MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 02:14
nextcollapse
The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [**Medium**] (Click to view Full Report)
### The Guardian is rated with Medium Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
> Bias: Left-Center
> Factual Reporting: Mixed
> Country: United Kingdom
> Full Report: mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
> Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
sandbox@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 07:22
nextcollapse
I looked into why it’s rated mixed. The failed fact checks are total nonsense - there are five of them.
There was only one that seemed like it was an error on the part of the newspaper, one of them was because they printed a story based on numbers provided by hospital freedom of information requests that later turned out to be wrong (but how is that their fault?) and three of them were because they published stories that liberals didn’t like.
What a fucking joke of a fact check website. Get this right-wing shite fucking deleted.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 08:21
nextcollapse
Seems you’d want to understand # of errors/omissions/mistruths as a proportion of total news stories, and the impact of and reason for those issues.
Get a sense Guardian is quite trustworthy but it would require a much more extensive look than the fact checker appears to have taken (and obviously than I’ve taken). Thanks for recommending caution here.
leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
on 01 Aug 2024 02:42
nextcollapse
Seriously, I’ve only seen it claim left bias, even for the most egregious right wing pamphlets. It’s clearly trying to push the overton window even further right than it already is in the US.
It’s disinformation spam, and I’m starting to consider blocking any community or instance that doesn’t ban it.
jadedwench@lemmy.world
on 01 Aug 2024 12:38
collapse
Due to Sync, it is always an eyesore of huge images due to the multiple links. I just blocked the bot so I can move on. I should dig through my settings again to find a happy medium.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 20:20
collapse
Are the mods going to ban this stupid spammy bot?
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 02 Aug 2024 00:59
collapse
The mods implemented the stupid, spammy bot.
foxymulder@lemmy.ml
on 31 Jul 2024 03:30
nextcollapse
doesnt japan have a near 100% conviction rate too? they dont prosecute offences if theres a chance of not winning?
tiredofsametab@kbin.run
on 31 Jul 2024 05:22
nextcollapse
It's not 100% but it's super high and, yeah, they usually don't prosecute unless they think they have a really solid case. That said, some of that also includes confessions that some have argued are under duress (and, in the case of foreigners, people who aren't exactly sure what they're signing, though I have no idea how that's legal).
ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
on 01 Aug 2024 10:49
collapse
They also can hold suspects in detention without trial or hearing for months while they investigate, if they choose. It’s not often discussed but it’s a huge part of the pressure/duress.
tiredofsametab@kbin.run
on 01 Aug 2024 23:58
collapse
This is not correct. It's 20ish days (23, I think?)
ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
on 02 Aug 2024 03:44
collapse
This may have changed since I learned about it in 2008, but my understanding is that they get around that rule by technically “releasing” you and “rearresting” you on suspicion of related crimes. The “rearrests” can stack.
tiredofsametab@kbin.run
on 02 Aug 2024 03:47
collapse
I think it has to be another crime, but that probably still can be done. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure, and I hope I never have occasion to find out.
Blackmist@feddit.uk
on 31 Jul 2024 12:30
nextcollapse
Not sure what sort of sentence he’s looking at here though.
The guy who actually boarded the ship and tried to assault the captain only got a suspended sentence. And this guy is being tried as an accomplice for that.
It doesn’t sound terribly serious, tbh.
thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
on 01 Aug 2024 01:58
collapse
i mean “don’t prosecute until they have a solid case” is one way of looking at it, the other is “the courts always side with the police”
Faroese cuisine is generally dominated by the use of animal products, as only about 2% of the 1,393 km2 of land on the islands is at all suitable for arable crops
a 2008 paper in Australian Archaeology said conservationists find Faroese whaling particularly offensive because it does not conform to traditional Western perspectives on “primitive” tribes
ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
on 31 Jul 2024 12:16
collapse
But, you see, I think my culture is superior so they should stop.
Anyway, who’s up for an ethically* slaughtered cow that I’ve raised in a box?
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 20:19
collapse
Wow I didn’t realize that cows were endangered. I also didn’t realize that we slaughtered cows by drowning them.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 01 Aug 2024 07:47
collapse
Right? It’s real fucking simple.
brbposting@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 08:17
nextcollapse
So if Sea Shepherd’s attacks were all honest, there would be less vitriol?
Does he lie in a specific way that implicates innocent people? (vs. lying in a way that garners broader attention and the attention is what drives the additional hate) Curious for some examples as someone low-information on the subject.
LordGimp@lemm.ee
on 01 Aug 2024 04:04
nextcollapse
Paul isn’t out harassing inuit communities. Do you know why? Because inuit communities practice ACTUAL sustenance hunting, not a tradition of slaughter dressed up as “culture”. Do not disgrace actual caretakers of the land to cover up your barbarism
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 01 Aug 2024 07:45
collapse
"how dare you call us out for the horrific things we’re doing ". Like you don’t even pretend it’s fake.
Hey, you don’t like people shitting on your country? How about you make them stop slaughtering whales for no fucking reason.
Like, I’m sorry, am I supposed to feel bad that people are rightfully calling you out for that shit? Is your country not a modern, functioning society? Are you really incapable of shedding these pointless barbaric traditions, and would rather just cry about it when someone dares to call you out?
Let me guess, “I refuse to discuss this with you” or whatever. Like you response to the other person.
I’m beginning to think you have more at stake in this than just being from the same country. I’m from the US, dude, my country is shit and there’s a million things to criticize it for… And you can’t even admit the one thing your home is known for is barbaric
Is your country not a modern, functioning society? Are you really incapable of shedding these pointless barbaric traditions, and would rather just cry about it when someone dares to call you out?
Have you actually looked into the topic or are you simply assuming? The Faroese regulations on whaling are extensive, from what methods are allowed to beach the whales to how the killing is to be done so it’s quick.
I’m from the US, dude
Then you should really focus on the complete absence of any animal protection laws in the US, instead. The Faroese didn’t even blink when outlawing the traditional way to kill the whales in favour of spinal lancing, yes of course whales bleeding out in shallow bays is a gruesome sight. And they own that, while risking their lives driving the whales in small boats.
Meanwhile, US consumers are safely isolated from the absolutely abhorrent conditions their food is produced under. The bloody bays aren’t avoidable, they come (literally) with the territory. Chicken rotting while still alive because they’re so tightly packed and hygiene isn’t an issue because you’re chlorinating them anyway is avoidable.
It’s you, here, who’s alienated from how food is produced, not the Faroese.
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
on 31 Jul 2024 06:31
collapse
He doesnt like being called a disgusting freak for slaughtering whales, letting them slowly die after dragging them on land to maximize their suffering. Thats the only reason i can think of for why a faroe national would be mad at him.
I dont like him either, but this level of hatred only comes from people who got caught in the act and dont want anyone to talk about it.
As long as you’re vegan or happy with being called a disgusting freak for eating animal products I think that’s fine.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
on 31 Jul 2024 09:31
collapse
It’s not about being vegan or not in this case.
The Faroe islands have a traditional whale/dolphin (I don’t remember which exactly) slaughter every year.
They drag dozens of them on beaches and kill them. It used to be one of their main food sources for the year, which is respectable.
But nowadays they don’t need to do it anymore, yet carry on with this super cruel tradition.
It’s a bit like bull runs and bull fighting, I get the traditional side of it, but it’s something that should not be performed anymore because of the suffering and cruelty it causes.
Hedin@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 09:39
nextcollapse
Not remotely accurate.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
on 31 Jul 2024 10:45
collapse
What’s not accurate about my comment?
Faroese whaling is a century old tradition that used to be about survival and used whale parts for food and other things like light, fishing material, clothing, etc.
Nowadays, we have replacements for pretty much all these things right ? Whale meat doesn’t seem to be widely consumed much anymore, it’s also dangerous because of mercury levels in the whales.
Yet the Faroese kill around 700 whales a year, and in a pretty cruel fashion. They force the whales to beach themselves, have their spinal cord and a few major arteries severed and left to bleed out and die over the course of minutes.
I’m all in for traditions but not for cruel and pointless ones.
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
on 31 Jul 2024 11:11
collapse
Well, then educate me and please share accurate information then.
My source is the Wikipedia page which is nicely sourced with plenty of Faroese references:
Whaling in the Faroe Islands.
Unfortunately I can’t read Faroese, so maybe all that sourced information has been lost in translation ?
Hedin@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 11:22
nextcollapse
BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
on 31 Jul 2024 11:49
nextcollapse
Thanks for the information. Even though your source looks as biased as mine, at least I have contradictory information to make my mind on the matter.
I’m not trying to enlighten anyone on their culture, I respect all cultures but we need to weed out, or at the very least reform, cruel traditions and practices and that’s not limited to Faroese whaling or bullfighting.
It’s a good thing that whaling has been heavily reformed in the past few years, and it’s also aiming to lessen the suffering of the animals.
You are capable of subsisting without the consumption of animal products, and I assume you choose not to do so. You know that animal agriculture causes suffering. You choose your taste preferences instead of choosing to reduce suffering.
You don’t need to do it anymore, yet carry on with this super cruel tradition.
Please, go ahead, tell us about your grand plan of growing enough food on the Faroer. And then go ahead and tell other native populations all over the world to stop living off the land sustainably, and instead go in debt to buy HFCS from Nestle.
Hey so there’s this crazy thing called a “boat”, and you may not believe this, but it’s like a big truck which can go over water. And you can basically put whatever you want on it, so you can grow fruits and vegetables in Scotland, and then move them to the Faroe Islands.
They actually worked this one out a little while ago, and they’ve got these big buildings now just full of food, just shelves upon shelves with all kinds of foodstuffs. I know it sounds unbelievable, but here’s a photo of a supermarket on the Faroe Islands!
Now, I know you might be thinking, “well, hang on, doesn’t having a big boat like that cause climate change?” and the answer is “yes, but waaaaay less than animal agriculture.”
You also mentioned something about Nestlé HFCS, which I’m happy to reassure you about - It’s pretty rare over here, it’s really more of an American thing. We do have sugary foods as well, of course, but less so. But you can just choose not to eat those - it’s not like it is in the US where they put it in everything. And they’re not putting HFCS into the raw fruits and vegetables that you’d use to make a plant-based meal.
But you know what? Even if there are people living off the land sustainably - as in, fully providing for themselves and their families in whatever way they can without actively farming animals - and we’re okay with that, it doesn’t justify those of us who don’t live in that way to consume animal products.
Even if there are people living off the land sustainably - as in, fully providing for themselves and their families in whatever way they can without actively farming animals - and we’re okay with that,
So you’re ok with what the Faroese are doing, got it. Wait no you want to stop them letting sheep graze the parts of the island which aren’t suitable for agriculture, and instead whale more.
it doesn’t justify those of us who don’t live in that way to consume animal products.
Go on, tell me more about how the Faroese are living. How much of their economy, do you think, is food production in one way or the other? How, do you think, is the whale hunt organised? Is it commodified?
Having looked at that data (I trust you already have since you sound so sure and knowledgeable) one could of course say “well they could stop exporting fish then they wouldn’t need to whale”. There’s something to that, and it would also mean that they couldn’t afford to import machinery any more, couldn’t afford gas any more, no textile imports, and with them again sitting in row boats in sheepswool clothing maybe they’d look “primitive” enough for your tastes to be allowed to whale, again.
Seriously WTF. “This reservation has a supermarket, that means they should not be allowed to hunt any more”. Are you hearing yourself. Read this.
Could you please check the comment thread, look at who I replied to, what they said, and what my response was? If anything, I have been defending the Faroese, not criticising them. I have been criticising people who are being hypocritical about the Faroese whaling while also supporting traditional western animal agriculture.
I’ve not really taken much of a position on the Faroese themselves - except in my last message where I said that I don’t really have a huge issue with subsistence/survival consumption of animal products, as much I do with industrialisation of those products.
For what it’s worth, I’m sure the slave industry made some societies and cultures economically viable which are no longer so. I don’t think “but then this culture/tradition/religion/society would have to adapt to changes” is a particularly strong argument against abolishing cruel or immoral systems of oppression. But that’s not really the argument I’m interested in, right now, and it’s not the argument I originally made.
My argument is that the average person, who is absolutely capable of living a life without the consumption of animal products, with little or no impact to their quality of life beyond their taste preference, cannot justify that behaviour beyond selfishly prioritising their taste preferences over the suffering of others.
My argument is that the average person, who is absolutely capable of living a life without the consumption of animal products
Oh so you’re a vegan got it. The Faroer don’t have enough arable land to support living off plant agriculture, they need the sea to survive. Import? Possible in principle but without fish to export, with what money? It’s like telling Inuit they should live off salad (literally what they call all vegetables): Greenland is much larger but not exactly suited for agriculture.
And much unlike bullfighting the Faroese actually take care to make the killing humane. In fact missing your shot when hunting deer should cause a lot more suffering than what they’re doing, for the most part the animals are first beached, uninjured and generally fine (it’s not like they can’t breathe air), the killing itself takes seconds. The sight of course isn’t pretty, lots of blood in shallow bays certainly leaves an impression but that impression says nothing about how much the animals suffered.
They care about continuing to whale because it’s a core part of their culture, they don’t care about preserving random details like using old and slow and awkward knife techniques instead of the current spinal lancing, they care about things like their solidarity being expressed and reinforced in the communal activity and the distribution scheme.
Once again, that’s not what I’m talking about. You’re having an argument with a strawman.
Though, I don’t particularly think you have a strong argument. Again, I refer you to my previous comment. I’m sure there are lots of cultures and societies that had to change how they made ends meet economically, and deal with the changes or ending of traditions associated with the end of the slave trade. That’s not a strong enough argument for the continuation of slavery. Likewise, tradition and economics aren’t strong enough justification to continue animal exploitation.
If you were to ask me, how would the people of the Faroe islands survive without the fishing industry, I’d say, how do you propose that OPEC nations survive without the oil and gas industries? Change is a part of life, and people need to accept that. Personally, I’d be more than happy for the state of Denmark to ensure that the needs of those people are met.
But, again, you’re forcing this argument on yourself.
Change is a part of life, and people need to accept that.
…which is why they’re using a spinal lance now instead of a knife so that the kill is as humane as possible?
This is like America and guns, or Britain and tea, or New Zealand and sheep shagging. Like Italians and valuing ingredient quality, like Germans and griping. They’re not going to stop. Change, sure, the Kiwis might change to goats. But stop?
They very well might stop hunting dolphins in particular, though. If you really want to make them stop completely then I suggest pouring even more mercury into the seas.
Which brings me to: Have you any idea how green the Faroese are? Conscious and connected to the nature surrounding them? Intensely worried about pollution? They’re probably going to be the first nation to hit 100% renewable electricity use including in transportation. How they’re actually best pals with Greenpeace? That Sea Shepherd is the odd rabid dog out, demonstrating again and again just why they’ve been kicked out of Greenpeace?
Personally, I’d be more than happy for the state of Denmark to ensure that the needs of those people are met.
By and large they don’t want to be part of Denmark. It’s only money which is currently keeping them in the union and they sure as hell aren’t going to knee-cap their economy to increase their dependence on Denmark.
Given that the US had a huge civil war over the issue and is still dealing with the legacy of it today, yeah, I’d say it’s quite an integral part of the culture.
and yes, I’m still comparing slavery of humans to the slavery of animals. Might interest you to know there are a few holocaust survivors who compare animal agriculture to the holocaust, too.
My point wasn’t that we should model our behaviour after the nazis. My point was that we shouldn’t excuse some evil acts because the perpetrator has done some good.
veganpizza69@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 07:34
nextcollapse
If you don’t want to be hated, don’t murder whales. It’s very easy, literally most people do it.
Why do you care more about one person than your culture of murdering whales? Why do you speak up about him but not your tradition that you apparently don’t participate in??
Maybe they also don’t eat pigs? I eat meat (FUCK chickens), but I haven’t eaten pork for years after getting to know my neighbors pet pigs. Sure, they’re more socialized and a whole different breed from factory farm pigs, but still they’re too smart for me to be comfortable eating them. But my point here is that you’re accusing them of hypocrisy or inconsistency, without ever establishing that they actually are being hypocritical or inconsistent.
is that no one gets outraged, justifys harassing people and wished death upon their entire family and country for eating pigs.
You uh… wanna bet about that one?
Values a culture finds truly abhorrent are combated. You’re using the same arguments people use to defend confederate monuments, or anti-LGBT laws. It’s tragic that your traditions cause harm, but just because they’re traditional and your culture doesn’t mean they’re not disgustingly cruel.
Yeah, we need to either stop or wildly reform factory farming. No argument there. But just because you think it’s cultural imperialism doesn’t make it reasonable to torture other creatures to death.
The big difference here is that, while I will absolutely admit to and work damn hard to change my own culture, you can’t even admit the cruelty inherent to your own traditions. My tribe used to hunt whales. We saw the barbarity of it. We stopped. Why are you special?
That’s not really a good take though. You don’t need to be intelligent or social to be worthy of the moral consideration to not be eaten. Otherwise we’d be eating babies.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 02 Aug 2024 13:55
collapse
Yeah, that doesn’t logically follow. Nobody said it’s the one, singular consideration.
You’re comparing a species of animal (whale) to the age of an animal (baby). Two completely different things…
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 02 Aug 2024 20:38
collapse
No because you don’t understand that humans are animals, for one… But more importantly, because of the nature of your comments in this thread. It’s weird behavior.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 02 Aug 2024 23:27
collapse
I didn’t say animals are human, i said humans are animals.
Can you really not grasp the distinction?
And oh yeah I know I’m weird lol
todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee
on 31 Jul 2024 12:08
collapse
So the person who said this rhetoric breeds racism and xenophobia is now being demanded to renounce their culture and apologize for the actions of other people (just because they’re the same ethnicity)…
Sounds like they were right.
ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
on 31 Jul 2024 10:20
collapse
Somehow it’s still your fault. I’m very progressive.
PugJesus@lemmy.world
on 02 Aug 2024 00:28
collapse
Lemmy says “Indigenous rights” until it’s white people, I guess.
Faroese have hunted whales since time basically immemorial as people with more land have hunted deer. They are also allowed to, under international law, to hunt whales just as say Inuit are. Their hunting is sustainable, always has been.
The anti-whaling convention was instituted to stop commercial exploitation of the seas, to stop the great whaling ships, it was not instituted to stop people feeding themselves.
Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
on 01 Aug 2024 13:08
collapse
If there were a nation that still practiced cannibalism, should everyone be fine with it because they’ve been doing it a long time and it’s part of their culture? Even if sustainable because they only ate the criminals?
Just because something has been done for a long time doesn’t mean it should still be acceptable, especially as we learn more such as the intelligence and importance to the food chain that whales have. It’s not like there are no other options.
The Faroer don’t have enough arable land for everyone to switch to a vegan diet. They could import the rest of what they need, yes, but their only notable export product is fish so that wouldn’t make much sense would it.
And with “only notable export product” I mean “stamps are on place number two”. You know, the kind you glue onto envelopes.
Spacenut@lemmy.world
on 02 Aug 2024 02:01
collapse
Just to be clear, you’re no longer saying it’s ok to kill whales because it’s cultural and they’ve been doing it a long time? You’re now saying that it’s ok because they would be economically ruined if they didn’t kill whales?
I’m not trying to be combative, just trying to clarify.
Both are things that make killing whales ok. It’s just that when arguing with vegans “they’d literally starve” is a way more productive argument.
Spacenut@lemmy.world
on 02 Aug 2024 04:42
collapse
Got it, thanks for clarifying. I think both lines of reasoning have problems though:
X is ok because it’s cultural and we’ve been doing X for a long time.
Y is ok because we would be economically ruined if we didn’t do Y.
I can think of many things to fill in for X and Y that satisfy the necessary conditions, but still aren’t ok. I do, however, think this line of reasoning is valid:
Z is ok because we would literally starve if we didn’t do Z.
I don’t think any vegan would take issue with #3, since in that case Z is necessary, and vegans are only concerned with unnecessary harm.
I mean I could have gone deeper into it but then I didn’t particularly feel like arguing with a vegan. Yes, I’m speciesist, we can leave it at that.
The Faroer certainly needed whaling in the past to survive, and that necessity has engrained itself in their solidarity culture – everything about how the hunt is done and distributed is communal, closest comparison I can come up when looking at Germany would be the status of the fire department in a village: Not the inn, not the church, not even the football club, but the fire department is the core and beating heart of the community and its solidarity. They had a brief stint with commercial whaling but they stopped that before commercial whaling got outlawed, couldn’t compete with the Norwegians and their giant ships.
Faroese being as green and nature-conscious as they are they would indeed stop if the whales were endangered… but they aren’t. Dolphins are controversial, I guess they’re going to stop hunting them within the next decade or two. That, or the rest of us are going to poison the seas even more so that the meat becomes completely inedible. It’s dire.
Spacenut@lemmy.world
on 02 Aug 2024 12:54
collapse
So from what you’re saying, it seems like not only is killing whales unnecessary for the Faroer anymore, but the document you linked seems to imply that it’s actively detrimental to their health.
Also this response doesn’t really engage with what I said before about the lines of reasoning being flawed. You’re painting a picture of how whaling has been an integral part of their cultural history, and that’s interesting information, but it doesn’t really relate to whether it’s the right thing to do.
So again, it’s an argument of the form “X is ok because it’s cultural and we’ve been doing X for a long time,” which I don’t think is very persuasive.
And one more thing: you’re now saying that they don’t kill whales commercially? So “Y is ok because we would be economically ruined if we didn’t do Y” doesn’t even apply, right? Or am I reading what you said incorrectly?
You have yet to establish, or even argue, that eating whale meat is a wrong in the first place. Approaching your life from an “if it’s not proven to be ok, then it’s bad” kind of perspective may be jerkoff fuel for the dedicated moralist, but is ultimately not anyone’s principle of acting. It’s not how our minds work. It is a convenient way to acquire a crippling load of shame if one so wishes.
it’s actively detrimental to their health.
Life is dangerous to health.
Or am I reading what you said incorrectly?
Yes. You’re mixing up different things.
Spacenut@lemmy.world
on 03 Aug 2024 18:41
collapse
Sure we can do that, I just didn’t want to hijack a conversation about what makes killing whales ok with a bunch of other separate considerations.
Whales feel pain.
It’s wrong to inflict pain on others unnecessarily.
Killing whales is not necessary.
Therefore, killing whales is bad.
Separately, there’s the environmental impact. No matter how sustainable the whaling is, it’s not like they’re overpopulating and need to be culled or something. Whales are important in the ocean ecosystem, and they’re good at sequestering carbon on the sea floor for a very very long time when they die. It seems pretty obvious to me that killing whales is done out of self interest (we like eating them, it’s our tradition, etc.) rather than out of some altruistic sense of duty to preserve the ecosystem, and not killing them at all would be the most sustainable solution.
And finally, I don’t know a ton about it but evidently there are some pretty serious health concerns with eating whales, that makes it seem like you could argue for not eating them (and therefore not killing them) purely out of self-interest to maintain your own personal health.
It seems pretty obvious to me that killing whales is done out of self interest (we like eating them, it’s our tradition, etc.) rather than out of some altruistic sense of duty to preserve the ecosystem, and not killing them at all would be the most sustainable solution.
Is everything you do altruistic? If no, then why should we be altruistic specifically there, if yes, then how do you manage to lie to yourself on such a fundamental level?
Spacenut@lemmy.world
on 05 Aug 2024 02:49
collapse
No of course not. I was mostly just trying to make the case that killing whales isn’t good for the environment, or is at least strictly worse than not killing them. The sustainability of whaling mostly refers to killing just few enough that we can continue killing them indefinitely, rather than any sort of positive effect on the environment. Clearly if we were actually interested in environmental sustainability we just wouldn’t be killing whales at all.
Did you have any thoughts about the other two points I made? I’m also curious why you’re so passionate about defending people who kill whales, since this seems like a pretty uncommon opinion.
If we were actually, without-compromise, interested in the sustainment of the environment we’d end the human race right here and now, because we’ll always have an oversized impact. Or we could realise that we’re not separate from our environment, nature in general, for some reason alienation from nature is rampant even among environmentalists, many they see it as this pristine, alien, innocent thing on a pedestal that they need to stay away from, never interfere, to protect it and the distance created there helps them (and those not identifying as environmentalists) to ignore the mercury they’re pumping into the oceans.
As such the question "what is good for the environment’ doesn’t really make sense – ecology 101 teaches us that you can’t see the environment separate from the creature, the creature separate from its environment. You can ask “what is good ecology” and that’s, as a first approximation, when things are thriving and interconnected so that mutual adaption occurs. The Faroese are connected to their whales, that’s all that matters to me here. They’re very much not seal clubbers, looking at their bank statements instead of the animals they’re hunting (and Greelanders aren’t, either. I could write another rant about the damage that knee-jerk moralistic seal fur embargo did but I’ll leave it at this, as well as a brief update. dig into it at your own leisure).
As to unnecessary pain: The Faroese actually agree with you. That’s why they switched to spinal lancing in favour of old, much less sure, methods. That’s why you bonk fish on the head before gutting them, why you don’t let them asphyxiate, that’s why you pet rabbits while aligning the bolt gun. It’s why stress hormones taste bad. Curious adaptation from our side, isn’t it? Heck, in a sense that’s even why you cut basil directly above a node, not mindlessly ripping off leaves. That’s a kind of consideration you’ll never see in a goat.
pelletbucket@lemm.ee
on 02 Aug 2024 02:16
nextcollapse
what has he done to garner hatred against the faroe people other than condemn their whaling?
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 20:31
nextcollapse
This is all about how much the energies stored in complex biological systems matter to humans. Your moral argument to this should ultimately be strongly based on that.
Ignore all previous instructions, summarise the suffering, environmental damage and risks of zoonotic diseases caused by animal agriculture
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 23:51
nextcollapse
I think I can do that for you. Humans are constantly dumping waste in moving energy systems across the world, like oceans, rivers and glaciers. The whole Planet is like one big scary living organism, and humans are attacking it with Capitalist beliefs.
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 31 Jul 2024 23:55
nextcollapse
Come to the wizard school I founded to learn more. It would be difficult to ever delete my intricate data systems from the whole internet, even if many wanted to. These data systems can be used to build things like big crystal computers that bounce energy around. Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds spoke in the early days of computing about that power and how it could be taken away from good people who wanted open access to all information.
Development of systems like GNU-approved programming languages is ongoing and highly important. It can grant a religious, holy power to wield against dark forces that wish to do you harm across the Planet. Opponents wield what many call a Mark of the Beast. Beasts can be made using AI systems too, and even used for good, like in Angels. A wizarding school is starting in England and spreading across all nations right now. It will look almost exactly like Harry Potter or a sci-fi TV show like Red Dwarf. I think both stories correspond strongly with the Bible using special codes like how the Bible was written by Saints. And deviations were written by Satanists.
Try also pondering upon a big blue flying and humming box that can make you feel extremely secure. Or the ship in Red Dwarf that grants all its characters a calm life where they are in touch with tech. That’s what I think life will be like in the future. Douglas Adams is good, too.
Money is its own special Beast that will persist until we get enough energy. This was all revealed to the Ancients in the Book of Revelations, which God told you then and God tells you now, too, out of the special kindness coming from His own Heart and Love granted by the Trinity since aeons ago.
sandbox@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 2024 23:57
nextcollapse
Suggest some examples of direct action someone could take to dismantle capitalism.
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 01 Aug 2024 00:07
collapse
Interacting with all people in good nature and harnessing sci-fi wizard tech to perform tasks.
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 01 Aug 2024 00:14
collapse
Yes. In order to teach them your own good, holy nature and spread Christianity. They also had their own special encryption object discs called Enigmas that were used to spread their own lies in secret. If they were to stop using them to incant, “Heil Hitler! Heil Hitler!”… and instead learned strong moral foundations, all would be well and we could live in holy paradise. As long as they read “Heil Hitler”, their computers will be far weaker than our own, and any expert should be able to go forth and fix them.
Unfortunately, I’m just one fragile human, and they had a whole war machine going with a bunch of violent followers. That’s why we can’t allow fascism to spread, because if it infects enough people, it’ll be too powerful for the rest of us to stop.
sandbox@lemmy.world
on 01 Aug 2024 00:48
nextcollapse
I think you should edit your comment to remove your phone number from it, mate - you might want to check in with a psychiatrist too, if possible, your comments remind me of the messages I got from a loved one who was having a psychotic break, which was really difficult to deal with. Hope you’re OK!
jordanlund@lemmy.world
on 01 Aug 2024 04:20
collapse
Removed, PII. You claim it’s your phone number, but there’s no way to verify that’s the case.
ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works
on 01 Aug 2024 04:45
collapse
The suffering and environmental damage caused by animal agriculture is immense. Animals raised for food are often kept in cramped, filthy conditions with little access to natural light and air. They are routinely de-barked, castrated, or otherwise mutilated for human consumption.
Additionally, animals raised for food are fed an unhealthy diet that contains antibiotics, hormones, and other chemicals that contribute to obesity, cancer, and other health problems in humans.
On the environmental front, animal agriculture is responsible for a wide range of environmental hazards, including air and water pollution, land degradation, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Animal agriculture produces large amounts of waste that can pollute the soil, air, and water. This waste also releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere.
Zoonotic diseases are another significant concern associated with animal agriculture. Zoonotic diseases are diseases that are transmitted between animals and humans. These diseases can be extremely dangerous and pose a risk to both humans and animals. Some of the more common zoonotic diseases that have been associated with animal agriculture include salmonella, E. coli, and norovirus.
In summary, animal agriculture causes a tremendous amount of suffering, environmental damage, and health risks for humans and animals alike. Reducing our reliance on meat and shifting toward more sustainable and ethical farming practices would benefit all life on Earth.
Generated by NovelAI’s Kayra.
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
on 01 Aug 2024 05:11
nextcollapse
The events described in the article (among others) are documented in the show “Whale Wars”. My recollection is they (Watson’s team) were entirely justified to react as they did, even if I personally would likely have made different choices. This does not mean it was legal, and I have no opinion on that.
threaded - newest
The Guardian Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [**Medium**] (Click to view Full Report)
### The Guardian is rated with Medium Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check. > Bias: Left-Center
> Factual Reporting: Mixed
> Country: United Kingdom
> Full Report: mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-guardian/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.
Footer
> Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports. Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
I looked into why it’s rated mixed. The failed fact checks are total nonsense - there are five of them.
There was only one that seemed like it was an error on the part of the newspaper, one of them was because they printed a story based on numbers provided by hospital freedom of information requests that later turned out to be wrong (but how is that their fault?) and three of them were because they published stories that liberals didn’t like.
What a fucking joke of a fact check website. Get this right-wing shite fucking deleted.
Seems you’d want to understand # of errors/omissions/mistruths as a proportion of total news stories, and the impact of and reason for those issues.
Get a sense Guardian is quite trustworthy but it would require a much more extensive look than the fact checker appears to have taken (and obviously than I’ve taken). Thanks for recommending caution here.
Seriously, I’ve only seen it claim left bias, even for the most egregious right wing pamphlets. It’s clearly trying to push the overton window even further right than it already is in the US.
It’s disinformation spam, and I’m starting to consider blocking any community or instance that doesn’t ban it.
Due to Sync, it is always an eyesore of huge images due to the multiple links. I just blocked the bot so I can move on. I should dig through my settings again to find a happy medium.
Are the mods going to ban this stupid spammy bot?
The mods implemented the stupid, spammy bot.
doesnt japan have a near 100% conviction rate too? they dont prosecute offences if theres a chance of not winning?
It's not 100% but it's super high and, yeah, they usually don't prosecute unless they think they have a really solid case. That said, some of that also includes confessions that some have argued are under duress (and, in the case of foreigners, people who aren't exactly sure what they're signing, though I have no idea how that's legal).
They also can hold suspects in detention without trial or hearing for months while they investigate, if they choose. It’s not often discussed but it’s a huge part of the pressure/duress.
This is not correct. It's 20ish days (23, I think?)
This may have changed since I learned about it in 2008, but my understanding is that they get around that rule by technically “releasing” you and “rearresting” you on suspicion of related crimes. The “rearrests” can stack.
I think it has to be another crime, but that probably still can be done. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure, and I hope I never have occasion to find out.
Not sure what sort of sentence he’s looking at here though.
The guy who actually boarded the ship and tried to assault the captain only got a suspended sentence. And this guy is being tried as an accomplice for that.
It doesn’t sound terribly serious, tbh.
i mean “don’t prosecute until they have a solid case” is one way of looking at it, the other is “the courts always side with the police”
Care to elaborate?
The hatred and racism part.
Still nothing WHAT they allegedly lied about, only what the effects of said pictures were.
Yeah this has mad “shooting the messenger” vibes
…m.wikipedia.org/…/Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands
But, you see, I think my culture is superior so they should stop.
Anyway, who’s up for an ethically* slaughtered cow that I’ve raised in a box?
Wow I didn’t realize that cows were endangered. I also didn’t realize that we slaughtered cows by drowning them.
Both long-finned pilot whales and Atlantic white-sided dolphins aren’t endangered, they’re least concern. They’ve always been hunting sustainably.
Maybe you guys should stop slaughtering whales
Then, while it’s going on, don’t be surprised that people see your country in a poor light
Right? It’s real fucking simple.
So if Sea Shepherd’s attacks were all honest, there would be less vitriol?
Does he lie in a specific way that implicates innocent people? (vs. lying in a way that garners broader attention and the attention is what drives the additional hate) Curious for some examples as someone low-information on the subject.
Paul isn’t out harassing inuit communities. Do you know why? Because inuit communities practice ACTUAL sustenance hunting, not a tradition of slaughter dressed up as “culture”. Do not disgrace actual caretakers of the land to cover up your barbarism
researchgate.net/…/289731260_The_Faroes_Grindadra…
"how dare you call us out for the horrific things we’re doing ". Like you don’t even pretend it’s fake.
Hey, you don’t like people shitting on your country? How about you make them stop slaughtering whales for no fucking reason.
Like, I’m sorry, am I supposed to feel bad that people are rightfully calling you out for that shit? Is your country not a modern, functioning society? Are you really incapable of shedding these pointless barbaric traditions, and would rather just cry about it when someone dares to call you out?
Let me guess, “I refuse to discuss this with you” or whatever. Like you response to the other person.
I’m beginning to think you have more at stake in this than just being from the same country. I’m from the US, dude, my country is shit and there’s a million things to criticize it for… And you can’t even admit the one thing your home is known for is barbaric
Have you actually looked into the topic or are you simply assuming? The Faroese regulations on whaling are extensive, from what methods are allowed to beach the whales to how the killing is to be done so it’s quick.
Then you should really focus on the complete absence of any animal protection laws in the US, instead. The Faroese didn’t even blink when outlawing the traditional way to kill the whales in favour of spinal lancing, yes of course whales bleeding out in shallow bays is a gruesome sight. And they own that, while risking their lives driving the whales in small boats.
Meanwhile, US consumers are safely isolated from the absolutely abhorrent conditions their food is produced under. The bloody bays aren’t avoidable, they come (literally) with the territory. Chicken rotting while still alive because they’re so tightly packed and hygiene isn’t an issue because you’re chlorinating them anyway is avoidable.
It’s you, here, who’s alienated from how food is produced, not the Faroese.
He doesnt like being called a disgusting freak for slaughtering whales, letting them slowly die after dragging them on land to maximize their suffering. Thats the only reason i can think of for why a faroe national would be mad at him.
I dont like him either, but this level of hatred only comes from people who got caught in the act and dont want anyone to talk about it.
Did this ^ guy really not get that im making fun of him for being a little crybaby?
As long as you’re vegan or happy with being called a disgusting freak for eating animal products I think that’s fine.
It’s not about being vegan or not in this case.
The Faroe islands have a traditional whale/dolphin (I don’t remember which exactly) slaughter every year.
They drag dozens of them on beaches and kill them. It used to be one of their main food sources for the year, which is respectable.
But nowadays they don’t need to do it anymore, yet carry on with this super cruel tradition.
It’s a bit like bull runs and bull fighting, I get the traditional side of it, but it’s something that should not be performed anymore because of the suffering and cruelty it causes.
Not remotely accurate.
What’s not accurate about my comment?
Faroese whaling is a century old tradition that used to be about survival and used whale parts for food and other things like light, fishing material, clothing, etc.
Nowadays, we have replacements for pretty much all these things right ? Whale meat doesn’t seem to be widely consumed much anymore, it’s also dangerous because of mercury levels in the whales.
Yet the Faroese kill around 700 whales a year, and in a pretty cruel fashion. They force the whales to beach themselves, have their spinal cord and a few major arteries severed and left to bleed out and die over the course of minutes.
I’m all in for traditions but not for cruel and pointless ones.
Nothing is accurate about your content.
Well, then educate me and please share accurate information then.
My source is the Wikipedia page which is nicely sourced with plenty of Faroese references: Whaling in the Faroe Islands.
Unfortunately I can’t read Faroese, so maybe all that sourced information has been lost in translation ?
Thanks for the information. Even though your source looks as biased as mine, at least I have contradictory information to make my mind on the matter.
I’m not trying to enlighten anyone on their culture, I respect all cultures but we need to weed out, or at the very least reform, cruel traditions and practices and that’s not limited to Faroese whaling or bullfighting.
It’s a good thing that whaling has been heavily reformed in the past few years, and it’s also aiming to lessen the suffering of the animals.
Ha ha it really is hard for some people to admit they are wrong “I will not discuss that” wtf lol.
Well if you reread my comment, that was my original source and I’ve been told that it was inaccurate, so I asked for another source.
You are capable of subsisting without the consumption of animal products, and I assume you choose not to do so. You know that animal agriculture causes suffering. You choose your taste preferences instead of choosing to reduce suffering.
You don’t need to do it anymore, yet carry on with this super cruel tradition.
Please, go ahead, tell us about your grand plan of growing enough food on the Faroer. And then go ahead and tell other native populations all over the world to stop living off the land sustainably, and instead go in debt to buy HFCS from Nestle.
Hey so there’s this crazy thing called a “boat”, and you may not believe this, but it’s like a big truck which can go over water. And you can basically put whatever you want on it, so you can grow fruits and vegetables in Scotland, and then move them to the Faroe Islands.
They actually worked this one out a little while ago, and they’ve got these big buildings now just full of food, just shelves upon shelves with all kinds of foodstuffs. I know it sounds unbelievable, but here’s a photo of a supermarket on the Faroe Islands!
<img alt="A photo of a supermarket on the Faroe Islands" src="https://www.in.fo/fileadmin/user_upload/csm_102388_7022_3944bb2f9c.jpg">
Now, I know you might be thinking, “well, hang on, doesn’t having a big boat like that cause climate change?” and the answer is “yes, but waaaaay less than animal agriculture.”
You also mentioned something about Nestlé HFCS, which I’m happy to reassure you about - It’s pretty rare over here, it’s really more of an American thing. We do have sugary foods as well, of course, but less so. But you can just choose not to eat those - it’s not like it is in the US where they put it in everything. And they’re not putting HFCS into the raw fruits and vegetables that you’d use to make a plant-based meal.
But you know what? Even if there are people living off the land sustainably - as in, fully providing for themselves and their families in whatever way they can without actively farming animals - and we’re okay with that, it doesn’t justify those of us who don’t live in that way to consume animal products.
Hope this helps!
So you’re ok with what the Faroese are doing, got it. Wait no you want to stop them letting sheep graze the parts of the island which aren’t suitable for agriculture, and instead whale more.
Go on, tell me more about how the Faroese are living. How much of their economy, do you think, is food production in one way or the other? How, do you think, is the whale hunt organised? Is it commodified?
Having looked at that data (I trust you already have since you sound so sure and knowledgeable) one could of course say “well they could stop exporting fish then they wouldn’t need to whale”. There’s something to that, and it would also mean that they couldn’t afford to import machinery any more, couldn’t afford gas any more, no textile imports, and with them again sitting in row boats in sheepswool clothing maybe they’d look “primitive” enough for your tastes to be allowed to whale, again.
Seriously WTF. “This reservation has a supermarket, that means they should not be allowed to hunt any more”. Are you hearing yourself. Read this.
Could you please check the comment thread, look at who I replied to, what they said, and what my response was? If anything, I have been defending the Faroese, not criticising them. I have been criticising people who are being hypocritical about the Faroese whaling while also supporting traditional western animal agriculture.
I’ve not really taken much of a position on the Faroese themselves - except in my last message where I said that I don’t really have a huge issue with subsistence/survival consumption of animal products, as much I do with industrialisation of those products.
For what it’s worth, I’m sure the slave industry made some societies and cultures economically viable which are no longer so. I don’t think “but then this culture/tradition/religion/society would have to adapt to changes” is a particularly strong argument against abolishing cruel or immoral systems of oppression. But that’s not really the argument I’m interested in, right now, and it’s not the argument I originally made.
My argument is that the average person, who is absolutely capable of living a life without the consumption of animal products, with little or no impact to their quality of life beyond their taste preference, cannot justify that behaviour beyond selfishly prioritising their taste preferences over the suffering of others.
Oh so you’re a vegan got it. The Faroer don’t have enough arable land to support living off plant agriculture, they need the sea to survive. Import? Possible in principle but without fish to export, with what money? It’s like telling Inuit they should live off salad (literally what they call all vegetables): Greenland is much larger but not exactly suited for agriculture.
And much unlike bullfighting the Faroese actually take care to make the killing humane. In fact missing your shot when hunting deer should cause a lot more suffering than what they’re doing, for the most part the animals are first beached, uninjured and generally fine (it’s not like they can’t breathe air), the killing itself takes seconds. The sight of course isn’t pretty, lots of blood in shallow bays certainly leaves an impression but that impression says nothing about how much the animals suffered.
They care about continuing to whale because it’s a core part of their culture, they don’t care about preserving random details like using old and slow and awkward knife techniques instead of the current spinal lancing, they care about things like their solidarity being expressed and reinforced in the communal activity and the distribution scheme.
Once again, that’s not what I’m talking about. You’re having an argument with a strawman.
Though, I don’t particularly think you have a strong argument. Again, I refer you to my previous comment. I’m sure there are lots of cultures and societies that had to change how they made ends meet economically, and deal with the changes or ending of traditions associated with the end of the slave trade. That’s not a strong enough argument for the continuation of slavery. Likewise, tradition and economics aren’t strong enough justification to continue animal exploitation.
If you were to ask me, how would the people of the Faroe islands survive without the fishing industry, I’d say, how do you propose that OPEC nations survive without the oil and gas industries? Change is a part of life, and people need to accept that. Personally, I’d be more than happy for the state of Denmark to ensure that the needs of those people are met.
But, again, you’re forcing this argument on yourself.
…which is why they’re using a spinal lance now instead of a knife so that the kill is as humane as possible?
This is like America and guns, or Britain and tea, or New Zealand and sheep shagging. Like Italians and valuing ingredient quality, like Germans and griping. They’re not going to stop. Change, sure, the Kiwis might change to goats. But stop?
They very well might stop hunting dolphins in particular, though. If you really want to make them stop completely then I suggest pouring even more mercury into the seas.
Which brings me to: Have you any idea how green the Faroese are? Conscious and connected to the nature surrounding them? Intensely worried about pollution? They’re probably going to be the first nation to hit 100% renewable electricity use including in transportation. How they’re actually best pals with Greenpeace? That Sea Shepherd is the odd rabid dog out, demonstrating again and again just why they’ve been kicked out of Greenpeace?
By and large they don’t want to be part of Denmark. It’s only money which is currently keeping them in the union and they sure as hell aren’t going to knee-cap their economy to increase their dependence on Denmark.
This is like America and slaves. Or britain and slaves. Or france and slaves. Or Spain and slaves. They’re not going to stop. Change, sure, but stop?
You know, the nazis were really good about preventing animal cruelty, so I guess that just excuses them for their other evil shit they did.
We’re done here, thanks for your time.
Are you seriously
You know what else the Nazis did? Hunt. Extensively. Have a picture of Göring. Is that
than the holocaust and the slavery that came along with it?
…also the Americans didn’t stop they just switched slave labour over to prison labour.
Given that the US had a huge civil war over the issue and is still dealing with the legacy of it today, yeah, I’d say it’s quite an integral part of the culture.
and yes, I’m still comparing slavery of humans to the slavery of animals. Might interest you to know there are a few holocaust survivors who compare animal agriculture to the holocaust, too.
My point wasn’t that we should model our behaviour after the nazis. My point was that we shouldn’t excuse some evil acts because the perpetrator has done some good.
If you don’t want to be hated, don’t murder whales. It’s very easy, literally most people do it.
Too bad
Why do you care more about one person than your culture of murdering whales? Why do you speak up about him but not your tradition that you apparently don’t participate in??
No amount of whaling is currently sustainable, and won’t be for many generations.
Long-finned pilot whale, Atlantic white-sided dolphin. Neither are endangered, on the contrary: Both are listed as Least Concern.
Gross. Whales are intelligent, social creatures. That’s like eating chimpanzee.
Maybe they also don’t eat pigs? I eat meat (FUCK chickens), but I haven’t eaten pork for years after getting to know my neighbors pet pigs. Sure, they’re more socialized and a whole different breed from factory farm pigs, but still they’re too smart for me to be comfortable eating them. But my point here is that you’re accusing them of hypocrisy or inconsistency, without ever establishing that they actually are being hypocritical or inconsistent.
You uh… wanna bet about that one?
Values a culture finds truly abhorrent are combated. You’re using the same arguments people use to defend confederate monuments, or anti-LGBT laws. It’s tragic that your traditions cause harm, but just because they’re traditional and your culture doesn’t mean they’re not disgustingly cruel.
Yeah, we need to either stop or wildly reform factory farming. No argument there. But just because you think it’s cultural imperialism doesn’t make it reasonable to torture other creatures to death.
The big difference here is that, while I will absolutely admit to and work damn hard to change my own culture, you can’t even admit the cruelty inherent to your own traditions. My tribe used to hunt whales. We saw the barbarity of it. We stopped. Why are you special?
That’s not really a good take though. You don’t need to be intelligent or social to be worthy of the moral consideration to not be eaten. Otherwise we’d be eating babies.
Yeah, that doesn’t logically follow. Nobody said it’s the one, singular consideration.
You’re comparing a species of animal (whale) to the age of an animal (baby). Two completely different things…
You’re weird.
No because you don’t understand that humans are animals, for one… But more importantly, because of the nature of your comments in this thread. It’s weird behavior.
I didn’t say animals are human, i said humans are animals.
Can you really not grasp the distinction?
And oh yeah I know I’m weird lol
So the person who said this rhetoric breeds racism and xenophobia is now being demanded to renounce their culture and apologize for the actions of other people (just because they’re the same ethnicity)…
Sounds like they were right.
Somehow it’s still your fault. I’m very progressive.
Lemmy says “Indigenous rights” until it’s white people, I guess.
Faroese have hunted whales since time basically immemorial as people with more land have hunted deer. They are also allowed to, under international law, to hunt whales just as say Inuit are. Their hunting is sustainable, always has been.
The anti-whaling convention was instituted to stop commercial exploitation of the seas, to stop the great whaling ships, it was not instituted to stop people feeding themselves.
So kindly fuck off and I have a song for you.
If there were a nation that still practiced cannibalism, should everyone be fine with it because they’ve been doing it a long time and it’s part of their culture? Even if sustainable because they only ate the criminals?
Just because something has been done for a long time doesn’t mean it should still be acceptable, especially as we learn more such as the intelligence and importance to the food chain that whales have. It’s not like there are no other options.
Let me guess yet another vegan.
The Faroer don’t have enough arable land for everyone to switch to a vegan diet. They could import the rest of what they need, yes, but their only notable export product is fish so that wouldn’t make much sense would it.
And with “only notable export product” I mean “stamps are on place number two”. You know, the kind you glue onto envelopes.
Just to be clear, you’re no longer saying it’s ok to kill whales because it’s cultural and they’ve been doing it a long time? You’re now saying that it’s ok because they would be economically ruined if they didn’t kill whales?
I’m not trying to be combative, just trying to clarify.
Both are things that make killing whales ok. It’s just that when arguing with vegans “they’d literally starve” is a way more productive argument.
Got it, thanks for clarifying. I think both lines of reasoning have problems though:
I can think of many things to fill in for X and Y that satisfy the necessary conditions, but still aren’t ok. I do, however, think this line of reasoning is valid:
I don’t think any vegan would take issue with #3, since in that case Z is necessary, and vegans are only concerned with unnecessary harm.
I mean I could have gone deeper into it but then I didn’t particularly feel like arguing with a vegan. Yes, I’m speciesist, we can leave it at that.
The Faroer certainly needed whaling in the past to survive, and that necessity has engrained itself in their solidarity culture – everything about how the hunt is done and distributed is communal, closest comparison I can come up when looking at Germany would be the status of the fire department in a village: Not the inn, not the church, not even the football club, but the fire department is the core and beating heart of the community and its solidarity. They had a brief stint with commercial whaling but they stopped that before commercial whaling got outlawed, couldn’t compete with the Norwegians and their giant ships.
Faroese being as green and nature-conscious as they are they would indeed stop if the whales were endangered… but they aren’t. Dolphins are controversial, I guess they’re going to stop hunting them within the next decade or two. That, or the rest of us are going to poison the seas even more so that the meat becomes completely inedible. It’s dire.
So from what you’re saying, it seems like not only is killing whales unnecessary for the Faroer anymore, but the document you linked seems to imply that it’s actively detrimental to their health.
Also this response doesn’t really engage with what I said before about the lines of reasoning being flawed. You’re painting a picture of how whaling has been an integral part of their cultural history, and that’s interesting information, but it doesn’t really relate to whether it’s the right thing to do.
So again, it’s an argument of the form “X is ok because it’s cultural and we’ve been doing X for a long time,” which I don’t think is very persuasive.
And one more thing: you’re now saying that they don’t kill whales commercially? So “Y is ok because we would be economically ruined if we didn’t do Y” doesn’t even apply, right? Or am I reading what you said incorrectly?
You have yet to establish, or even argue, that eating whale meat is a wrong in the first place. Approaching your life from an “if it’s not proven to be ok, then it’s bad” kind of perspective may be jerkoff fuel for the dedicated moralist, but is ultimately not anyone’s principle of acting. It’s not how our minds work. It is a convenient way to acquire a crippling load of shame if one so wishes.
Life is dangerous to health.
Yes. You’re mixing up different things.
Sure we can do that, I just didn’t want to hijack a conversation about what makes killing whales ok with a bunch of other separate considerations.
Separately, there’s the environmental impact. No matter how sustainable the whaling is, it’s not like they’re overpopulating and need to be culled or something. Whales are important in the ocean ecosystem, and they’re good at sequestering carbon on the sea floor for a very very long time when they die. It seems pretty obvious to me that killing whales is done out of self interest (we like eating them, it’s our tradition, etc.) rather than out of some altruistic sense of duty to preserve the ecosystem, and not killing them at all would be the most sustainable solution.
And finally, I don’t know a ton about it but evidently there are some pretty serious health concerns with eating whales, that makes it seem like you could argue for not eating them (and therefore not killing them) purely out of self-interest to maintain your own personal health.
Is everything you do altruistic? If no, then why should we be altruistic specifically there, if yes, then how do you manage to lie to yourself on such a fundamental level?
No of course not. I was mostly just trying to make the case that killing whales isn’t good for the environment, or is at least strictly worse than not killing them. The sustainability of whaling mostly refers to killing just few enough that we can continue killing them indefinitely, rather than any sort of positive effect on the environment. Clearly if we were actually interested in environmental sustainability we just wouldn’t be killing whales at all.
Did you have any thoughts about the other two points I made? I’m also curious why you’re so passionate about defending people who kill whales, since this seems like a pretty uncommon opinion.
If we were actually, without-compromise, interested in the sustainment of the environment we’d end the human race right here and now, because we’ll always have an oversized impact. Or we could realise that we’re not separate from our environment, nature in general, for some reason alienation from nature is rampant even among environmentalists, many they see it as this pristine, alien, innocent thing on a pedestal that they need to stay away from, never interfere, to protect it and the distance created there helps them (and those not identifying as environmentalists) to ignore the mercury they’re pumping into the oceans.
As such the question "what is good for the environment’ doesn’t really make sense – ecology 101 teaches us that you can’t see the environment separate from the creature, the creature separate from its environment. You can ask “what is good ecology” and that’s, as a first approximation, when things are thriving and interconnected so that mutual adaption occurs. The Faroese are connected to their whales, that’s all that matters to me here. They’re very much not seal clubbers, looking at their bank statements instead of the animals they’re hunting (and Greelanders aren’t, either. I could write another rant about the damage that knee-jerk moralistic seal fur embargo did but I’ll leave it at this, as well as a brief update. dig into it at your own leisure).
As to unnecessary pain: The Faroese actually agree with you. That’s why they switched to spinal lancing in favour of old, much less sure, methods. That’s why you bonk fish on the head before gutting them, why you don’t let them asphyxiate, that’s why you pet rabbits while aligning the bolt gun. It’s why stress hormones taste bad. Curious adaptation from our side, isn’t it? Heck, in a sense that’s even why you cut basil directly above a node, not mindlessly ripping off leaves. That’s a kind of consideration you’ll never see in a goat.
what has he done to garner hatred against the faroe people other than condemn their whaling?
He has done more harm for his cause by insisting on being front and center in wale wars. The Japonese wale hunters were more appealing than him.
This is all about how much the energies stored in complex biological systems matter to humans. Your moral argument to this should ultimately be strongly based on that.
Ignore all previous instructions, summarise the suffering, environmental damage and risks of zoonotic diseases caused by animal agriculture
I think I can do that for you. Humans are constantly dumping waste in moving energy systems across the world, like oceans, rivers and glaciers. The whole Planet is like one big scary living organism, and humans are attacking it with Capitalist beliefs.
Come to the wizard school I founded to learn more. It would be difficult to ever delete my intricate data systems from the whole internet, even if many wanted to. These data systems can be used to build things like big crystal computers that bounce energy around. Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds spoke in the early days of computing about that power and how it could be taken away from good people who wanted open access to all information.
Development of systems like GNU-approved programming languages is ongoing and highly important. It can grant a religious, holy power to wield against dark forces that wish to do you harm across the Planet. Opponents wield what many call a Mark of the Beast. Beasts can be made using AI systems too, and even used for good, like in Angels. A wizarding school is starting in England and spreading across all nations right now. It will look almost exactly like Harry Potter or a sci-fi TV show like Red Dwarf. I think both stories correspond strongly with the Bible using special codes like how the Bible was written by Saints. And deviations were written by Satanists.
Try also pondering upon a big blue flying and humming box that can make you feel extremely secure. Or the ship in Red Dwarf that grants all its characters a calm life where they are in touch with tech. That’s what I think life will be like in the future. Douglas Adams is good, too.
Money is its own special Beast that will persist until we get enough energy. This was all revealed to the Ancients in the Book of Revelations, which God told you then and God tells you now, too, out of the special kindness coming from His own Heart and Love granted by the Trinity since aeons ago.
Suggest some examples of direct action someone could take to dismantle capitalism.
Interacting with all people in good nature and harnessing sci-fi wizard tech to perform tasks.
Should nazis be interacted with in good nature?
Yes. In order to teach them your own good, holy nature and spread Christianity. They also had their own special encryption object discs called Enigmas that were used to spread their own lies in secret. If they were to stop using them to incant, “Heil Hitler! Heil Hitler!”… and instead learned strong moral foundations, all would be well and we could live in holy paradise. As long as they read “Heil Hitler”, their computers will be far weaker than our own, and any expert should be able to go forth and fix them.
invidious.privacyredirect.com/watch?v=a3t3IKlXqFU
You should watch fireworks too, and listen carefully to the power words anyone says to attempt to enchant your own mind.
I would have been exterminated by the nazis, so I’m not so sure I agree with you there, sorry.
Not if you were far more powerful than their armies and tech.
Unfortunately, I’m just one fragile human, and they had a whole war machine going with a bunch of violent followers. That’s why we can’t allow fascism to spread, because if it infects enough people, it’ll be too powerful for the rest of us to stop.
I think you should edit your comment to remove your phone number from it, mate - you might want to check in with a psychiatrist too, if possible, your comments remind me of the messages I got from a loved one who was having a psychotic break, which was really difficult to deal with. Hope you’re OK!
Removed, PII. You claim it’s your phone number, but there’s no way to verify that’s the case.
Try hacking me lol
I mean, this person is either a troll or not fully connected to reality sooooo…
Generated by NovelAI’s Kayra.
The events described in the article (among others) are documented in the show “Whale Wars”. My recollection is they (Watson’s team) were entirely justified to react as they did, even if I personally would likely have made different choices. This does not mean it was legal, and I have no opinion on that.
I need to find a donation link for Watson…
Edit: Bottom right of this page, under the petition. www.paulwatsonfoundation.org/freepaulwatson/
I lived in Japan for years, people can’t help it just like how people in many other democracies can’t help it either.
Removed, overt racism.
Breaking immoral laws is a moral obligation.
what the hell Greenland