3 ms·
There's nothing reasonable about blaming one agent instead of another when it's their partnership that's doing the damage. Indeed, and in a very small way, adv
by alexqgb 16y ago
There's nothing reasonable about blaming one agent instead of another when it's their partnership that's doing the damage.
Indeed, and in a very small way, advocacy for this kind of buck-passing you makes you part of the problem, not the solution.
The problems of trophy hunting, poaching, black-market animal parts, and wholesale extinction are all connected. They're all part of an outlook that reflexively sees wildlife as being worth more dead than alive. The thing supporting this view is a larger (and hugely problematic) outlook that views the Earth as an infinitely renewable resource, and only acknowledges financial limits when it comes to one's own consumption.
The good news is that a growing number of people look at this guy's 'adventure' and think "ick". Though you may not share that sense of moral revulsion, please be aware that it reflects an instinct that you and any kids you may have will ultimately benefit from.
- Travis 16y agoYou seem a lot more comfortable telling other people what they ought to do than I am.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- riffraff 16y agoI believe that your connection of the tragedy of the commons with this specific story may be wrong. I recall Zimbabwe is one of the countries that more or less _privatized_ elephants, and the owners of private hunting parks do not treat them at all as an infinitely renewable resource, exactly like a cow farmer doesn't. They don't have interest in over hunting, on the contrary their profit depends on having a healthy and stable population. I am not qualified enough to judge the long term effects, but Zimbabwe has had a stable/growing population of elephants for more than twenty years now. While I don't like big animals hunting, I'd say this shows a completely different outlook from the one you refer to.
- scythe 16y agoEven the Republicans don't grease their slopes this much. One guy killing one elephant for the sake of a minor and frankly uninteresting publicity stunt (and this guy being part of a small minority of company owners capable of doing this, since shareholders would never approve) does not ipso facto lead to a bunch of rich sport-hunters decimating the wildlife population of Africa as a revival of some sort of primal hunting instinct. That's absolutely absurd. I seem to recall this show back in the day called the "Crocodile Hunter" featuring the contest of a human with an endangered species in waaaaay more glorified terms than this.
- whatusername 16y agoI'm pretty sure Steve Irwin was a conservationist though... Aka -- he went and wrestled with Crocodiles but he never shot them - certainly not for sport. // Being an Aussie -- we'd never really heard of Steve Irwin until he died. At which point he moved from being a tosser to being a national hero.