|
eNewsletter |
IWC-53
London, England |
25 July 2001 |
|
|
IWMC
World Conservation Trust |
|
A Humanized
Divine Whale
and A Dehumanized Nobody |
Slowly,
effectively, and in a subtle way, anti-user advocates have used all possible
means to further their cause, making the world believe that whale hunting is
worse than raping someone, that hunters are serial killers while eating whale
meat is cannibalism. What is their secret?
Their magic formula is very spicy. It can be found in "Environmental PR
made easy":
- (apply to a charismatic species) divine and mighty words,
- (apply to a starved nobody) deceitful and immoral words,
- shake the above ingredients together,
- publish a poster, and
- conduct a survey.
Cook for a few weeks and invite all media to a tasting session. Use words
like endangered and immoral and, voila, you are ready to collect the divine
manna.
How many times have we heard the expression "murdering a whale" or
"bloody murderers"? You have certainly heard the frequently used
expression "No matter how you dress it up, murder is murder". But the
most revealing expression is "Murdering an innocent whale".
How can a whale be innocent? And who can determine if a whale is innocent? Is
there such a thing as an "innocent species"? Does that infer all other
species must be "guilty"? Is a young child dying of starvation guilty
or innocent when eating what his parents are able to get from the wild from a
species that is not endangered? Should we make him feel guilty?
Strangely enough, "humane killing" takes its full value when
applied to whales, but it becomes a secondary consideration when related to the
execution of human beings. Would that mean that whales are always innocent and
humans always guilty?
This whole phenomenon of "A Humanized Divine Whale and A Dehumanized
Nobody" should be seen for what it is: a manifestation of racism. 
|
