Most Japanese don't really like whale meat

[Kim]

Anyway at this point the racism issue is really a red herring. The thread is about the fact that there is a decreased desire in Japan to eat whale. This is something that in my experience I can see around me actually occuring so it's not so hard to believe that eventually they won't get caught anymore here as no-one wants them. There simply is no huge Japanese whaling fleet that needs to stay in business so the economic incentive argument also carries little weight for me. I don't believe there is any justification to continue whaling only for petfood, and neither does my Japanese wife. I don't think that anyone will be able to make a valid argument for whaling based on petfood. I also wouldn't like to see any other animal raised purely to be petfood. I would have thought that basically it's rather good news for those who would like to see whaling decrease or stop. Whether or not the same trends occur in other whaling nations I have no idea but if they don't then as long as the activities are sustainable then I view eating whale as no more different, or sinful, than eating any other animal or fish.
Basically in Japan though it seems to be dying out. It might take a little while longer to happen; how long I don't know.

 

[HarryWhisman]

Murder is wrong in every culture that I'm aware of. As human beings it's fairly clear that your rights end where mine begin and vice versa..Whales however are not human and apart from Bhuddism which abhors the taking of any life (but equally I might add), the only life that the other religions prohibit taking are other human beings.

I disagree. I don't believe the gassers and bombers think what they are doing is wrong. Quite the contrary; I think they believe they're called and surely you are just as much aware of that fact as I am.

The whales are simply a food source for the people who eat them (not just the Japanese), just the same as cows, sheep, pigs etc are for others. For me this makes it a very different question.

Some may believe whales are simply a food source (not just the Japanese) but if others disagree and believe it's wrong to kill any more whales do you really believe that makes them a racist? Couldn't it be they just believe it's wrong to kill the whales just like you think it's wrong to gas the subway?

Frankly Kim I haven't quite figured out the whale thing yet although I am working on it. That little voice in my head keeps telling me there's something wrong here no matter what the Japanese or the Indians or you or anyone else might say. I have to do some more soul searching on this one but that's not what I was talking about anyway.

If I conclude that killing these whales is wrong and needs to be stopped, and frown upon the Japanese who are evidently doing this under the false pretext of doing research, you seem to want to classify me a racist. Please tell me I'm mistaken.

 

[HarryWhisman]

Anyway at this point the racism issue is really a red herring.

That's almost always the case these days in my opinion. Not just here.

 

[Kim]

Please tell me I'm mistaken.

OK. You are mistaken!
First off, you don't seem to comprehend what I'm actually saying through the several threads that this discussion has been raging. (maybe you didn't see them all?) I think it is perfectly acceptable for people to be against whaling - I am for myself. As an Englishman we don't eat whale so why would I be for it? However, I strongly believe that just because I feel a certain way it confers me no automatic right to foist my belief onto others who think rather differently. It most certainly gives me no right whatsoever to be so judgemental about that other point of view that I can claim that the other party is 'wrong'. This is what some people seem to be finding hard to understand. It's OK to attack the idea, but it's not OK to attack the people because of the idea. Attacking ideas is called debate, attacking whole nations or ethnic groups because of their way of life is called racism. Cultural differences exist between all sorts of these different nations and ethnic groups and historically we all used to go to war because of them. These days tolerance is what most have realized is the only real way out of the cycle of violence. Coming from Europe, historically I know quite a bit about war.

Now to come to your bombers. These sort of people are a prime example of what happens when toleration isn't present. They represent no national or ethnic mainstream cultural position but to punch above their weight because of their intolerance of others they choose violence. Not the straightforward in your face let's duke it out violence (that's war), but the sneaky underhanded violence of those who know full well that they are in a minority. They are outlaws in their own societies. There have been some historical examples of when guerrilla tactics have been justified in defense of an oppressed people, but from what I think you are referring to we are talking genuine terrorists. (this particular point comes rather close to the kind of political discussion not allowed on SB though, so I will give no specific examples)

Lastly - most people seem to take it for granted that the Japanese are doing NO scientific research with their JARPA programs and it's all purely commercial. As a matter of fact the JARPA projects are the only scientific studies that anyone is doing at all. Results of their research are published so the fact that it's happening is irrefutable. Is it their only motive? I doubt it. Do they need to take as many whales to achieve the same research? Probably not. According to one of our own Moderators who happens to be a Marine biologist they could do the same research taking less whales. However, paying for the fleets (less than 10 boats I believe) to conduct this research is costly and they need to recoup the money somehow as Japan pays for this on their own. The IWC regulations also dictate that any whales taken may not be discarded - they have to be used somehow. In spite of claims for instance that the same research could be conducted by non-lethal methods it's hard to see how anyone could gauge the amount of heavy-metal content in the blubber, or the stomach contents to establish feeding patterns just by looking at them. Basically, if no-one at all does this research we won't know - and no-one else seems to want to do it. The whales could simply die out due to factors of pollution, sickness, lack of food due to climatic changes etc.....and we wouldn't have a clue why.

So in the end I would simply say think about it. I don't want to see whales become extinct - and no, I don't think that desire is racist.

 

[Mr.X]

I've attached a .pdf (41kb) survey taken from a JARPA linked site. It's an older survey and interesting from several angles. X

 

[Kim]

I've attached a .pdf (41kb) survey taken from a JARPA linked site. It's an older survey and interesting from several angles. X

It's a quite small survey, only around 2000 people, but yes...it's is quite interesting. Out of interest - which questions did you find the most interesting...and which answers?
Generally to me it didn't really show an attitude of "We're going to keep whaling and never mind the consequences" - and I found the acceptance and admission of other cultures deep rooted beliefs also quite telling.
Another thing that was clear is the Japanese concern with the effect of whales and dolphins on fish stocks. I would agree that that is something that everyone doesn't see in the same way, but it's fairly clear that the Japanese view it quite seriously.
I'm interested in your views though.

I'd be very interested in seeing a similar but much larger survey conducted with people under the age of 30.

 

[Mr.X]

It's a quite small survey, only around 2000 people, but yes...it's is quite interesting. Out of interest - which questions did you find the most interesting...and which answers?
Generally to me it didn't really show an attitude of "We're going to keep whaling and never mind the consequences" - and I found the acceptance and admission of other cultures deep rooted beliefs also quite telling.
Another thing that was clear is the Japanese concern with the effect of whales and dolphins on fish stocks. I would agree that that is something that everyone doesn't see in the same way, but it's fairly clear that the Japanese view it quite seriously.
I'm interested in your views though.

I'd be very interested in seeing a similar but much larger survey conducted with people under the age of 30.

It's an interesting survey. The sampling size is miniscule (as you mentioned) and the overall return was in the 60 percentile. It's not quite as tight a survey as I would like. It's a tad loose. I do notice a some biased questions. I'll have to have a look at it tonight in detail...have to run out and film people reacting with museum exhibits today. X

 

[HarryWhisman]

OK. You are mistaken!

I knew you would see it my way.

First off, you don't seem to comprehend what I'm actually saying through the several threads that this discussion has been raging. (maybe you didn't see them all?)

I disagree. I think I comprehend what you're saying just fine.

I think it is perfectly acceptable for people to be against whaling - I am for myself.

Acceptable or not, some are indeed against whaling.

As an Englishman we don't eat whale so why would I be for it?

Look out. Someone might say you're a racist.

However, I strongly believe that just because I feel a certain way it confers me no automatic right to foist my belief onto others who think rather differently. It most certainly gives me no right whatsoever to be so judgemental about that other point of view that I can claim that the other party is 'wrong'. This is what some people seem to be finding hard to understand. It's OK to attack the idea, but it's not OK to attack the people because of the idea. Attacking ideas is called debate, attacking whole nations or ethnic groups because of their way of life is called racism.

There's nothing wrong with fighting for what you believe to be right. Culture, nation, ethnic group be damned. Right is right, wrong is wrong and the truth doesn't care.

Cultural differences exist between all sorts of these different nations and ethnic groups and historically we all used to go to war because of them. These days tolerance is what most have realized is the only real way out of the cycle of violence. Coming from Europe, historically I know quite a bit about war.

"Everyone knows war"

Now to come to your bombers. These sort of people are a prime example of what happens when toleration isn't present. They represent no national or ethnic mainstream cultural position but to punch above their weight because of their intolerance of others they choose violence. Not the straightforward in your face let's duke it out violence (that's war), but the sneaky underhanded violence of those who know full well that they are in a minority.

They represent no national or ethnic mainstream cultural position? You're really on thin ice here in my opinion, but even if we assume you're right, do we really need to take a poll to determine right from wrong?

They are outlaws in their own societies.

They are also heroes in their own societies.

There have been some historical examples of when guerrilla tactics have been justified in defense of an oppressed people, but from what I think you are referring to we are talking genuine terrorists. (this particular point comes rather close to the kind of political discussion not allowed on SB though, so I will give no specific examples)

You can't have it both ways Kim.

Lastly - most people seem to take it for granted that the Japanese are doing NO scientific research with their JARPA programs and it's all purely commercial. As a matter of fact the JARPA projects are the only scientific studies that anyone is doing at all. Results of their research are published so the fact that it's happening is irrefutable. Is it their only motive? I doubt it. Do they need to take as many whales to achieve the same research? Probably not. According to one of our own Moderators who happens to be a Marine biologist they could do the same research taking less whales. However, paying for the fleets (less than 10 boats I believe) to conduct this research is costly and they need to recoup the money somehow as Japan pays for this on their own. The IWC regulations also dictate that any whales taken may not be discarded - they have to be used somehow. In spite of claims for instance that the same research could be conducted by non-lethal methods it's hard to see how anyone could gauge the amount of heavy-metal content in the blubber, or the stomach contents to establish feeding patterns just by looking at them. Basically, if no-one at all does this research we won't know - and no-one else seems to want to do it. The whales could simply die out due to factors of pollution, sickness, lack of food due to climatic changes etc.....and we wouldn't have a clue why.

So you're saying in order to save the whales we need to kill a few ship loads? Hmmm. And so maybe the Japanese whale researchers should start hanging with the "Save the Whales" crowd? You don't believe that.

So in the end I would simply say think about it. I don't want to see whales become extinct - and no, I don't think that desire is racist.

I don't think anyone wants to see the whales become extinct and of course that desire isn't racist. Look, you seem like a nice enough gentleman to me but hey, figuring out what's right and wrong is hard work and our time here on earth is hopelessly short. Too hard and too short in my opinion to waste time worrying about how someone else might be offended about what I conclude. Regardless of whether or not that encompasses another ethnic group, another country, another political party or whatever, it's still someone else and in the end the truth lies within YOU. It's a gift given to us all by God.

 

[drbill]

IMHO, the key to determining if one's opposition to whaling has racist undertones is to find out if that person disagrees with whaling by other societies including Norway and aboriginal tribes. If one is against whaling, one would be against it being done by any culture. I think that is where Catherine stands on the issue.

I have great admiration for some of the traditions and values practiced by Asian cultures. I dated a Japanese-American woman for nearly 8 years and am still a good friend of hers. I have Asian-American and Asian friends (although most from cultures that do not, at least to my knowledge, practice whaling).

My gut tells me whaling is wrong, at least based on my value system. I've never had anything against hunting or fishing for food, and have practiced both in the past. However, I lack respect for participants in either activity who do so illegally... without licenses (ahem Dick! and there is no license to kill for humans), targeting illegal species, keeping undersized individuals, etc.

Although I find it personally "wrong" to kill whales, I also try not to impose my will on or judge other cultures which may find it acceptable. Education is the best avenue.

However, I categorically object to the killing of whales for pet food! Much as I love pets, I even object to keeping them especially if it is indoors in an unnatural setting strictly for the self-enjoyment of the owners. I do not campaign against this, I simply don't keep pets myself.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

The whales are simply a food source for the people who eat them (not just the Japanese), just the same as cows, sheep, pigs etc are for others.

This kind of position really undermines your argument. On the one hand, we are talking about a natural wild resource and on the other hand, livestock raised for food. They are two totally different things, and I hope you realize that.

There is nothing similar about raising cows for food and hunting whales (or any seafood or wild animal) for food. While environmental impact issues should be considered in both cases, trying to justify one by citing other only muddies the debate.