Every year there is a real massacre against dolphins in Taiji Bay, Japan. The animals are surrounded in open water and taken to the small bay. Networks are launched. They are now chosen, and massacred by harpoon strikes, knives and spears by fishermen.
After the first denunciation that shocked common sense through the award-winning documentary The Cove, the killing is recorded on video every year in the hope that the repercussion will change the Japanese behavior. This year was not different.
And once again the international community does nothing.
There are no sanctions or embargoes against the Japanese government to stop this "cultural tradition."
Each one does what they can. You are very helpful in sharing and giving more visibility to this petition and asking people to sign and share it. The more people know, the better. Japan should be ashamed of such attitudes. The dolphin slaughter must be ended! Contribute spreading this news of horrors, give more visibility to it. Comment with your friends. You will have contributed a lot.
Those animals that are selected to be sold to amusement parks. The most famous of these is Sea World. But many other companies in the business also buy their "copies."
The physical and psychological suffering inflicted on dolphins is the main reason for condemning this practice. We are not simply talking about people who kill dolphins. We are talking about something much more serious.
The way they pick up the dolphin groups and imprison them before bringing them to the bay is also macabre. They strike metal objects, usually poles, against each other underwater, resulting in noise barriers that confuse and frighten dolphins.
Once disoriented, they are brought into shallower waters where they are surrounded by nets and left for several days starving, stressed and deprived of rest, until finally being dragged into the bay.
There is no selection here, pregnant females, juveniles, babies all receive the same barbaric treatment. Some die at this stage.
When the time comes, the dolphins are dragged into the bay. They are beaten, run over by speedboats and then subjected to a cruel selection process, where three destinations are possible:
Smaller dolphins, if they have survived capture and starvation, are usually returned to the sea.
No, this is not some kind of pity on the part of the "fishermen" - a baby dolphin counts as an individual in the quota, but it has less meat than an adult, so it will hurt if they stick with it.
Unfortunately, the release of younger dolphins is also a death penalty for most of them as they are without parents. It is very difficult for an orphaned baby dolphin to survive alone in the ocean.
The way the boats push away the "released" dolphins is as traumatic as the catch: they are chased as they eagerly seek out their relatives. They will not see them again.
The most "beautiful" dolphins, the rarest or those with attributes that trainers find attractive, are selected to sell and spend the rest of their lives captive in the entertainment industry.
Several aquariums, particularly in the East (Japan, China, Dubai, among others) are attentive customers willing to pay large amounts for each of these captured animals.
3. Death with touches of cruelty
Dolphins who are sentenced to death (the "ugliest" or deep-scarred dolphins from the beatings and nets that hold them) are impaled with a metal rod sticking to the spinal cord.
Death is slow, preceded by paralysis, in which animals are aware of what is happening to them, what is happening to their peers and without any chance of defending themselves.
Being highly intelligent and socially conscious animals, as is common to all cetaceans, the crime becomes even more barbaric.
The justification for the killing is feeding the natives?
The argument that the killing of dolphins is justified by the need to obtain their meat for the consumption of the people of Taiji and other regions, falls apart in a simple way: their dolphin meat is toxic.
Mercury levels of this meat are up to five thousand times higher than allowed by the World Health Organization.
Needless to say, the people of Taiji have access to other types of meat to feed.
All in all, most Japanese are not even fond of dolphin meat and therefore not looking for it.
The fishermen say that hunting is due to the economic situation. But this is a lie. The value of the dolphin can reach 200 thousand dollars.
According to the city's own historical records, edited and published in 1979, the history of dolphin killing in Taiji is recent.
The first recorded hunt is from 1933, having been repeated in 1936 and 1944. The current series of annual killings only began in 1969.
So it is not a 400 year tradition as they want to make us believe. Only 45 years old was started. This, added to the fact that animals are sold live to the entertainment industry, is a form of profit.
Can tradition be justified?
If traditions could justify remaining in the daily lives of mankind, we would still be living with cannibals.
It was precisely because of cruelty that made society banish as development. A consequence for rational and intelligent beings.
We should point out that we are not igniting public opinion against the Japanese. Even because not everyone is favorable to dolphin hunting. Otherwise we say that all Portuguese or Spanish are inhuman people because in their countries there are bullfights.
Mistakes Don't Justify Other Mistakes
Today's globalized society has long banned mistreatment and cruelty to animals, which was expressed in common agreement with all UN member states through UNESCO (it is a United Nations-based specialized agency). in Paris, founded on 4 November 1946 with the aim of contributing to peace and security in the world through education, the natural sciences, the social / human sciences and communications / information.):
Universal Declaration of Animal Rights 17-10-1978, which states that all animals have equal rights to exist within the context of biological equilibrium. This equality of rights does not overshadow the diversity of species and individuals. All animal life has the right to be respected. Animals should not be subjected to mistreatment or cruel acts. 2 ° - If it is necessary to kill an animal, it must be instantaneous, painless and not cause apprehension. 3 ° A dead animal must be treated with decency. (…) Article 41 - Wild animals have the right to live and reproduce freely in their own natural environment. 2 ° The prolonged deprivation of freedom of wild animals, hunting and fishing as a hobby, as well as the use of wild animals for non-vital reasons, are contrary to this fundamental right.
We know that there is no painless death inflicted unless every victim is doped. And every living being feels fear, anguish and stress. Therefore suffers.
There are many mistakes globally made by our human species, either directly or against habitat destruction. But right now, we would take the focus off this petition.
The fact is that what happens in Taiji would not be justified by a series of practices elsewhere in the planet.
If we were to deal with all the issues in which animals are treated badly, we might come to the conclusion that nothing can be done.
What's Behind Dolphin Death
The big question behind the death of dolphins is closely linked to the entertainment industry, which belongs to large corporations that finance it. But wait. Unfortunately I have to say that if you went to some water park with dolphin or orca shows, believe me, your ticket was one of millions that makes owners willing to continue the "spectacle" of horrors. Sea World spent some time speaking during presentations that animals are "rescued," as if they were better imprisoned than free. They receive all necessary treatment for the welfare of the animals.
From the beginning of the end of freedom to the end, when dolphins and orcas are confined, the truth is that there is a sequence of lies and false information as explained above.
The United Nations and governments need to take action against this crime, just as they do when another nation endangers the environment and undermines the rights of every citizen on the planet.
Hasn't this recently been how many governments took a stand when the fire that destroys the Amazon rainforest struck?
And we ordinary people also didn't take to the streets, went to the front of the Brazilian Embassy in our countries, and protested?
Did the companies not stop buying Brazilian products? Why now, against Japan the same cannot be done?
But it will only be done if we sign this petition and many others.
It will only be done if we take to the streets, go to the gates of the embassies of Japan in various countries, to say that we no longer accept it.
That we want one enough.
That our governments must take immediate action, or we will leave many Japanese products stocked in supermarkets and stores with Japanese products.
We have to get out of our comfort zone, take to the streets in front of the Embassy of Japan so that they and our governments know that we are opposed to the continued killing, slavery and display of dolphins and orcas.
Only then will our governments and the UN take positive steps to end this form of illicit enrichment by fishermen, shipping companies and the ultimate destination of aquariums or water parks.
Despite all the technology that allows our species to have access to information to predict and reduce negative actions, the results have generally been predatory, toxic, polluting and destroying ecosystems and extinction of various species of life.
Even so, humanity has destroyed the planet's life under cover of its transportation, food and even entertainment needs.
Conservation limits are being exceeded through predation, causing ecosystem imbalance, causing harm to humanity itself.
By the logic of destruction and domination, human beings are reduced to pieces of a game, the value of the human person is mitigated and often dismissed, cruelty becomes the rule.
To curb this state of affairs, the United Nations (UN) was created, which, together with the Organization of American States and the Council of Europe, is part of the effort to develop international human rights protection systems. An important milestone in this process was the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, preceded in 1945 by the Charter of San Francisco.
However, it is observed that there is no democracy in the international community that enables the formation of a collective will, there are no efficient public spaces for transnational governance - thus leaving room for the will of the strongest. This reflects the difficulty of practical operationalization of one's own dignity, since Canotilho's statement is valid: "It is understood, therefore, that the 'rules' and 'principles', to be actively operative, need procedures and processes that give them practical operation. "(CANOTILHO, José Joaquim Gomes. Constitutional law and constitution theory. 3. ed. Coimbra: Almedina, 1998. p. 1088).
As Weilert warns, "Transnational corporations and issues related to their treatment and conduct remain a matter of serious international discussion." (WEILERT, Katarina. Taming the untamable? Transnational corporations in United States law and practice. In: Max Planck 14. V. 2010), because states' obligations regarding human rights and the environment are scattered in various international conventions, however, international treaties fail to consider the globalized character of transnational corporations. which are not subject to the jurisdiction of a single State.
Thinking about the protection of human rights in the 21st century involves thinking about transnational democratic institutions of regulation and governance, ways of producing regulations of transnational spaces, the organization of an effective sanctions system, a division of responsibilities that allows for broad protection of human rights. , and the operation of human duties.
Thus, it is possible to foresee the emergence of a further phase in the process of human rights evolution, which encourages thinking of a transnational citizen as the holder of transnational law, and the legal content by the idea of human dignity, which overcomes the feeling of ethnocentrism. to broaden the notion of society and bonds of union with a transnational community, by overcoming structures of domination to construct structures of cooperation.
The economy, therefore, must unite with the commitment to build good for human beings, which should be seen in the working relationship, with customers, with society, with public authorities, with the environment; in compliance with the law; the entrepreneurial commitment to sponsor culture; in the beautification of life by art; in stimulating self-realization. In this sense, are Cucinelli's words: Knowledge of the laws of economics and the market must be combined with knowledge of the human being, with the warning that every good soul can offer something useful. "(CUCINELLI, Brunello. The memoirs In: FONDAZIONE BRUNELLO CUCINELLI Solomeo: Brunello Cucinelli, the humanistic enterprise in the world of industry Perugia: Quattroemme, Perugia: Quattroemme, 2011. p.
It is a time to bring human beings back to just proportions towards and contributing to their surroundings, restoring the unity of homo faber (worthy for what they do), homo sapiens (worthy for wisdom) and homo prudens (worthy). what he chooses), to realize the human form of the cosmotandric man: worthy for what he is.
TRANSNATIONALITY / ENVIRONMENT
That goes beyond the boundaries of a country's borders.
The environment is a right of transnationality, because by causing damage the state can harm not only the local population, but affect all humanity, even indirectly.
The big challenge is that transnational demands must be faced by the international community differently from those provided for in national and international legislation, especially in relation to economic issues. As human rights are not static, in the face of transnational demands it is necessary to rethink a transnational foundation for such rights. The transnationalization of rights is a different process and subsequent to the internationalization of rights, which leads to a new treatment of the historical evolutionary process of fundamental rights and which requires new civilizing solutions. (PECES-BARBA, Gregorio. Course of Fundamental Derechos: general theory. Madrid: Universidad Carlos III, 1999. p. 154-155.)
OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH NATURE
A humanistic enterprise establishes the harmonious relationship between human beings and nature, as it seeks a balance between economic, social and environmental needs. Cucinelli understands that the human being has his dignity, but that the earth also dignifies the human being, so he speaks of a "dignità della terra" (dignity of the earth), seeking to preserve the natural landscape and make it even more beautiful, placing so in relation to the human and the environmental factor. As Cucinelli states: We care to respect nature and the environment, being mindful of Genius loci (CUCINELLI, Brunello. La dignità ea forma dello spirito. 2010. 47 f. Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Umbria, 11 November 2010. P. 22).
This means that the humanist economy considers the contributions of the environmental economy, which means "a part of the economy that tries to integrate the environment into conventional economic analysis, so that environmental actions have a classic cost-benefit structure." (HERNÁNDEZ BERASALUCE, Luis Environment Economics and Market Madrid: World Press Libros 1997. 13) The humanist economy calculates a new way of making economics with the purpose of balancing environmental impacts because it values the dignity of the earth and a architecture that is art, that preserves the genius loci alive, reconciling human desires and ecosystem needs. It seeks to harmonize with the management of resources and the environment from the two steps suggested by Pearce and Turner (PEARCE, David W. TURNER, R. Kerry. Saving Natural Resources and the Environment. Translation by Carlos Abad y Pablo Campos Madrid: Edigrados, 1995. p.74. a) use renewable resources so that the rate of extraction is not greater than the rate of natural regeneration; (b) waste streams in the environment must remain at or below the environment's capacity to assimilate such waste.
The humanist economy makes a cultural revolution in the way of dealing with nature, transforming the mentality from which it is extracted, produced, sold and discarded to a mentality of production, recycling, regeneration and preservation in order to that the dignity of the earth is always protected. This is because ecological consciousness is a strong aspect of humanist consciousness.
To this end, the economy must be based on know-how (the dignity of work), acting in the community (the civil context), on the basis of law (within the law and guided by the constitutional spirit, human rights and duties, and the principle of human dignity), humanistic values (the promotion of the natural virtues of human beings), harmony with nature (sustainability), commitment to art and culture, in the spirit of humanist leadership.
The challenge is immense, as Bauman says: "Globalization" is not about what all of us, or at least the most talented and enterprising, want or hope to do. It concerns what is happening to all of us (BAUMAN, Zygmunt. Globalization: The Human Consequences. 1999. p. 67-68).
The biocentric conception has, over the years, split into two streams, a fact that has brought together the milder anthropocentrist and biocentrist strands, perhaps, towards a new conception, which, for the moment, does not have its well-defined contours. The radical biocentric view, also called deep ecology or global biocentrism, derived from the English term deep ecology, argues that all life itself must be preserved, that is, each life has an inherent intrinsic value and cannot be withdrawn by another being.
Based on new scientific discoveries, which pointed to the interdependence of the elements that make up the environment and to the evidence that life functions according to the network pattern and that the biosphere survives through a very delicate self-regulating balance of forces, advocates of Deep ecology discussed, for the first time, our relationship with the environment, questioning the certainty of knowing the laws of nature, which provided modern man to master and modify nature as he pleased (4 BAHIA, Carolina Medeiros. Proportionality principle in cultural manifestations and protection of fauna Curitiba: Juruá, 2006, p. 95).
In this wake Chalfun points out: Deep ecology preaches the change of anthropocentric perspective, the reduction of consumption, the production of goods and services, which must be in disagreement with the need of society and not with profitability. Socially there should not be a hierarchy in which man puts himself on a higher or detached scale, but rather a new conception of solidarity [...]. (CHALFUN, Mery. Environmental-philosophical paradigms and animal rights. Brazilian Journal of Animal Law, Salvador, v. 6, year 5, jan./jun. 2010, p. 209-246, p. 219).
Deep ecology is a theory advocated by various areas of knowledge and not just by philosophy or law as it seems at first glance. This movement is not the hallmark of academic philosophy. If you have your doctoral thinkers today, such as A. Naess, B. Devall or G. Sessions, you are equally fueled by the works of poets, such as the precursors HD Thoreau or G. Snyder (who won the Pulitzer Prize in 1975 for Turtle Island, bringing together, in poetic mode, Zen Buddhism, Amerindian tradition and deep ecology), journalists.
Singer starts from a utilitarian basis in stating that in the pursuit of producing advantage for any animal there can be no defense of human acts that could result in animal suffering, as these would not be the interests of the animals in question (SINGER, Peter Practical Ethics Jefferson Luiz Camargo 3. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2002, p.
In the 1970s, Rachel Carson in "Silent Spring" already warned the scientific community about the harms of pesticides, and surprised jurists of the day by questioning the risks of adopting a position of human superiority over nature: Risking so much in Our efforts to shape Nature to our satisfaction and convenience, and yet end up failing without achieving our goal, would actually be the ultimate irony. However, it seems that this is our situation. The rarely mentioned but existing truth to be seen by anyone who wishes to see it is that Nature is not easily moldable [...]. (CARSON, Rachel. Silent Spring. Trad. Raul de Polillo. 2. ed. Sao Paulo: Improvements, 1969, p. 15.)
The Society is collapsing by consecrating the constant pursuit of pleasure - even as a duty - in such a way as to bring human beings to enjoy all that is accessed in pursuit of happiness. There is no limit to the pursuit of long-awaited human happiness, even if the consequence is unnecessary animal suffering or the destruction of the planet.
People who go to an animal show circus or go to a rodeo have to be informed about the treatment given to the animal. Many go to these places because they love the animals and aim to see them more closely, however, are unaware of the way they are treated in the dressing rooms.
Certainly, the permissive position of the UN and its member states has a strictly anthropocentrist view that considers animals to be mere things not worthy of philosophical or legal support, as it is in decline in virtue, mainly, the attempt to implement the Socio-Environmental State, which has as one of its bases the remodeling of dignity in order to seek its ecological content.
RESPONSIBILITY OF COMPANIES AND ASSOCIATIONS OF DIVE CERTIFICATES
Every diver is responsible for conservation through positive action and be a force for the good of the oceans and their creatures.
The presence of divers during dolphin catches is notorious, contrary to the principles that guide this sport activity.
Therefore, we require companies to refrain from issuing new certificates in Japan.
In the same way, suspend all certificates issued in Japan so that divers from that country cannot dive outside its territorial waters.
This is a way to pressure Japanese divers to confront their peers who make dolphin catch diving a livelihood. Similarly, they will put pressure on Japanese government officials on the Taiji issue.
WHY SHOULD THE UN NATIONS TAKE ATTITUDES?
The UN has created several legal provisions through the votes of the participating states. What are these vast agreements and what are they worth if the participating countries themselves do not enforce it? Were they not created for the benefit and protection of the participating states and, consequently, for the world population?
Let's start with animal rights:
UNESCO - Universal Declaration of Animal Rights 17-10-1978
All animals have equal rights to exist within the context of biological equilibrium. This equality of rights does not overshadow the diversity of species and individuals.
All animal life has the right to be respected.
Animals should not be subjected to mistreatment or cruel acts. 2 ° - If it is necessary to kill an animal, it must be instantaneous, painless and not cause apprehension. 3 ° A dead animal must be treated with decency.
Wild animals have the right to live and reproduce freely in their own natural environment. 2 ° The prolonged deprivation of freedom of wild animals, hunting and fishing as a hobby, as well as the use of wild animals for non-vital reasons, are contrary to this fundamental right.
Any animal dependent on man has the right to adequate sustenance and care. 2 ° Under no circumstances shall it be unreasonably abandoned or killed. 3 ° All forms of animal husbandry and use must respect species-specific physiology and behavior. 4 ° - Exhibitions, shows and films involving animals must also respect their dignity and should not include any violence.
Animal experiments involving physical or psychological suffering violate animal rights. 2 ° - Substitution methods must be developed and implemented systematically.
Any unnecessary act involving the death of an animal and any decision leading to that act constitute a crime against life.
Any act that compromises the survival of a wild species and any decision that leads to such an act is equivalent to genocide, ie a crime against the species. 2 ° The massacre of wild animals and the pollution and destruction of biotopes are acts of genocide.
The specific legal status of animals and their rights must be recognized by law. 2 ° - The protection and safety of animals must be represented at the level of government organizations.
Educational and school authorities must ensure that citizens learn from childhood to observe, understand and respect animals.
Whereas life is one, all living beings of common origin and diverse in the course of species evolution, - whereas all living beings have natural rights and whereas any animal with a nervous system has specific rights, whereas contempt and even The mere ignorance of these natural rights causes serious damage to nature and causes men to commit crimes against animals. Whereas the coexistence of species implies the recognition by human species of the right of other animal species; whereas the respect of animals for human beings is inseparable from the respect of men for each other, it is stated that:
Article 1 All animals have equal rights to exist in the context of biological equilibrium. This equality of rights does not overshadow the diversity of species and individuals. Article 2 Every animal life has the right to be respected. Article 3 1 ° Animals must not be subjected to mistreatment or cruel acts. 2 ° - If it is necessary to kill an animal, it must be instantaneous, painless and not cause apprehension. 3 ° A dead animal must be treated with decency. Article 41 - Wild animals have the right to live and reproduce freely in their own natural environment. 2 ° The prolonged deprivation of freedom of wild animals, hunting and fishing as a hobby, as well as the use of wild animals for non-vital reasons, are contrary to this fundamental right. Article 51 - Any animal dependent on man has the right to adequate support and care. 2 ° Under no circumstances shall it be unreasonably abandoned or killed. 3 ° All forms of animal husbandry and use must respect species-specific physiology and behavior. 4 ° - Exhibitions, shows and films involving animals must also respect their dignity and should not include any violence.
they relate to the construction of ethical and moral ideals, which are passed from generation to generation, in a perpetual line of integration into our society. Religion offers man the necessary pillars for the interpretation of the distinction between right and wrong, and man has the free will and common sense to "shape" these pillars according to collective needs.
But why are moral values so important in society? Now, they are responsible for maintaining order among people, being even taught from the cradle. It is easy to imagine in what situation the world would find itself today if man ignored the laws formulated from the concepts of ethics and morality. It is true that man has the right to freedom of expression and choice, but everything is passive of limits. Otherwise, in the face of any adversities that might come our way, we would return to our primitive state and solve all problems in an old-fashioned manner, devoid of ethics and morals, as criminals, notably followers of moral values, do.
In short, moral value, besides being an indispensable instrument for the proper functioning of society and the integration of individuals in it, also means respect for life. To our lives and the lives of the people around us.
We understand that interaction is of fundamental importance for the development of a globalized society, since it is in and through the interaction that we all appropriate culture at the same time as we constitute it. This process of constitution is mediated by laws designed for the greater good.
Thus, all signatories to this petition hope that the United Nations will be diligent in urging the State of Japan to refrain from continuing the atrocities committed in Taiji Bay, under penalty of economic sanctions from all spheres by the States participating in this organization.
That the present application be made known to all participating States of that organization.
And if the State of Japan refuses to refrain from practices in Taiji Bay or any other part of its territory that would suffer economic sanctions until further deliberations by the UN General Council.