I’m not saying we can reverse every problem we’ve created but we damn well know how to substantially lower the damage we’re causing and mitigate future damages. One year of COVID alone created more positive change than we thought even possible. As I stated above, the only issue is politics. It’s a lot more than just “not really wanted.” It’s almost completely not cared about.

There is always a way to stop all of this. Hell, there are ways.

What we lack is the political fortitude to make it so.

I gotcha man, it’s okay. I know full well nothing I say will convince you so you’re welcome to think this.

> What’s fallacious about this argument? You value one animals’ life over another.

Let me make sure I understand what you’re asking: If you don’t try and save every single animal’s life, it means you don’t care about that specific animal.

You’re asking why that statement is fallacious? Really?

> Unless you’re vegetarian or vegan, then saying you value a whales life over a pig or cow etc is simple personal double standard.

Holy bad-faith moly, Batman, there’s no way I’m going to approach this dumpster fire, lol. You’re welcome to believe what you want.

> So what's really behind resistance to the moratorium? From the Japanese perspective, banning whaling before banning the killing of other animals is a bit logically inconsistent. If your argument is about conservation, then bluefin tuna, a far more important part of the Japanese diet, is also far more endangered. (Minke whales, the species Japanese whalers hunt, aren't even close to endangered, though the IWC claims minke whale numbers have fallen in recent decades.)

So part of the argument lies in denying reality by making claims that differ with the IWC. We’re off to a great start here.

>If your argument is that hunting whales is cruel, so is factory farming. If your argument is that whales are smart, so are pigs. None of this amounts to a case for eating whales, of course, but the argument to single out whales for protection is not exactly airtight either.

Then another argument is a bullshit logical “gotcha.” ‘If you care so much about animal conservation, why doesn’t that extend to every possible animeal?!’ Sure, ignore the slippery slope fallacy and there’s probably at least one more in that bullshit line of reasoning as well.

>So “saving the whale” may be irrational, but so is saving the panda or the polar bear or any other cute mammal. Activism rides on symbolic actions. And just as the whale has become symbolic for environmental groups like Greenpeace, it has, in response, become symbolic for the Japanese, too. “The strong condemnation of whaling by the foreigners is taken as harassing the traditional values,” says Kobayashi. The Japanese government now heavily subsidizes whaling to the tune of $50 million a year.

And like you said, here’s the crux of the real argument for whaling: political, yes, but in reality, just simply financial. The government gives 50 million a year for people to go kill fucking whales. That’s all. No more, no less.

“Here’s what came out.”

Sounds like the writer was blowing hot air.