Editorial: When Cultures clash
by Eugène Lapointe

Economic Boycotts demonstrate only Intolerance and the Power of the Animal Cults - not Moral Superiority of one Society over another

Some animal rights zealots are duping leaders in both the restaurant business and in retail and wholesale food businesses to believe that if they follow their direction, they shall be safe from attacks against their economic interests at home. Canadian fishermen and those who distribute their products are being unjustly damaged by economic boycotts against them that are entirely unjustified. The following "power play" by the animal rights movement is an example that should be resisted and scorned by all those who champion the legal, sustainable and science justified use of our natural resources:

An American chef, Rocco DiSpirito, plies his trade in gourmet food items at a restaurant in New York. Some of his specialties include dishes made from calves, young lambs and force fed geese, creatures that animal rights zealots have formerly held up to public view as innocent and undeserving victims of the elite western preference for exotic food items.

Recently, Chef DiSpirito declared that he would not allow Canadian fish on his elite menu because Canadian fishermen continue to slaughter harp seals. This move on his part is not only foolish, but is no insurance that his culinary preferences are safe from similar criticism.

Perhaps Chef DiSpirito thinks that if he cooperates with the HSUS in publicly refusing to include Canadian fish on his exotic menu, that the organization and others will never attack his use of foie gras, or veal, or lamb. Not true. His prostitution to the protest industry will be in vain, as will that of major supermarkets and restaurant chains whose CEOs have also stupidly capitulated to activist demands.

Wise up, folks. Your public will support you as long as you produce quality foods at fair market prices. There will be no market advantage to your capitulation in this manner, as fish prices in your business will only rise, if Canadian products are boycotted.

The boycott idea spawned by HSUS and others is nothing more than a power play to demonstrate to the general public that they can control those "others" (Canadians) who harvest a creature that needs to be managed, even though it has been highlighted by activists as attractive and undeserving of slaughter. The attack on Canadian fishermen and the national economy is unjustified; it is bad business conducted for reasons that have nothing to do with conservation, compassion, or fair and respectful treatment of societies by one another. HSUS specializes in pitting nations against one another, and in declaring its own values as morally superior to all others. This is bunk, and must be made known to as many people as possible. Societies that place their own foods in a rigid moral hierarchy in contrast to the foods of others are not contributing to the spiritual or economic health of this global community.

IWMC urges all those businesses that have fallen for this ploy to reconsider; it will not benefit them in the long run, and for now, it is resulting in both economic damage to their clients and in undeserved social harm to everyone. Good business is a reflection of wise and socially beneficial action among all participants. Forget the boycott. Feed the people with a diversity of food items and reap the rewards of better business relationships in the future. The food consumers in this world want safe, diverse menu items. Depriving them of wholesome Canadian fish because of a demand by a socially dysfunctional special interest group's demands is not part of the food industry tradition. It is a destructive decision to bow to cult fundamentalism, and can only do harm to all who participate in it.