliation and a slight change in the financial status quo.
These people are the moral warriors, albeit imperfect, that our leading our civilisation out of its dark age.
mac said
And just in case you think those wonderful men and their polished corporate PR are law abiding, go back and review what Roosevelt called the “malefactors of great wealth”.
By comparison, the actions of PETA, Sea Shepard et al are like mosquitos hitting the windshields of their semis as they roll across the prairies (or oceans), loaded with stolen goods.
fh said
So how do we go about “protecting the oceans” and “representing the animals”? By consciously endangering the lives of other human beings. Yes, that sounds quite enlightened indeed. You want to have humans and animals treated equally, yet these kinds of actions clearly demonstrate a willingness to put the lives of animals ahead of humans — ergo the problems we face today can be solved by getting rid of (some number of) people. Sounds like like the thoughts of some of history’s less popular figures.
The argument about (saving the environment from) the greedy corporation is irrelevent, nevermind the minefield of contradictions within the argument itself. I would explain why in detail, but I will put it in this way:
Blaming whalers or corporate bigwigs is only the simple answer, the easy way out. The real answer is to look at the global forces that are causing humanity to push the environment to its limits. However, by continually using fishermen and fatcats as the lynchpin of environmentalist cause, you make the “extremist” label inescapable which only hurts your cause. Here’s a reality check: simply getting rid of a few groups of people will not “save” the environment. And you’re fooling nobody but yourself if you believe the world is really that simple.
To be a real leader capable of effecting positive change requires a deep understanding of the world (and not just that “it’s full of lies”); resorting to violent tactics in no way demonstrates that capacity.
Bender said
Google “Paul Watson” “white supremacist” “anti-immigrant” “Sierra Club”…I for one have serious doubts about the guy.
Ken said
I wonder if the US does not arrest the suspects regardless of criminal delivery treaty with Japan.
Taintus said
Check out the work of Arne Kalland for a perspective on the cultural dimensions of whaling.
This is a tough issue because it involves issues of resource rights, cultural traditions, and local autonomy. Think, for example, about Sea Shepherd tactics in terms of the few engagements they have had with the Makah, an indigenous group with homelands on Washington’s Olympic Peninsula.
Check out my blog: In the Pines for more about issues surrounding local socio-ecological systems.
mac said
I have a feeling that Ampontan only puts up Whaling stories comments are slow and discussion ebbing because it is always assured of rising temperatures. These actions are not violent, they are defensive. No one is forcing the whalers to go blasting the brains out of whales, leaving them to die over hours or cutting them up as they are still alive.
fh, I have gone into this in more detail elsewhere here. Personally, I am not particularly involved in the whale issue but I can see clearly that it has an emblematic value far greater than its actual important for the, let’s say, Greens or Animal Rights campaigners.
The whale issue has become the trench war of the environmental movement and I would say one of the reasons for this is that, on the basis of very limited resources, it is, and is likely to be, winnable in a way that taking on the beef industry is not yet. (Other folks are working at the exploitative beef industry by way of vegetarianism, veganism, fairtrade and organics).
But do not for one minute think it is the end … its only one of the beginning points.
Let us look at your language though … we are not talking about “fishermen” we are talking about multi-million dollar industrial whaling corporations. Factories owners with shareholders at sea. None of the animal rights organizations are targeting humans as victims. It would be a lot easier to whack them as they left their homes (as some vivisectionists have been) than chase them to the Antarctic… but these groups are not stupid. I would argue that the industrial whalers are not fully evolved as human yet.
Within the current legal, economical and global political systems, the right to cause terminal damage and exploitation is protected at law and there is microscopically little to no recourse for environmental or species damage. I would go as far as to say, the game has been designed in this way. Causing economical damage is the only way to oppose the conscienceless exploiters because it directly targets their only interests and greatest vulnerability.
Its all about money … nothing else … so take out their market at one end and their means of production on the other and they are sunk. Its simple. Japan loses 10,000 times more than it gains from pushing this business. If it had any sense, it would turn around on its heals, just as it did after WWII, and become the leading whale tourism country, it would gain much more.
There is no need for it. Why should the greed of a few be allowed to screw us the environment for us all, for all time?
I do not know how many of you are aware of this but a few years ago (before the Gulf this way), a decision was made in governmental and intelligence communities to deliberately put out propaganda equating environmentalists with terrorists in order to bring out restrictive changes in the law and this was rolled internationally because it was successful and appealing to control freaks. “Something had to be done” about those pesky hippies that were actually starting to make a difference and, of course, for the intelligence/security community it was great because a new enemy also meant a new budget … and this enemy was such a fluffy, soft touch in comparison to the usual paramilitary targets.
So when I read individuals with no real experience or understanding of the issue spouting that very same language, I find it hysterical to a ‘no brain’ in action parroting what they have been programmed to.
As to Paul Watson being anti-immigration, what he actually believes is written here; http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_040406_1.html it sounds perfectly reasonable.
BTW, the usual rules of the flame state that whoever ‘reduction ad hitlerum’ first loses the game. What success on earth would Peta or Greenpeace have proposing an alternative global economics? Nah … just remove the financial inventive to do what they are doing, which what these groups are doing.
Bruce Smith said
Mac, So according to you people like me who disagree with Sea-Shepherd and PETA are on auto-pilot, but people like you who agree with Sea-Shepherd and PETA are not on auto-pilot ? How convenient.
Get a Job, Son! said
Mac… Is there a huge difference between whaling and other fishing…?
To use your pararmeters…
“whalers … go blasting the brains out of whales, leaving them to die over hours or cutting them up as they are still alive”
… and other commercial fishing uses hooks or net to catch, and the fish then thrash about and die slowly over hours, or some are caught, brought to land then cut up alive.
“we are not talking about “fishermen” we are talking about multi-million dollar industrial whaling corporations. Factories owners with shareholders at sea”
… as opposed to the factories on land that process huge quantities of other fish, owned by corporations. Thinking logisitcally, the factory vessels make sense when handling larger fish and longer journeys.
Assuming that the whales caught are not endangered (and I believe Minke whales are not) then there is no real difference to my eye. Of course, comments about how intrlligent and beautiful whales are will not be considered, as they are no more intelligent than most other animals on the ‘menu’. Beauty is also emotional, and therefore not valid.
Here is a final comment on the Sea-Shepards actions…
Consider if I live next door you, and your car makes too much noise and disturbs my peace. I talk to you and you refuse to change… you love your noisy car!. I talk to the authorities, and there is little they can do given the current laws.
Using Sea-shepard logic, I am freely able to cut your break cable so that next time you drive, you crash and injure youself/die.
This ‘activist’ approach is what Watson is trying, and is the real barbarism in this issue.
fh said
Mac:
No one is trying to censor the message of environmental conservation. But certain actions simply cannot be justified no matter the cause. If we’re really talking about multi-million dollar operations, then why do these activists attack the “fishermen”? After all, wrecking a boat isn’t going to do any good if the corporation is just going to buy a new one, right? Don’t you think their efforts would be better spent towards legislative action, in order to shut down these businesses from a legal standpoint?
Again, the problem isn’t what these people are trying to do, it’s how they go about doing it. They refuse to work with others and instead make up their own rules and willingly put other people’s lives in danger under justification of their own unilateral standards. In any other situation that sort of behavior would be considered illegal; there’s no reason why this should be treated differently.
For your own cause, you should learn to accept criticism where it’s due. Stand by your message, but admit that the violent actions of these activists is not appropriate. If you can’t do that, no one will ever take you seriously.
mac said
The debate is equivalent to that brought up by the “unlawful, unilateralist, violent … blah blah blah” Abolitionist movement when it opposed slavery. You find yourself in exactly the same position socially that opposed the anti-slavery movement and use the same rhetorical forms. “My goodness, what the world coming to if a gentleman and shareholder cannot whip his own black or harpoon his own whale!”.
• There was no “law” to stop us buying black men, therefore it was the abolitionist who were illegal by interfering with another gentleman’s “property”.
• There is no “law” (yet) to stop us slaughter wild whales, therefore it was the environmentalists who are illegal by interfering with another gentleman’s profit margin.
It was the “unilateral” direction actions of the campaigners, and numerous others, that brought about protective laws to stop the abuse.
Its a balance act. If you actually knew anything of “movement” as a whole, rather than depending on jingoist tabloids who are fed what to write for your opinion forming data, you would know that for every direct action group, there are several quiet, tireless lobbyist/research/legislative groups, e.g. just as PETA grabs the headlines in the last few years, BUAV (British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection) have been plugging away for over 100 years to end animal testing; just as Gandhi did his thing, others were (woo-woo … so terrible) blowing up railway lines to stop the British moving troops about.
The problem is, of course, that these are all handfuls of dedicated but ethical individuals on a minimum to no wages and a shoestring budget against, literally, multi-billion dollar industries playing dirty with big dick lawyers and politicians in their hands. The law is neither just, nor equal for all.
The failure in your logic and understanding (apart from the fact that whales are not fish … but let us let that one go) is that;
* groups like Sea Shepherd are not going out intentionally to “wreck boats”. If they were just boat wreckers like, e.g. the monkey wrenchers that wreck loggers equipment, their job would be much easier done and quicker (as Somalian or Philippine pirates prove on a regular basis). But it would not work as a tactic.
* what we are talking about here are victims, or their proxies, defending themselves from acts of violent. Victims have a perfect right at law to use “reasonable force” to do so, even to carrying arms if they so require. As I am sure you will have to agree.
It is perfectly obvious to anyone but a bigot, a self-interested industry man or fool that the first offence lies the “unilateral standards” of capitalism as applied by the industrial whalers making up their own rules and willingly put other people’s lives, and ecology, in danger under justification of their profit margins. That is it is. It is not even about whales … not need, just money for screwing the environment.
When your write “work” you mean adopt a submissive position and often, literally, take a cut or bribe like some Pacific nation islands we could all name … and no doubt it will be disclosed eventually some Japanese politicians. The actions of direct action groups are ultimate defensive. A last line of defence in over 150 years of abuse. Defending the ecology of the planet, of which we know so little, against violent abuse and financial exploitation.
A far better metaphor, ‘Get a Job’, would be double parking your car in order to block the exit of your neighbour’s car until the authorities arrive, and if there is not a law to stop him, keeping him double parked until your friends pass one.Happens all the time.
Personally, I think “sport fish” will be the next target once whaling is won. It is an utterly ridiculous, unnecessary and inhumane act to inflict pain, distress and physical damage to a living being for no purpose whatsoever. So expect a rematch soon.
Mad Bluebird said
The SEA SHEPARDS CONSERVATION SOCIETY like GREENPEACE are nothing but a bunch of pirates they shouldnt be allowed to teach their radical ideas to kids they should be entierly shut down
mac said
Good God … have young people think for themselves, seek to protect other living creatures and the environment … you are quite right … something should be done about it!
You can donate by credit card here; http://www.seashepherd.org/donate.html
fh said
People who think for themselves are free to agree or disagree, as long as they study all arguments and use reason and logic to reach their opinions. But you’ve made it quite clear that anyone who disagrees with the actions of Sea Shepherd is automatically wrong; ergo the only “right” answer is that Sea Shepherd is good and everyone else is bad. That my friend, under the guise of teaching youth to “think for themselves”, is brainwashing.
Also, congratulations on completely invalidating the entirety of your arguments by shamelessly linking to a donation page. Better luck next time!
mac said
I doubt you have actually ever read what I have said on the subject, let alone thought about it. You are just running your pre-recorded tape. The one pre-written for you by the vested commercial interests.
Are there really only two options, a binary good versus bad … Sea Shepherd versus “everyone” else?
So, in the spirit of promoting balance and informed discussion, and opposing the corporate whalewash, may I also offer the Japanese Greenpeace donation page for folks to vote with their wallets or credit cards;
https://www.greenpeace.or.jp/donation-en.html
It is unfortunate that in this market driven world compassion for other living beings is as unexploitable and undercapitalized as sustainability and conservation are suicidally unprofitable.
When was the last time you heard of a corporation set up to protect species loss and the environment?
Its funny how the whale issue rises to the surface time and time again on this blog … but my informed opinion is that it has archetypal influence within the whole “Japanese Question” as it was for the interests of the whaling industry that Japan was first cracked open involuntarily and under the threat of force by the West in the 19th Century.
Is it not a strange symmetry that 100 years later, it is another breed of ecological buccaneers that are closing down those commercial interests … or cracking open Japan again to greater environmental awareness?
Are they not the same conservative forces within Japan that resisted the first and who now resist the second? And did they not fail?
Perhaps brainwashing is exactly what is needed … the washing out from individual’s brains of the tired, old, worn out prejudices you parrot. Put that in your whale oil lamp and light it.
Ecoutez said
Mac,
Seriously, “moral warriors leading our civilisation out of its dark age?”
I, too, have met all too many PETA and Greenpeace activists, and I have noted that they are, for the most part, spoiled rich children. They are narcissists looking for a Meanigful Youth Moment in the form of Daring Activism.
This becomes transparantly obvious when you consider that most such activist groups never fail to achieve maximun irrationality and self-indulgence in pursuing (and inadvertantly undermining) their goals. Instead of reason and science, they embrace theater and spectacle. They are neither brave nor enlightened – they are confused people looking to satisfy half-formed pseudo-spiritual urges and projecting their own inner lives upon the tabula rasa of “nature.”
None of which would concern me, were it not for the fact that people with money and resources could and should be helping their fellow humans. In Africa, there are entire societies facing obliteration because of the oil industry and corruption. There are humans starving and dying who could be helped, but the folks with the megabucks prefer to act on behalf of creatures that neither care for them, and which would probably eat them given a chance (whales descended from wolf-like land animals, let’s recall).
Every society has a right to determine its own destiny, and develop its own relationship to nature. This is fair, because different societies have different needs. There is nothing brave or enlightened about Hollywood carny folk using their corporate revenue to enact upon other cultures their own infantile relationship with a “natural” world they have never had to reckon with in their own sheltered, catered lives. It is cultural imperialism, pure and simple – White America once again acting out of its own self-absorbed sense of superiority to other cultures.
mac said
Oh, wow. Is America really lead the world (let alone the environmental movement?) It must be a different America from the one I know. So how large a survey do you base your assumptions on … a handful of ‘johnny come lately’ volunteers?
You offer a fallacious argument. In fact, you attempt to use a number of fallacious arguments. So many, you’re hardly worth responding to. On top of which your factual assertions, along with your moral or legal ones, are so utterly wide of the mark that all they do is advertise the limits of your ignorance.
But … putting all that aside … “we” are a society and so “we” also have a right to determine “our” relationship with nature of which we have an equal and equivalent share to those that would exploit it. Be they industrial whalers or illegal bushmeat traders in Cameroon.
Why should “we” accept “your” (whose ever they are) neat little categorisation in national or regional packages … ? I am global and I assert those rights you say I have … globally. Just as the money men do.
Of course, what you are saying is rubbish. Broad and unsupportable generalisations, an appeal to prejudices, no sense of proportion. I mean, even a dough ball realises that some paparazzi starlet, or bare breasted PETA volunteer has very little to do with the grunt work that goes on behind the scenes of a broad and inclusive social movement. For god’s sake, get your head out of the tabloids, read some academics papers and government reports and realise that there is more to life than soundbites.
One of the big issues that the environmental movement has woken the world up to to is that “nature” is not unlimited and not packaged off into neat little imperial compartments. It is all connected. And if one person up stream is pissing in the water, then everyone down stream drinks from that. You pull out one piece of the machine and all the rest is effected.
No one has the right to screw with everyone else’s nature … for nothing more than ‘the money’. That is not even capitalism. It is theft and vandlism.
For those interested in taking sides with the industrial whalers and bushmeat traders, here is a reliable report and some vivid images of slaughtered primates;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2019193.stm
For those interested in taking sides with bare breasted PETA activists, here are some videos of pert, jiggling boobies taken from ‘The Running of the Nudes’ campaign against bull fighting;
http://www.runningofthenudes.com/campaign_center.asp
http://www.runningofthenudes.com/photos.asp
I mean, honestly, if smelly, blood splashed whalers in rubberwear making profits for tired old grey suits are your bag whilst screwing with the ecology … then who am I to judge what you get off on?
But I know who I would rather be rubbing up against.
Ken said
“Is America really lead the world (let alone the environmental movement?) It must be a different America from the one I know. So how large a survey do you base your assumptions on … a handful of ‘johnny come lately’ volunteers?”
No. America cannot afford to lead the world any more.
Now we are watching the turning point of history but I wonder why no blog is talking about current global crisis.
‘There is a new kid in town’?
bender said
Now we are watching the turning point of history
I seriously doubt this- the recession is global. These kind of things happen, there is no alternative system to shift into. I see the Japanese press eager to assert the end of Americanism (whatever that means), but they’d better revisit their own nation’s xenophobic & protectionist tendencies. The Nikkei is tanking, btw.
Speaking of protectionism, there was a good article in Newsweek a while back fearing spread thereof b/c of this crisis. That should be the real concern, as protectionist policies will make everyone suffer around the world. Talks about “the end of America” smacks of protectionism.
bender said
Oh, remember, after the Great Depression that spread around the globe, colonial powers engaged in protectionism. This is acknowledged as one of the causes for WWII (no, this is not revisionism!), and that’s why WTO was created post-war to promote free trade (find out for yourself if anyone doubts this).
ampontan said
Ken: One reason the blogs you may be reading aren’t talking about it is that few of the authors can talk intelligently about it.
For example, people are talking about the death of American style “capitalism”, when in fact many of the problems were caused by non market-oriented government intervention. The reason they are called “subprime” mortgages is that banks were forced to lend money (starting with Janet Reno’s Justice Department back in Clinton’s day) to people who shouldn’t have gotten them to begin with.
Another is that few people realize that Roosevelt-style measures made matters much worse than they should have been. (He was like Hoover, only he did more of it.) A recent examination found that the economic problems of those days could have ended (in the US) as early as 1937, but that Roosevelt policies prolonged them until 1943.
Bender: I’m surprised you bother with Timeweek and their ilk any more, for serious news analysis anyway. You might be better off looking at either the National Review and/or Commentary on the right, and something like the New Republic on the left, and then splitting the difference. Some people on the left read The Nation, and I tried a few issues about 15 years ago, but it was too stupid to put up with.
Ken: One more. Plenty of blogs with knowledgeable people are talking about it in English in the US.
Ecoutez said
Actually, Mac, my own mother has been an environmental activist since the late 1960’s, and remains so to this day. She also worked for the Humane Society and later ran her own animal rescue facility. I grew up around beasts of every conceivable size and shape, and met many ranchers, farmers, animal rescuers, and many, many environmental activists. That was my upbringing.
One thing I have noticed about most environmentalists – those who have actually done something to help the environment, I’m talking about – most of them think PETA and Greenpeace and Sea Shepard are nuts. They want nothing to do with them. I have met people who know what they are talking about, and who know which battles to fight if they really want to make a postive change. I therefore have more than enough experience to know the difference between genuine, informed, concerned citizens, and sensationalist cults seeking publicity and thrills. Their theatrics are to the endless detriment of more legitimate organizations and individuals with an ability to see nuance and practice humilty. These irresponsible “activists” discredit the whole movement.
Case in point, American activists could be saving more lives and doing much more for the environment by staying put in their home country and trying to end farm subsidies for the meat industry. But no, cows are neither romantic nor noble. There is adventure and fun to be had in the sea voyage – hence their calling. Their interests are selfish, and therefore disproportionate to need. A small handful of whales each year, versus millions of cattle and vast expanses of polluted farmland, not to mention the livelihood of the small farmer.
You can proclaim all you want your right to be seen as the true spokesperson for the environment, but there is such a thing as national and cultural sovereignty, like it or not, not to mention territorial borders.
Japan is not the country that drove the whale to the brink of extinction. That would be 19th century USA. Nor is it endangering the species now. Countries and cultures that have a centuries-long tradition of hunting a certain animal responsibly – be it whales or seals or what have no – have a right to persist with their traditions without harassment from terrorist organizations convinced of their own moral superiority. Often, those cultures have a much deeper relationship to the animals they hunt and consume than college kids raised on Walt Disney.
No, sorry, I’m not speaking from prejudice, but all too much personal experience, more than I ever wanted. I’ve met people who care about and understand animals, and I’ve met PETA and Greenpeace activists, and they are not the same people.
Ecoutez said
I’d also like to add that I myself was a member of PETA when I was 13-14 years old. I failed to renew my membership when, back in the 80’s, they sent me a pamphlet on cruelty to lobsters. I am not making this up. “Screams of torment,” if I recall correctly, was their term for that squeeky sound lobsters make when you throw them in boiling water.
It occurred to me, then, at that tender young age, that perhaps Ms. Newkirk was a few digits short of a Mastercard.
izanami said
“we are talking about ‘multi-million’ dollar industrial whaling corporations.”
It sounds quite small to me. Do you exactly know the wholesale price of an entire whale body, which in return accumulates as “corporate sales”?
Pardon me if you were talking about indulstrial whaling for oil more than a centuty ago.
Opinions must flow freely in a democratic society. I do not mind whatever the self-proclaimed “moral leaders” shout, or that they publicly demonstrate, as long as they do not resort to violence over those “blue-collar” whalers.
After all, it is just the arrogance of the rich and white, based on moral prejudice derived from the society in which they have been raised, viewing wild mammals as more sublime than caged animals or the whalers.
fh said
I know it’s a bit off-topic, but do you have any particular recommendations? Or if you’ve covered it before, a little kick in the right direction would be much appreciated!
ampontan said
ft: Here’s the last one I ran across:
http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/critical-point/#more-2823
The 10 October “Status Report” post is the current one. *I have no idea about the credibility of this guy*. I put it up because he has a ton of articles, a ton of links to other stuff, and has argued for a while that this has been a long time coming.
Last week I found a great site with several knowledgeable people posting, but couldn’t keep up, and now I’ve forgotten the name. I’ll see if I can find it.
Ken said
Bill,
Thanks for reply despite of off-topic
“One reason the blogs you may be reading aren’t talking about it is that few of the authors can talk intelligently about it.”
You are probably right but my wonder is why readers also do not seem to show interest in on-going problem which is more crucial for us while pursuing past incidents so in detail.
“Another is that few people realize that Roosevelt-style measures made matters much worse than they should have been.”
I am supporting monetarism but American economy has already gone so far that it will crash without Keynesian approach.
Zero-clear is an idea for efficient recovery with no debt but I wonder whether Americans are ready for poverty life.
If not and the Republican cannot adopt Keynesian policy, Pres. Obama may be a good timing.
However, It is ironical that it will suffer more those who are opposing Bush admin’s policy if at all it crashes.
“Plenty of blogs with knowledgeable people are talking about it in English in the US.”
Most of them seem based on the continuance of ‘US dollar standard’ or discussing to keep it.
I think US dollar hegemony is ending inevitably so that the discussion with them does not work out.
bender said
This is kind of old, but good news report:
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/update-wall-street/716161/
bender said
Well, looks like Krugman won the Nobel Prize:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49C37520081013?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7667190.stm
ampontan said
And you can participate in a poll on Krugman here.
Mad Bluebird said
SCREW THE SEA SHEPARDS CONSERVATION SOCIETY their nothing but a bunch of idiots we dont need these idiots running around in their zodiacs harrasing good people and lying through their fat green teeth about this so why dont they all go and take a hike we dont need their rediculous protests and the same to GRENPEACE
rob said
Anyone who’s seen the Whale Wars show on animal planet now knows the truth about the Sea Shepherds. They are definitely terrorists that use violence to try and force their ideals on other people.
They threw harmful butyric acid at the scientists and fisherman and boarded the whaling ship without permission and called it a kidnapping. They should be arrested.
mac said
Interesting, the Associated Press claim the Japanese fired stun grenades at the Sea Shepherd … but that have no shrapnel in them. Plenty of “stun” but not metal … so that is OK.
Animal Planet’s “Whale Wars” ranked as the most-watched ever for the channel, averaging 946,000 total viewers per first-run episode. The finale averaged just more than 1 million viewers and helped Animal Planet rank ninth among ad-supported cable networks.
Sadly, it will probably stoke more anti-Japanese sentiments and water residual racism against the people of that nation but, my guess, most of those million came out rooting for the anti-whalers.
Frankly, the words “terrorist and terrorism” are becoming so over-used that they have about as much impact, and read as ridiculously, as a teenager calling their parents “fascists”. No, no and no.
Honestly, what motivates these flamers? Are they afraid of turning gay or communist if they don’t boot up their PCs to flame some whale hugging hippies every day?
But please, Mad Blue, a word of advice. If you are going to flame whale hugging hippies, make sure your spellcheck first. Otherwise it just makes you look like some retarded throwback and damages your own team.
mac said
I was going to take a break but this dissonance between projection and reality is too great, and too serious to let slip by.
Whalers refuse help from Sea Shepherd to search for lost sailor
A Japanese whaling crew member goes missing in freezing Antarctic waters but the whalers refuse assistance the assistance of the Sea Shepherd ship and its helicopter.
‘‘We will not accept any help nor cooperation from the Sea Shepherd, who has been harassing our research vessels.’’ Kyodo Senpaku President Kazuo Yamamura continued by saying, ‘‘There is a distinctly uncaring nature about Sea Shepherd people in that they are prepared to disrupt the search for a missing seaman for their own ends.’’
In a statement posted on the Sea Shepherd website, Paul Watson, said that the crew had no intention of harassing the fleet during their search. He offered the services of the Steve Irwin, two boat crews and a helicopter, in the search for now dead man.
Never the less, despite the refusal, the two boat crews and a helicopter had been dispatched to search the immediate area for the missing crew member.
Now, who do you believe? Pride is one thing. Coming after a man fall into the Antarctic is another. Poor guy. Another blow for the harpooners.
bender said
I believe that whaling is a trivial issue fought between rich countries. In icy cold waters.
Mad Bluebird said
As long as their acting like pirats they should be treated as such and that means they should get 60 years in prison and absolutly no book deals or movie offers they deserve punishment not awards