Comment by Ken Worsley

November 26, 2007 @ 9:50 pm

Of course, as soon as we reported on profits being hit at the large banks due to subprime exposure, the Nikkei tells us that it’s all been miscalculated and that it’s WAY bigger than previously thought:

September midterm results announced by leading banks are showing profits substantially reduced with the impact of the subprime mortgage issue in the U.S., plus losses related to non-bank institutions. Their share prices have been hovering low and show no sign of recovery, with the midterm results only serving to lower investor confidence further.

At the end of June the Mizuho Financial Group reported its loan and investment balance related to U.S. subprime loans as 50 billion yen. The midterm results, released on Wednesday, show that figure ballooning to 106 billion yen.

http://www.nni.nikkei.co.jp/AC/TNKS/Nni20071126D26HH976.htm

Comment by J

November 28, 2007 @ 2:09 pm

I really want to know why some people in Europe oppose whaling.

Comment by DeOrio

November 28, 2007 @ 3:36 pm

Do you mean because Iceland and Norway practice whaling?

I’d imagine people in Europe oppose whaling for very much the same reasons other people do.

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 11:17 am

I, as well as a lot of other Japanese, really have no idea why some people oppose whaling. Deorio, if you also oppose it, would you please show the reasons?
And, please don’t tell me “because the number of whales are decreasing” or “because we care about the health of Japanese who eat whale meet.”

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2007 @ 11:48 am

Why shouldn’t I give you those reasons? Both are perfectly valid. The numbers of most whale species, if not decreasing, are still low - pretty much every species measures in the tens of thousands at most. Furthermore, whale meat is positively toxic - loaded with mercury and other hazardous substances.

Beyond that are the facts that whales are killed in drawn-out, inhumane manner, that there is pretty much no legitimate market demand - the hunt is funded by the government and the meat is sold to the market, that the JWC has yet to publish any new findings or explain its research in an even remotely valid way, that the government is adding to an already untenably large stockpile of whale meat, and that the preponderance of evidence suggests that whales and other cetaceans have the capacity to understand when they’re being hunted, that they’re dying, etc. On top of all that is the fact the, in its whaling, Japan ignores or flouts agreements it has signed.

This post, here, is over a year old, but spells out some of my other objections to it.

I still don’t understand your initial question, though, J. Why Europeans? If you’re in favor of it, why? I think that requires more explanation than any opposition to whaling.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2007 @ 12:52 pm

Sorry, that should have said the hunt is funded by the government, then largely sold to either the government or with government subsidies.

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 1:07 pm

Thank you, DeOrio. But I do not see any legitimacy in the argument.

The number of whales hunted in a year is well under the newborn whales in a year. There is no risk of extinction due to whaling.

People eat whale meat at their own risk. It is no reason to ban whaling.

“Whales are killed in inhumane manner”, because they are no humans.

“There is pretty much no legitimate market demand.” There is.

“The hunt is funded by the government.” Well, government funding is a problem in a commercial market, because it harms competition. But commercial whaling is prohibited. What kind of problem should government funding cause?

“large stockpile of whale meat” They keep large stockpile because whaling may be totally banned in near future. If restriction of whaling is relaxed, they will liquidate the stock.

“the capacity to understand when they’re being hunted, that they’re dying, etc.” Excuse me. I am not a good speaker of English, but do you mean that whales have the capacity to tell the future? Any animal, including cows, pigs and hens, understands its own death.

“Why Europeans?” Because you wrote “Aquariums across Europe have responded by pulling all Japanese products from their gift shops.”

If you do not like whaling, do not support it and refrain from eating whale meat. But you have no right to demand others to stop whaling based on your liking.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2007 @ 3:29 pm

J, let’s take this point by point.

The number of whales hunted in a year is well under the newborn whales in a year. There is no risk of extinction due to whaling.

That’s not the point. The point is that the populations are small to begin with. Industrial hunting prevents them from recovering. Furthermore, it’s simplistic to look at average birth numbers and hunting numbers and assume that’s the end of the story, as if no other factors killed whales, destroyed their habitat, or could cause a downturn in reproduction.

Many of your other points are closely-related, so I’ll address them together.

The government funds commercial whaling. Yes, there is a moratorium on purely commercial whaling. So how the government get around this? Simple. By lying. Research whaling is permitted, so they call it research. Nevermind that they have yet to publish anything new or worthwhile and that their explanations of the research are a farce. The JWC is unable to explain what research they are conducting that requires, for example, hunting nearly 1,000 Minke whales a year.

That this commercial whaling is funded by the government is not so much a problem for competition - as you correctly point out, there isn’t any - but because it is a massive, reckless waste of our tax money. This waste is compounded by the fact that there is not a legitimate market for whale meat. The demand is not there.

The biggest customers of whale mear are insitutions such as school districts and hospitals that are either given money by the government on the condition that they purchase whale meat or are ordered to purchase whale meat. The restaurant and retail markets are relatively small and are at least partly the result of well-funded government campaigns that waste even more of our tax money to promote and sell a product for which there is very little normal demand.

These practices are immoral and should be criminal because the meat is primarily being sold without the proper warnings or to people in no position to choose. It is not a rational free market. The government funds whaling, promotes the meat, and covers up or at least fails to disseminate information on the massive health risks posed by eating whale meat. The government still has strict controls on the import of US beef and beef from other countries in which BSE has been found. Why is whale meat fundamentally different?

To force something known to be hazardous to health and causative of birth defects and growth abnormalities to children should be criminal.

This brings us to another waste of our tax money - our money is being to used to feed kids something that we know could make them sick or cause developmental problems, after which our money will be used to treat them and, in extreme cases, care for them.

Whaling might eventually be banned, but this is partly because Japan has shown repeatedly that it has no intention of even attempting a sustainable whaling policy or allowing it to be subjected market forces, which would kill the industry.

To be continued. . .

Comment by Ken

November 29, 2007 @ 4:14 pm

If you do not like whaling, do not support it and refrain from eating whale meat. But you have no right to demand others to stop whaling based on your liking.

That sounds very insecure and defensive. I smell fear in that statement. Do you really think that people should not be free to say what they think on the issue?

Why are you so afraid of people who exercise their freedom to express their opinions?

Is it because deep down inside you know they’re right?

Comment by Ken

November 29, 2007 @ 4:18 pm

J,

I, as well as a lot of other Japanese, really have no idea why some people oppose whaling.

Lack of understanding has nothing to do with the passport you happen to hold. Don’t try to hide behind that.

It has everything to do with a lack of awareness, research and independent thought.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2007 @ 4:34 pm

Next, whales’ apparent capacity for understanding, fear, etc. What I meant here is that whales know when they’re being hunted and appear to have familial relationships in which older ones protect the young, etc. It takes a few seconds to kill a pig or at least render it insensate - the method of killing is usually stunning followed by slitting its throat. It takes many, many minutes, at best, to kill a whale and involves numerous wounds, even explosives.

This is inhumane. (What can I say? Check your dictionary for the word’s meaning.)

It is made even more inhumane by the excessive, unnecessary nature of the hunt.

Whales, it seems, are pretty intelligent animals - many would say the most intelligent non-primate animals on Earth. What seems clear is that they feel fear and pain and recognize on another. Whether or not they are sentient is difficult, if not impossible, to tell, but it doesn’t seem beyond the pale to suggest it.

As for my right to object to whaling, it is mine and I claim it.

First, everyone in the world has the absolute right to voice his opinion on any topic he chooses. Anyone who limits this right in the absence of a clear and immediate concern for safety is absolutely and completely in the wrong. Likewise, anyone who asserts that anyone has “no right” to criticize any governmental policy is absolutely wrong. This goes for people from McMurdo to Hammerfest, Tokyo to Dakar to Lima and all points in between.

Furthermore, when that opinion is in opposition to a wrong being done, I’d go so far as to say one has a social responsibility to voice and explain that opinion. To do otherwise is de facto complicity in wrongdoing.

This is especially true in the case of whaling, which is neither a domestic nor a sovereign issue. Japan does most of its whaling in Antarctic whale sanctuaries and waters under the protection of Australia and New Zealand - both of which are vociferous in their opposition to whaling. Japanese whaling violates treaties and agreements to which Japan has subscribed, thus it could be considered illegal.

Finally, as a resident of and taxpayer in Japan, I have every conceivable right to use any legal means at my disposal to complain about disastrous policies that effect the country I call home, the people I know, and the use of the money I pay for the governance of this country.

I don’t normally encourage indignation on this site, but frankly I don’t see where anyone gets off exhibiting the audacity required to grant himself the power to deny another his right to voicing an opinion. Ever.

Again, I will ask. What are the reasons for whaling? Why would you support it?

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 5:26 pm

I think your argument is hard to understand.
If you are concerned about the extinction and the number of whales, all you have to do is to limit the number of whaling, not to ban whaling.
If you are concerned about the waste of tax money of Japanese Government, no one outside Japan, especially all other members of IWC, should say anything. The budget is approved by the Japanese Parliament, and most Japanese think the money for whaling is money well spent.
Why is 1000 minke sample needed? Because IWC used to say “The data provided by Japanese Government is based on small sample, so it is not statistically reliable.” Hence, Japanese government needs larger sample.
No demand? If you remember 30 years ago, there was a very big market for whale meat. Since IWC banned commercial whaling, the market is gone, but the demands remain. Your argument about “no demand” is utterly wrong. If “no demand” is a problem, is it OK to whale if Japan proves the existence of demands for whale meat?

I feel that people who oppose whaling oppose whaling just because they hate whaling. All the objective reasons they bring about are all pretext. Whaling should not be banned based on subjective reasons. What happens if Hindus say, “Eating beef should be banned worldwide, because cows are sacred”, or Muslims say, “Eating pigs should be banned worldwide, because such an act is prohibited by god.” Whaling ban sounds just the same to me.

Pingback by Left Flank » Blog Archive » Rudd’s Election Signals True East Asian Consensus

November 29, 2007 @ 5:36 pm

[…] Emily O’Keefe (via TPR) argues that PM Rudd will challenge Japan to update Australian-Japan relations. While fundamental policies should remain the same, Rudd will have a deeper understanding of Australia’s relationship with the U.S. and Japan, and will look to use this to develop more constructive political and economic relations with China, Drysdale said. […]

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 5:41 pm

Ken, Deorio, I believe that anyone has the right to express his opinion. But that does not entile him the right to demand others to do or not to do things based on his liking.

Is this clear?

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 5:53 pm

Ken, as to your comment #506386.
Would you also read my comment #504077, which is just a few lines above my comment you quoted. Would you please explain what you wanted to say in your comment #506386 in plain English, since it seems you encourage mutual undersatnding?

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 6:01 pm

DeOrio, you wrote,
“Japanese whaling violates treaties and agreements to which Japan has subscribed, thus it could be considered illegal.”
Would you explain which treaty you are talking about and why Japanese whaling is illegal?

“What are the reasons for whaling?”
Because there is demand for whale meat.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 29, 2007 @ 6:23 pm

J,

It’s already there in plain English. Stop avoiding the question. You’re on the spot, you look really bad here, and your empty arguments are going down in flames.

Show me something.

Comment by kraig

November 29, 2007 @ 6:30 pm

Would you explain which treaty you are talking about and why Japanese whaling is illegal?

Talk about ignorance. Who comes to a discussion without doing the research? After all you say, you admit to knowing nothing about the issue. It’s impossible to take you seriously. Do some research.

Comment by DeOrio

November 29, 2007 @ 6:31 pm

J, I don’t where you get the idea that there is a demand for whale meat. If there is such a demand, why are thousands of tons being added to the over 4,000 tons left over from last year? Why is the government ordering public institutions such as the Wakayama school district to purchase whale meat and serve it to elementary school kids? Why is the government subsidizing the entire industry, from hunting to storing to selling to purchasing?

The answer is simple, there is no legitimate demand.

Besides, commercial whaling is prohibited. If Japan is whaling because there’s a demand for meat, that violates the IWC charter and the moratorium imposed by that body of which Japan is a member.

The time for a reduction or limit on whaling has passed. Numbers are low.

Besides, I said that was one reason to ban whaling, not the main reason.

Japan has no whales. There is absolutely no reasonable way to assert that Japanese whaling is a sovereign issue for Japan to settle. Japan whales very far from Japan and thousands of miles away from Japanese waters, including in an IWC-sanctioned sanctuary in Antarctica and the territorial waters of countries opposed to whaling.

It doesn’t matter what Japanese citizens alone think, it matters what the world thinks. Whaling is no more a Japanese issue than the Iraq War is an issue for US alone to consider.
The Diet approves a lot of shady budgetary items that are very bad for Japan. Public opinion poll son government activity don’t mean much because few people have any interest in what the government does and are unwilling to criticize it. The SIA scandal has a lot of public attention, but not many people in Japan know, for example, that Japan has the only pension fund in the world that loses money instead of gaining interest.

Public opinion in Japan thinks teenage crime rates are rising, even though they aren’t.

All of that is academic, though, because your claim that the majority of Japanese people support whaling and think that the money is well spent is based on two falsehoods:
1. That there have been regular, scientific surveys of public opinion on the matter.
2. That the public is aware of how much it costs and that the industry is entirely dependent on subsidies.

First, number 2 would have to be true, then number 1 would have to be true, then you assertion could be tested.

The research sample size argument is pure bullshit and you know it. When is this research being done? If the sample size is now large enough, why isn’t any peer-reviewed cetological research being published?

The answer is simple: no real research is being done.

I would support a very tight limitation on whaling and an outright ban on commercial whaling. It would be wrong of me to use force against other people to do so. Calling for such limitations is absolutely within my rights. If not mine, then whose? Yours?

As much as you hae a right to say whaling should continue, I have a right to call for its end. Are anti-war protesters going beyond their rights? In 1982, nearly half a million people in Japan protested a proposal to develop nuclear weapons? Did they have the right to do that?

I feel that people who oppose whaling oppose whaling just because they hate whaling. All the objective reasons they bring about are all pretext.

You’re putting the cart before the horse here. The reasons I have listed are the reasons I am opposed to whaling. Most people who are opposed to things have reasons.

As far as I’m concerned, there’s nothing inherently wrong with killing or eating anything, as long as there’s a valid reason. Japan’s whaling program is wanton slaughter without purpose.

As far as I can tell, this is a massive government boondoggle - someone is getting rich at our expense. Same thing happens in many other industries, so its not unbelievable in the cae of whaling. Powerful people want to keep getting that money and want to keep a few towns happy, so the program continues.

You still haven’t given me any reasons why there should be whaling.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 29, 2007 @ 6:59 pm

J,
Because there is demand for whale meat.

You say there’s demand. Prove it. Cite some sources and figures.

We’re waiting.

Comment by J

November 29, 2007 @ 7:38 pm

Ken Worsley, “Stop avoiding the question.” Which question have I avoided?

Kraig, I don’t think DeOrio can show the treaty Japanese whaling is violating, because it is not violating any treaty. Or can you show it?

DeOrio, “there is no legitimate demand.”
“Besides, commercial whaling is prohibited. If Japan is whaling because there’s a demand for meat, that violates the IWC charter.”
This is the meanest argument I hear recently. What was the word for it? “Witch trial?”
If you want to know if there is demand, just ask some of your Japanese friends. Japanese have been eating whale meat for centuries. It is part of its culture. There is demand regardless of your speculation. I want to eat, too.

“Japan has no whales.” By the way, do you know why there are very few whales in Northern Pacific? There were a lot of them until 18th century. A lot of old Japanese lived on them. Then came the US whalers with modern equipment, who depleted the whales to near extinction. You know the first treaty between US and Japan was about, among other things, fueling US whalers.

As to the “whales are intelligent” argument, I thought it was a bad joke when I first heard it years ago. Cows, pigs, sheep and hens are all intelligent. Why can we single out whales? The same goes with “whaling is inhumane” argument. Killing cows, pigs sheep and hens is inhumane as well.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 29, 2007 @ 8:31 pm

J,
Because there is demand for whale meat.

You say there’s demand. Prove it. Cite some sources and figures.

We’re still waiting.

Comment by Croce

November 29, 2007 @ 8:41 pm

J wrote: Japanese have been eating whale meat for centuries. It is part of its culture. There is demand

Wow, you guys really get the nutjobs sometimes. Look at these three statements, they are complete propaganda and make no sense whatsoever. Japanese have not been whaling in the South Ocean, off Antarctica, for centuries. This is impossible. Take a look at Japan’s naval history and you’ll see.

The conflation of old-time whaling with today’s commercial venture is false. Claiming that the Nisshin Maru is part of Japanese whaling ‘culture’ is a big fat PR spin lie.

This isn’t a debate about other animals. This is about whales. Why does this ridiculous red herring come up every time?

Comment by Grayson

November 29, 2007 @ 11:53 pm

Well, I’d like to get the discussion on a different track, but one thing I’d like to comment on. Whenever someone, such as this “J” character, tries to say that people are not allowed to voice their opinions on a topic, it means they have no credibility whatsoever. It’s an admission of defeat.

At any rate, back to the politics. Any idea of the chances of a censure motion? Is Fukuda willing to take the risk of losing his position over this bill? It seems to me the LDP is stuck in a bad position, and the media has no qualms about granting tons of airtime to their misdeeds at the Defense Agency/Ministry.

Comment by J

November 30, 2007 @ 9:12 am

Croce, see this page in wikipedea about the history of whaling in Japan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Japan
The Japanese did not have to go all the way to the South Ocean to get whales, because there were a lot of whales in Northern Pacific near Japan, until US whalers depleted them.

Grayson, when did I say “people are not allowed to voice their opinions on a topic”?

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 9:37 am

J, I don’t begrudge you your opinion, but I will admit to certain amount of irritation at accusations, presumptions, and hectoring from someone who has been unwilling to research the issue and is unwilling to engage in a discussion of the actual merits of the issue, as opposed to simply trying to turn the debate to other, irrelevant topics or engaging in gainsaying.

Basically, you need to learn what demand is. Yes, it is absolutely true that there are some people, in many countries, who want to eat whale. The problem is that there are not enough of these people to create a market. If there were; if, as you claim, the people of Japan were clamoring for whale meat, whale meat would sell. It doesn’t. There isn’t any real demand.

Let me draw you an analogy. I like radio drama. I am particularly fond of the current radio dramas produced by the BBC. I also like the convenience of podcasts and downloadable mp3s. I would love it if the BBC made its radio dramas available as mp3s. I’ve even written to them asking if they have any such plans and to let them know that I, for one, would subscribe.

The problem is, it takes time, hence money, to make those programs available as podcasts. The BBC’s radio dramas are not among its most listened-to programs, though and a previous trial run resulted in very few subscriptions. So, even though I and tens of thousands of other people listen to those dramas, there is not sufficient demand for a podcast of them.

Whaling is even more extreme because the amount of meat that would sell on an open market wouldn’t pay for the voyages. Oh wait, even the meat being sold at government order isn’t paying for the whaling trips.

No demand.

If whaling ended today, a few people would be out of jobs. Most of them could easily be retrained to find other work. Those too old or who could not find other work could easily be given generous government assistance out of the money saved by the cessation of whaling.

A few customers might say, “Oh, I miss whale.” Most people wouldn’t notice it. Most supermarkets don’t have whale on the shelves. Most people rarely eat it.

To be honest, I think supporters of whaling do so out of irritation at the idea of appearing to cave to outside pressure. This is unfortunate. Arguing in favor of whaling as some sort of nationalistic thing is perverse, as is claiming to speak for 127 million people.

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 9:54 am

Grayson, I agree that this whole JDA/MOD scandal gives the DPJ a bit of leverage and might give them the confidence to pass a censure motion. However, I don’t see why the LDP would call elections at such a risky time. I’m sticking with Spring as the earliest time we’ll see elections called.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 9:59 am

J,
Because there is demand for whale meat.

You say there’s demand. Prove it. Cite some sources and figures.

We’re still waiting.

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 10:38 am

Polls posted at What Japan Thinks:

The pro-whaling front for the whaling industry found 90% of respondents to a self-selecting poll in favor Iceland’s resumption of whaling.

Nearly 3/4 of respondents to government poll supported a return to sustainable whaling based on scientific evidence. (If anyone can find an actual, independent cetologist calling Japan’s whaling program sustainable or in line with scientific evidence, I’ll eat my hat.)

A Greenpeace poll found just under 1/4 opposed to Japanese whaling, roughly 34% in favor, and roughly 40% having no opinion on the matter.

I know of no objective, scientific poll on Japanese public attitudes toward whaling. Likewise, I know of no governmental attempt to disseminate information on whaling, much less accurate information.

Comment by J

November 30, 2007 @ 11:23 am

OK. Demand. This is a quote from wikipedea which is a quote from New York Times.

Japan’s whale consumption peaked in 1962 at 226,000 tons, then declined steadily until it fell to 15,000 tons in 1985, the year before the commercial whaling ban took place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_Japan#_note-0
So, there was a demand for 15,000 tons in 1985, which is far more than what you call “thousands of tons being added to the over 4,000 tons left over from last year.” And don’t think decline in consumption was due to decline in demand. It was due to restriction imposed by IWC.

This is the poll you talked about. Sample was 5,000 Japanese, two-stage stratified random sampling with response rate of 69.1% conducted in 2002.
http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/whale/index.htm
Look at Q2 and Q3. More 80% of Japanese have eaten Whale meat. Can’t we say there is demand for whale meat?

You quote “Nearly 3/4 of respondents to government poll supported a return to sustainable whaling based on scientific evidence.” Doesn’t that prove the existence of demand for whaling? You are shooting your own feet.

Having said so, I want to ask a question.
If I further prove the existence of demand, are you likely to change your attitude toward whaling? No, you aren’t. This is why I call your argument pretext.

Comment by Yoichi

November 30, 2007 @ 1:40 pm

Any claim that there is substanial demand for whale meat is false.
I think most Japanese know this, but don’t want to be criticized by foreign power, so there is defensive reaction.
The whalers make other countries angry, for example by hunting whales with lower population, or that other countries people like to watch.
They make other countries a little angry becuase this will create support with Japanese people at home.
It is their game, and they are good at it.
Their purpose is making money of course.

We know there is no demand.
The meat is frozen in storage and will not sell.
Government forces children and people in hospital to eat it.
This is worng.
It is all done to subsidize a dying industry.
The whalers and government say it is about “culture”
many Japanese know that’s not true, it is propaganda.
It is about profit.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 2:16 pm

If I further prove the existence of demand, are you likely to change your attitude toward whaling?

No, of course not. I know when I’m right, and I know you’re dead wrong. Demand for a certain commodity does not make it right. Your argument here shows false logic.

This is why I call your argument pretext.

Pretext for what? You don’t actually think you’re going to change anyone’s minds, do you?

More 80% of Japanese have eaten Whale meat. Can’t we say there is demand for whale meat?

No, not at all.

Experience of doing something in the past does not logically mean that there is demand for it in the future. That is a huge logical fallacy. Such a fallacy in argument means you are not credible and cannot be trusted to engage in honest discussion on the matter.

What you have cited in your comment proves absolutely nothing. You have failed miserably, while hiding your misleading information behind a veil of anonymity.

We see through you.

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 3:28 pm

J, your grasp of logic is weak at best. First, pretext. My arguments against whaling are a pretext for my opposition to whaling?

That doesn’t make sense.

In 1985, 15,000 tons of whale were consumed. That shows consumption, not demand. It also shows consumption 22 years ago and a drop of 221,000 tons in per annum consumption over the previous 23 years - conveniently, an interval almost identical to the interval between 1985 and now. As if that weren’t enough, it shows a rapid decline in consumption prior to the moratorium. Consumption in 1985 was under 7% of what it had been in 1962.
Had concumption continued to fall at the same rate, it would now be at under 1,000 tons per year.

If anything, the moratorium boosted consumption. We both know this not what actually happened, though. What actually happened is that the government stepped in to boost consumption by subsidizing purchases of whale meat and by forcing public institutions to buy whale meat.

This is not legitimate demand.

You know what else happened in Japan between 1962 and 1985? The country went from being a comparitively poor country to being, by some measures, the richest country in the world. This shows that when Japanese could get other food, they did.
If anything, this shows that most Japanese people do not like whale meat.
This makes perfect sense in light of the fact that Japanese people are not buying whale meat.

This part was just funny:

You quote “Nearly 3/4 of respondents to government poll supported a return to sustainable whaling based on scientific evidence.” Doesn’t that prove the existence of demand for whaling? You are shooting your own feet.

That has absolutely nothing to do with demand. If I said 50% of people who watched baseball were Yomiuri Giants fans, would that show that baseball was increasing in popularity?

Furthermore, those people would support a return to sustainable whaling based on scientific evidence.
First, both of those criteria are missing from Japan’s whaling program.
Second, it’s a magnificently leading question because it implies that the whaling program is both sustainable and based on unsoecified scientific evidence.
Scientific evidence of what? What’s the evidence?

They’ve had decades and tens of thousands of Minke whales? Where are the research papers? Where’s the peer-reviewing? Where are the independent researchers?

Oh, it’s all being produced by groups other than the Japanese whaling industry and is almost entirely in opposition to whaling.

80% of Japanese have tried whale. OK, great. I’ve eaten whale four times. By your logic, I would be a very likely future purchaser of whale meat.

Let me give you a parallel. I think it’s safe to assume that virtually every American has eaten dark chicken meat. Some Americans even prefer it. Nevertheless, white meat outsells dark by a very high margin. Producing enough white meat to meet market demand leads to a glut of dark meat. This dark meat is purchased by the US government, frozen, and shipped overseas as foreign aid or sold at a great discount to be processed into animal feed.
How can this be? Almost every American has eaten dark meat, so the demand must be very high, right?

No. Having done something is not the same thing as demand.

80% of Japanese people have eaten whale meat. Maybe all of them loved it and think it is the greatest thing they’ve ever tried. Good for them. The fact is, they’re not buying enough of it to sustain the market. Supply is far greater than demand.

Once you strip away the government essentially buying whale meat from the distributors to whom it sold whale meat, the demand is tiny.

I really don’t get what you don’t grasp about this. If you like whale, good for you. You still have not made any argument in favor of why whaling should be done. You’re focusing on demand, which is probably the weakest part of the pro-whaling argument because there is not sufficient demand to make even one whaling ship pay for itself and there is no evidence to suggest that the whaling industry would be missed.

Now, let’s talk hypothetically. Let’s suppose there was raging demand. Let’s suppose there were actually more than a tiny handful of Japanese people who enjoyed, purchased, and ate whale on a regular basis. Let’s suppose that if every whale in the world were hunted and processed, it would sell at a high price in Japan overnight.

Would I favor whaling?

No. You’re right. I would not.

Why? Because the lack of demand and the disastrous economics of the whaling industry make up only one of the reasons I oppose commercial whaling. (If it makes you feel any better, I oppose Icelandic and Norwegian whaling as well.)

I love bluefin tuna. Bluefin chutoro sushi might be my single favorite food. I’d be happy to eat it every day.
There’s also an enormous demand for bluefin around the world, especially in Japan, where it is possibly the single most popular fish. It’s great. It’s very profitable industry. Supply simply cannot keep up with demand. In terms of economics and popularity, bluefin is everything whale is not.

Some countries have placed a moratorium on fishing for bluefin tuna. Other countries are considering joining that moratorium. Despite it’s popularity and it’s centrality to the cuisine, many restaurants serving sushi and sashimi overseas have removed it from their menus.

You know what? I’d support a moratorium on bluefin fishing. I wish Japan would join the moratorium?

Why? Because there just aren’t that many bluefin left in the world. Stocks need time to replenish. The bluefin needs a few years to recuperate, so we can continue to enjoy it in the future, so some of the ecological damage caused by overfishing can be mitigated.

If ever whale were a person, they’d make up a small city. There just aren’t that many of them.

As I said above, commercial whaling is wanton and unnecessary. The only reason it goes on is that someone is lining his pockets with ill-gotten lucre. This is just plain wrong.

Finally, as I said above, the way whales are hunted is inhumane. If there’s really no reason to kill something and you can’t do it quickly and cleanly, you’re being cruel. I’d say the same thing about someone who killed a cow by jabbing it with a steak knife, shooting it with a BB gun, and pushing firecrackers into it. Eventually, it would work, but it wouldn’t do the job quickly, and it would be torturing the cow to death. Now imagine the cow was smart enough to learn games, follow commands, and remember complex patterns of behavior.

I’m opposed to whaling because there is no way in which it makes sense. It loses and is a negative on all fronts. It’s ludicrous. It’s cruel, damaging, expensive, unnecessary, unhealthy, and unpopular. It is one of the single biggest mistakes the government of Japan has made. And they keep digging the hole deeper and deeper.

I’ll ask again, and I really hope you answer: What are the reasons for whaling?

I’ll even clarify. I don’t care about what’s wrong with the anti-whaling argument. I want to know why I or anyone else should support whaling. What’s good about it? Why should it go on?

Comment by Real J

November 30, 2007 @ 3:47 pm

DeOrio, you should write a book! It’s easier to read than such long comment!

J, I saw this:

The Japanese did not have to go all the way to the South Ocean to get whales, because there were a lot of whales in Northern Pacific near Japan, until US whalers depleted them.

Which US whalers? In Edo period, with sailing ships or steam ships which were travelling many years at a time? I tried to read the book Moby Dick by Herman Melville. I couldn’t understand many parts and it gave me a negative reaction to his books. Now I see he destroyed our whales too. Oh my god!

Or do you mean in years of 1940’s and 1950’s? It is true US supported whaling near Japan, but it was not US whalers or whaling for US. In that time Japan did whaling with support of US to get food. This is why eating whale meat is going down as other foods, like beef is going up.

I have eaten whale. It’s not bad. I think whaling is a bad idea for Japan. I won’t feel sorry if I can’t eat whale. Really, I think you won’t too.

On the other topic, I also think Fukuda won’t go soon. Really, I think DPJ will make a bad image if they censure him. It is easy for LDP to say DPJ is wasting time in the Diet and it will not help DPJ. To be honest, tho - I like Fukuda. I think next year he will have the power to make accomplishments.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 4:56 pm

DeOrio,

I think one might assume that J’s comments are actually ironic. He’s setting up such easy positions to knock down that it’s like shooting fish in a barrel, almost a joke.

There could be some decent arguments for whaling, but the ones he’s made are pretty ridiculous and don’t stand. The replies never address the questions asked and he twists words to claim that people said things they never said, ie, a strawman. Thus, I think it might just be a pisstake for someone and we don’t really have time for it. The level of discussion ought to be higher than that.

Back to the politics…

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 4:59 pm

I’d say the same thing about someone who killed a cow by jabbing it with a steak knife, shooting it with a BB gun, and pushing firecrackers into it.

Ever seen how many rounds a cow can take?

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 5:05 pm

Real J, I agree with you. I don’t what calling an election would do for the LDP unless the DPJ really creates a massive amount of ill will over the next couple weeks.

Comment by J

November 30, 2007 @ 8:26 pm

DeOrio, we are living in a free world. If you want to ban something, you have to show the reasons. The one whose liberty will be limited does not need to establish why his liberty should not be limited.

Why don’t we agree that lack of demand does not justify ban on whaling. By the way, I can show you more evidences of existence of demand.

The only legitimate argument for the ban on whaling is the threat of extinction. If you think there is a threat of extinction, prove it. As you know, even IWC admits there are an estimated 760,000 minke whales in Southern Hemisphere in 1989 and 174,000 in North Atlantic in 2001. http://www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm
There should be much more right now, thanks to the ban on commercial whaling. They are enough for sustainable whaling.

By the way, Japan turns in its report of research whaling very often.
http://www.iwcoffice.org/publications/doclist.htm
In Special Meetings and Workshops, there are a lot of papers that mension JARPA such as paper number SC/D06/J25. They are the results of Japan’s research whaling.

Comment by DeOrio

November 30, 2007 @ 8:59 pm

J, we’re living in a world governed by agreements among people. Japan joined the IWC of its own free will and hunted whales down to a bare minimum in its own waters of its own free will. Agreements approved by the IWC set up sanctuaries necessary for whales to keep breeding. Japan hunts in those sanctuaries.

I’d say anytime killing is involved, violating agreements with other countries is involved, or causing possibly irreparable damage to the environment is involved, the burden is on the side who wants to do such things. Besides, you have yet to even attempt to offer a reason why whaling should be carried out. Puerile gainsaying is not a method of argument.

If you want to take the free world argument, you’re going to have to give up a lot of the protections you probably enjoy - it’s alla give and take between view points.

As I said above, there’s more to extinction than simply comparing hunting numbers to birth numbers, especially when much of the hunt disrupts a sanctuary and, thus, threatens breeding.

At this point, I have to wonder whether you’re even reading what I’m writing. Yes, the whaling industry publishes reports - I didn’t say they didn’t. I said they don’t publish anything new, peer-reviewed, or advancing the science of cetology, nor have they given anything more than farcical explanations of what kind of research is being done here.

To be honest, I don’t think you can show me any evidence of demand, J. The only “evidence” you’ve yet offered that has anything to do with demand clearly shows a lack of demand. This is not your fault, don’t worry. You can’t offer evidence of demand because there isn’t any demand. I’m sick of repeating this.

I’d say that whaling needs to be justified, especially since the government of Japan attempts to detooth the IWC by turning it into an industry group packed with poor landlocked countries and flatly lies about what it is doing.

Japan is engaged in commercial whaling with factory ships in violation of a moratorium put in place by a group of which Japan remains a member, period.

There are plenty of other factors that make it even worse.

Whaling is propped up by a few powerful vested interests to the detriment of Japan and the rest of the world. If you’re getting paid to argue in favor of it, I can see why you would. If you’re not, you’re making yourself the tool of people who are screwing you. I have no idea why you would do that, since you seem to be a fairly bright guy.

From here on out, I don’t want to be rude or anything, but if you come back with yet another statistic that has nothing to do with demand and call it evidence of demand, if you keep arguing against a straw man instead of me, or if you don’t start making a case for whaling, I’m just not going to respond. If you don’t agree with me, you don’t agree with me. So be it. I just hope you have a good reason.

If you have something to say on a different topic, go for it.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 10:13 pm

By the way, I can show you more evidences of existence of demand.

Haha. Go for it. You’re not convincing anyone.

Comment by John S

November 30, 2007 @ 11:01 pm

have you guys noticed how this ‘J’ guy’s English has progressively gotten better? It’s just another lobbyist posting spoon-fed pro-whaling trash.

Everyone exposed david@tokyo and his Japan Today username, Debido. This is the same nonsensical argument repeated again. Not worth even considering.

Note how after getting absolutely creamed in the debate, this guy comes up with, “Why don’t we agree that lack of demand does not justify ban on whaling,” a statement that has no meaning at all.

Before that he says, “If you want to ban something, you have to show the reasons.”

Seriously, what a clown - the reasons were demonstrated time and time again. Does this guy think that hunting Humpback whales is good for Japan’s international image? Does he actually think that people are going to be convinced by his spurious arguments? Even a child can laugh at the ridiculousness of his claims.

To be honest, I think the only people who are pro-whaling must be anti-Japan. They must hate Japan so much down inside that they want Japan to look bad in the international community. It gives them their sad identity. They have nothing else to live for.

It must be so sad to live a life that insecure with oneself.

Comment by Ken Worsley

November 30, 2007 @ 11:59 pm

John, you raise some good points. I agree that anti-whaling is pro-Japan in terms of public relations. We are pro-Japan, and we are in position to claim that we are the true patriots of Japan here, should we want to sink to such a level.

There are those who profit from the industry (much more than our little lobbyist/ironic poster on this thread) who financially benefit from the practice and would rather make their money than see Japan play a role of leadership in the world.

Ultimately, it is a small-minded position, and one which only serves to promote a false sense of nationalism.

The thing is, when people like this “J” person post their nonsense on public forums, it only does damage to what they claim, since it allows everyone to see the emptiness of their arguments. Many people might not realize their false hostility or deep-seated insecurity until they see it expressed in logical fallacy after logical fallacy. They are their own worst enemy.

When exposed, they resort to strawman attacks and ignore the salient points brought against them. They cannot engage in honest debate, because they do not hold an argument that carries water, so to say.

Notice how none of these lobbyists ever claim to have actually been on a whaling and/or fishing vessel. They simply have no idea.

Comment by Ken

December 1, 2007 @ 1:14 am

By the way, “J” is posting from South Korea. IP (identified)

Wow, what a fraud!

Comment by Anonymous

December 1, 2007 @ 2:56 am

Thanks Ken. I know who it is. Same IP in my blog. Let’s compare notes over email.

Comment by DeOrio

December 1, 2007 @ 9:11 am

So we’ve established that each shill for the whaling lobby can sucker me in at least once.

Oh well. I quit. From here on out, I have a policy for such commenters. First, a link to the two threads on this site overrun with this nonsense and a request to make the case for whaling.
When the shill doesn’t do that, the conversation is over.

J, whoever it is you work for, tell them they need to come up with some arguments for what they’re doing and stop insulting the intelligence of their opponents by harping on irrelevant points and wasting everyone’s time with strawmen.

Comment by J

December 3, 2007 @ 9:17 am

DeOrio, stop that non-sense. There is no treaty that prohibits research whaling. The “sanctuaries” you talk about has no legally binding power on Japan.

John, “Does this guy think that hunting Humpback whales is good for Japan’s international image?”
I can imagine how intelligent you are to say this “Kiss my ass” argument so openly.

Ken, my IP is not in South Korea.

Comment by Ken

December 3, 2007 @ 10:44 am

J,

Now you’ve stooped to using offensive language and being abusive towards other commenters on the thread, as well as flat out lying. We don’t suffer fools. No warning: Your comments will no longer appear here.