Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

Slaughtering Whales in the Name of Science?

By Ian Williams, Comment Is Free. Posted February 16, 2008.


It's a whale of a tale: Japan's claim that the whaling industry serves a scientific purpose is hypocritical and ridiculous.
Advertisement

Ceticide is silly, as well as not very nice.

I was addressing freshmen politics students at Paterson University about the British elections on the day that Tony Blair was first elected. "Could you tell them about Scotland and Wales?" the professor asked. A large and hitherto comatose football player in the front row suddenly raised his head from the desk and asked: "You mean, like Moby Dick?" Whales 'R Us for a whole generation.

Whales are clever and cuddly, and they sing. They even have names like Willy. Like eating dogs and horses, harpooning whales appalls the anthropomorphically inclined, a point realized by the Japanese who have responded to the recent Australian court ruling against Japanese whaling in the Antarctic by pointing out the relish with which their prosecutors eat kangaroo.

If the Japanese were to get up and say outright, "We actually like whale meat, we think it's yummy and we are going to chomp our way through it regardless of your anthropomorphic delusions," you could almost respect them. But they don't. They waffle on about scientific research while going through whales as if they were white mice in a laboratory.

As a born-again carnivore, when I chomp through a filet mignon, I don't pretend that it is byproduct of tissue sampling for "scientific research" unless gastronomy has moved recently from being an art to a science.

The Norwegians make no such pretense. These cozy Nordic social democrats and suppliers of U.N. peacekeepers, take as many whales as the Japanese and blithely admit that they are doing it for food. Of course, they are European, were on the right side in the last war and hunt in their own waters, so somehow Greenpeace leaves them alone. It may help that they take less than their own declared quota because demand for it is so low, but is cooking whale meat and eating it with knives and forks really any better than nibbling raw slivers on the end of chopsticks?

Japan sends heavily subsidized ships on long voyages to the opposite pole and then tries to flog the flensed carcasses back home to a generally indifferent public. There are freezers full of whale meat because they can't sell all the by-product of their "research" even to captive audiences like school lunch programs.

Added to the hidden subsidies are the untold millions in bribes -- sorry, aid -- that goes to small developing-world countries to join the International Whaling Commission and vote along with the ceticidal Japanese.

At one time, as I remember, it was widely alleged that the steak in British steak and kidney pies of the kind sold in fish and chip shops was in fact whale steak, so I have probably eaten some myself.

But there are differences. Many of the great whales were and still are endangered species, and we have the example of Atlantic cod to show what happens when a species falls below a threshold value. They are also remarkably intelligent and more cogently, there is no humane way to kill a Leviathan. Their dying is long and direful. That is why Tokyo got testy when the new Australian government released its official pictures of the beginning of the bloody trail to Japan's restaurant tables.

But the biggest sin of the Japanese government is hypocrisy. Real scientists use neither harpoons nor chopsticks to do biopsies and autopsies.

I eagerly await the government of Japan's announcement that it is setting up a Sashimi Research Council. Its purpose will be to kill lots of whales to investigate the possibility that whale sushi will combat global warming. After all, sashimi saves enormous amounts of carbon output because it does not involve cooking.

However, it would be every bit as blubbery an excuse as the research the Japanese whaling fleet is allegedly conducting, which is simply pandering to a small but very vocal industry than evokes atavistic national pride to keep the yen rolling in. Of course, Japan is not the only country where small lobbies have disproportionate power regardless of international opinion, but does the government really have to put so much effort into it? Can't they promise the whaling ports a bullet train line to bring whale-watching tourists instead?

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: hypocrisy, whaling, whale hunting, japan

Ian Williams writes on the United Nations for AlterNet. His work has appeared in Foreign Policy in Focus, the Nation and Salon. He is also the author of Rum: A Social and Sociable History of the Real Spirit of 1776.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Whales Be Gone
Posted by: operdoc on Feb 16, 2008 3:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the gist of this story, but the gibe taken at Greenpeace seems uncalled for. It infers that Greenpeace opposes Japanese whaling based on some racist bias.

Greenpeace opposes Norwegian whaling. They actively protest Japanese whaling for a variety of reasons including Japan's hypocrisy concerning scientific research.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As has been pointed
Posted by: bitsfick on Feb 16, 2008 4:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
out many times on this site, the human race is nature's biggest mistake. On a positive note, the earth will survive, we won't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: As has been pointed Posted by: John Annis
» RE: As has been pointed Posted by: warriornation
Whales face so many threats
Posted by: agathena on Feb 16, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They are hit by ships that should be avoiding them, caught in rope and fishing line, bombarded with plastic waste, sonar, depth charges & other war games. The oceans are warming and their food source is diminishing. To wantonly slaughter the survivors of this species is criminal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shoulder the Responsibility
Posted by: FedUp on Feb 16, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The governments of the world, at least those that are supposedly the governments that represent the interests of its citizens need to shoulder the responsibility for the continued scientific research.
We all know that the Japanese, more than anything else, would lay down their harpoons if economic sanctions were threatened or instituted. That it hasn't happened is an indictment of how far we and our governments will go for personal gain and profit.
The fascist atmosphere that surrounds our current régime shouldn't stop us from putting pressure on our hypocrite politicians to pressure the Japanese to stop whaling.
Our oceans are being sacked by government subsidized whaling and fishing fleets, and we're acting as though we're powerless.
The Japanese aren't the only nations bent on raping the oceans.
Economic pressure on these countries will make them stop.
It's almost too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E. on Feb 16, 2008 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whales have lived on this planet for twenty-five million years, in the form that we know them today. They are our masters of evolution.

That we slaughter them for food, rather than honoring and learning from their ability to exist in harmony within the Natural Order, is a measure of the unconscious, un-evolved arrogance that is killing our species and disrupting the balance of Earth's ecosystem.

Sea Shepherd has been effective in enforcing international laws, stopping the killing of whales and other marine life, by breaking the machinery used to kill them. If people want to protect the whales, then actively support the people who are doing the most to stop the slaughter.

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society
http://www.seashepherd.org/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society Posted by: mountainsrock
Whale meat in Japan
Posted by: kiel on Feb 16, 2008 10:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's sold in pubs as a snack.
It's a weekly staple in school lunches in parts of the country.
It's widely available in fish markets in coastal cities.
To claim whales are hunted for "scientific research" is just plain silly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Birth Defects. Posted by: Fencerider
Enjoy a nice juicy steak occasionally do you?
Posted by: nzo on Feb 16, 2008 1:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, leave our whales alone! But let's also look at our hypocrisy in chomping down megaloads of living breathing farm animals without a second thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stop Japanese Commercial Whaling
Posted by: thelostsailor on Feb 16, 2008 4:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Japanese whaling is commercial and nothing more. No whaling should take place today except for small-scale whaling done by indigenous peoples for subsistence. Japan refuses to stop harvesting everything from the sea. The Pacific Ocean is getting much much smaller with billions of hatchery salmon competing with the remaining native stocks all over the Pacific, originating today from virtually every country on the Pacific.
The International Whaling Commission, in allowing Japanese whaling, has turned into the equivalent of other shameful world organizations: Inernational Atom Energy Agency, OPEC, World Bank, etc....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Stop Japanese Commercial Whaling Posted by: mountainsrock
» RE: Stop Japanese Commercial Whaling Posted by: thelostsailor
I tried!
Posted by: maxfactor on Feb 16, 2008 11:49 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The norwegian whale meat is just not good. Be it the type of whale, the butchering - I dont know. Just not enjoyable.
The japanese whalemeat is much much better.
Now is it right to go whaleing while so many species are on the brink of extinction? An objective and definite no.
Is it right for Greenpeace to target mostly Asians only? Well, Japanese have a huge amount of gunships and whaling-factory-ships in drydock. I have seen them and they are ready to go at a momentsnotice. Norwegian whaling is a cottage industry with a short coastal reach.
Is Greenpeace sectarian? Yes and the more radical you are the better your chances in a religious group. Greenpeace is a product of western soul search and as such incorporates all the notions of neocolonialism, evangelism, veganism, vegetarianism, superiority complex and actionism.

Greenpeace is doing its thing - if they ever ever saved even one whale from beeing killed - is absolutely debatable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My title
Posted by: maddy141 on Feb 17, 2008 7:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to agree with the previous post.

I think the author needs to do a little more research. To imply that Greenpeace is racist is ridiculous. Why wasn't funding or publicity taken into account?

*While I do not condone the hunting of Kangaroos, it should be noted that they are not an endangered species and are currently thriving.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boycott
Posted by: jbloggz on Feb 18, 2008 12:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the interest in science I have decided that while Japanese enjoy their whale steaks, I will no longer buy Japanese products. I cancelled an order for a Japanese car and will no longer support these barbarians. So eat on and, as you enjoy the result of your 'research' think how such steps as mine, taken on a much wider scale will effect your appetite!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nature and Paradox in the Human Condition
Posted by: Sudo on Feb 18, 2008 1:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read this poem on the Internet written by A. Viirlaid of Toronto. It made me think there has to be a better way for us to coexist with other life on our planet Earth. My reaction follows after the poem.

Mother Whale’s Lament

I cry for our shared grace
I cry for your human family
I cry for your whaler's family
I cry for my family
I cry for me
 
With your warm hand you could stroke my skin like so many of your family have chosen to do
You would feel my warmth and gratitude
 
Why do you touch me only with your cold harpoon as you thrust it into my flesh?
I thought after so much killing that we would both crave harmony
 
That we had learned that we both feel and love
That we both treasure life
That we revere our comrades
That we embrace our children
 
That we share the same blood of our ancestors
That our hearts both beat the rhyme of life
 
How my child will cling to me as you haul my dying carcass out of the sea
How she will cry
Until you kill her too 

A.Viirlaid, Toronto


Nature and Paradox in the Human Condition

I believe this whale hunt is utterly unnecessary, mindlessly cruel, deeply hypocritical, and an activity not worthy of modern humankind nor especially of the Japanese people who are a culturally and economically advanced people.

The Japanese of today are not the same people as those who scraped a living out of the wilderness during the Stone Age. They are not starving. They do not today live in a disadvantaged situation when compared to the many poor peoples of other nations.

So there is little substance in any nutritional argument for killing whales. There is even less in the cultural argument. Also one cannot justify the current killing with the "scientific study" argument — it is easier to prove that guns and tasers don't kill people, than to try and prove that we have to kill whales in order to study them.

Cultures and people move forward. They advance. Values and our common cultural mentalities progress. Hopefully our humanity strengthens. And customs evolve. These things are not frozen in time. Like an individual who occasionally manifests irrationality, societies too can be unbalanced in some of their customs or practices. They can both mature and grow beyond the behaviors that indicate an alienation from their true long-term natures.

Retaining worthwhile and revered ancient customs is praiseworthy. But, for illustration, if the Japanese of ancient times, and sometimes not so ancient times, never took prisoners alive during wartime because of the prevailing Japanese Samurai "culture", does that mean that such a particular practice is something to be retained with pride today? Using the modern sword (剣) against defenseless whales is equally dishonorable.

Any appeal to ancient customs is thus especially absurd in the whale hunt discussion. Did the Japanese in ancient times use steel-hulled ships to journey to Antarctica to hunt with steel harpoons and explosives for whales?

Can we condone what is being done by any of the arguments presented so far? This is all doublespeak. These arguments are not even up to the pathetic standards of crooked politicians who lie when trying to justify their corrupt behavior.

[end of part one]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nature and Paradox in the Human Condition (Part II)
Posted by: Sudo on Feb 18, 2008 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If tribal customs for aboriginal peoples in some parts of the world are used to appeal for the allowance of hunting or fishing of protected species out of season then it is true, the local lawmakers will often grant exceptions in such cases. But these should only be granted if the indigenous peoples are willing to use their forebears' (先祖) ancient technologies. That would protect the species in question since ancient methods are much less likely to have the mass killing effect of our modern methods. More importantly it would give true meaning to the phrase "retention of valued ancient customs".

How much more profound would it be for a young man coming of age to perform an ancient rite or ritual with the ancient methods, like fishing with spears rather than with drift nets 100 km in length? With the introduction of a highly sophisticated technology, ancient customs can — in this new and different context — assume a completely new and different nature and hence become unjustifiable on the basis of any appeal to “tradition”.

The right to carry forward with a tradition implies that the traditional methodology, as much as practical, should be used — naturally with the provision that if the ancient method involved taking your enemy's head off, then we abstain from that part of the tradition with the understanding that we have moved forward from that point in our common development.

Our purpose today should be to protect and serve life. Whereas our primordial instinct for self-preservation through the ‘harvesting’ of animal life served us well and allowed us to survive as a species, that same instinct is no longer appropriate — it does us a disservice. It takes our identity away from us. It can today jeopardize our primary motivation for living, the celebration of life itself.

Henry David Thoreau wrote “In wildness is the preservation of the world”. Today that wildness preserves us more than ever. But we don’t serve it nor does it preserve us by our ‘harvesting’ of the great whales. The wilderness preserves us through our conservation of those great creatures and through our preservation of their environment.

Those Japanese and Norwegians who actively hunt whales may delude themselves into thinking that they are in touch with the past, with their primordial selves. But what they are in touch with is what all of our forebears (先祖) were compelled to do in order to survive. But precisely because such activities are no longer germane to our survival, they needlessly alienate us from our potential — our true loving human character. Early humans had no choice — we do.

Today when so-called primitive tribes hunt for food, they invariably practice a form of prayer and a showing of gratitude to Nature for the gift they have just received. There is an inherent paradox they recognize explicitly. And they must atone for the taking of Nature’s gift of life in order to keep themselves psychologically whole. Otherwise they would have to coexist with unacknowledged hypocrisy.

They have extinguished the lives of others. They have killed to preserve and ensure their own continuance. Without the proper atonement and acknowledgement of the wrong that has been done, they risk becoming mentally unwhole and eventually physically unwell. But when was the last time you saw a whaler give thanks to God or more to the point to the whale whose vibrant life he has just ended?

The Japanese (and the Norwegians) and their compatriots in other nations are worthy of something more sublime than the needless slaughter of their fellow mammals in the oceans. These nations prove this every day in all of their other activities. Why not do the same with a permanent cessation of whaling?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nature and Paradox in the Human Condition (Part III)
Posted by: Sudo on Feb 18, 2008 1:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We don't own the whales. They were born free. We did not raise them for food. We have no more right to organize in societal groups to hunt them down with modern technology than they would have that right to organize and hunt us. Because we can do so is not sufficient reason for so doing.

As far as our concern for our fellow humans, there is no contradiction in helping helpless animals as well as helping our fellow humans who are in need or in danger. There is no mutual exclusivity in pursuing both such noble activities. Admirably, both Japan and Norway give very generously to foreign aid. We as individuals should similarly respect all life.

Even if we raise life on the farm for eventual human consumption it should be done with care and respect for those creatures we raise. There is sacredness in all life, even most especially our own, which it is true, we do not always recognize. When we mistreat so-called animal life we are not respecting their sacredness or our own. By so doing, we diminish ourselves and disavow our own sacred nature.

The respect for every human and animal life is an essential precondition if worthwhile societal life is to ever be possible for all of us on our Home Earth. When our collective conscience loses respect for Life as something incredibly sacred, and as something worthy of all of our protection, we inevitably end by disunifying our own identities and repudiating our own most basic reason for living.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]