I’m arguing that Nihilism is a defensible moral stance. A depressing one. But defensible. I don’t think I was willing to have more fun with that remark than what I said, so how about we just drop it?
Oh. A scapegoat. I didn’t notice that. Nope. Not at all.
I genuinely appreciate the suggestion, but I meant the personal I, which is why I didn’t say “we humans.” As in I’m glad I’m working enough hours this week at my crappy job to pay bills. I usually can’t afford them as a recurring expense.
I couldn’t help read the attribution as River Bluff Denial.
[quote=“PhasmaFelis, post:20, topic:62767”]
I’m also seeing a lot of the sort of smug urbanites who sneer when some barbaric subhuman redneck shoots a deer, but have no problem noshing down on a factory-farmed hamburger.[/quote]
Hmm.
That’s like saying that you might as well cut these down for firewood instead of using some of these.
Nothing wrong with hunting, but this guy’s a total asshole for so many reasons.
Or, to paraphrase, “Nothing wrong with hunting, but this guy’s not a hunter.”
A few years ago, my wife and I celebrated our honeymoon in south India. At one point, in the hills of Kerala, we decided to take a hike into Periyar Tiger Preserve. Our guesthouse arranged for a guide to take us, early the following morn. I’d read that entry permits to the park didn’t allow for ins ‘n’ outs, so we planned to stay in the park for the day, culminating in a cruise on the lake that afternoon. Our guide told us our hike would be in a portion of the park contained by the neighboring state, Tamil Nadu, which didn’t require permits for entry. So, we’d have to come back out, the way we went in, and make our way 'round to the Keralan entrance later.
Long story short: the whole trek was illegal, and once rangers intercepted us, we spent a few hours milling about the ranger station, waiting for asst’d bureaucratic hurdles to be hurdled. On the plus side, we saw more exotic wildlife at the ranger station, in town, than we had in our hour of jungle trekking!
Incidentally, we didn’t kill any tigers. Or try, for that matter. Or want to, even.
Anyway, my point is: on a vacation, in a faraway land, one often finds oneself in situations demanding trust of the locals. I can’t speak for this dentist, but I know my wife and I had no interest in illegally breaking into a national park. I mean, sure, we weren’t shelling out $50,000 for anything–park fees amounted to the price of a cinema ticket, and we were plenty willing to pay it–but whatever the price, one can never be quite sure it won’t outbid the scruples of the other party in a given transaction.
I don’t know what this guy’s deal was, but I don’t doubt it involved a whole lot of, “for $50,000, we guarantee you will be able to shoot at a lion”, followed by “guides” making plenty sure to get a lion into his path, by any means necessary. I mean, I’m a bit grossed out by the whole notion of a hunting safari, and if all the opprobrium this guy’s reaping contributes to diminishing the appeal of such quests, then great, but despite how distasteful, or even abhorrent many of us find what he considers a cherished pastime, I can’t help but empathize with those who stumble so unwittingly, like Justine Sacco, into a life-wrecking internet shitstorm (although, granted, his wouldn’t be the first life wrecked in this particular situation).
Little. These people are contrarian MASTERMINDS!
Fortunately for everyone it is the Nation of Zimbabwe faulting him.
I’m a bit embarrassed.
I had been assuming the Dentist had been working on a lions teeth, giving it a filling, and perhaps injected too much painkiller.
I’m not actually against hunting. There are a few good reasons to hunt (deer overpopulation being a good one). Hunting for food gets my respect.
All that said, people who bow-hunt are little more than sadistic douchebags. People who bow-hunt for “sport” (i.e. trophy hunting) are sadistic douchebags that deserve to be gored by their game. Fitting, I say.
Thats the thing. If he just was passionate about “killing things,” we, that is, society, might be OK. He could be out constantly killing deer or killing antelope or killing wildebeest. But this guy, because of his insecure, perilously small ego, needs to kill big things, big game. He has to kill leopard and rhino and a black-maned tiger. The animals that completely fascinate us as children: he’s passionate about murdering and having his beaming picture taken next to their lifeless corpses.
[quote=“daemonsquire, post:46, topic:62767”]
Anyway, my point is: on a vacation, in a faraway land, one often finds oneself in situations demanding trust of the locals.[/quote]
Sure, but on the other hand you were paying a modest sum, were attempting no destruction, and could anticipate that at worst you’d be trespassing. You weren’t paying $50 grand to shady private parties (one allegedly the family member of a cabinet minister) to kill an iconic endangered animal at best thinking you were doing so a few miles from a nature preserve. Even leaving aside any sense of disgust for this guy’s desire to do this thing, if he’s paying well over $50,000 (travel, accommodations, taxidermy, shipping, etcetera may well be tens of thousands more), he could have paid a lawyer to scope out the situation. It’s just not a situation that even seems likely to be legal and aboveboard, unlike your guided jaunt along paths in a nature preserve.
[quote=“daemonsquire, post:46, topic:62767”]I can’t help but empathize with those who stumble so unwittingly, like Justine Sacco, into a life-wrecking internet shitstorm (although, granted, his wouldn’t be the first life wrecked in this particular situation).[/quote]Justine Sacco was an apparently well-meaning person who made a dumb joke intended to satirize an African tragedy but easily (mis)interpreted as crassly incendiary, and was pilloried for it. This dude paid $50 grand to have his butt chauffeured to the location of a baited, legally protected endangered African lion, then shot it from a safe distance, badly so it suffered for a day and a half, damning its kids to death and endangering the tourist industry in the area, not to mention the species. His intentions were vile, his deed was inexcusable, and he’s a wealthy jackass who’s done this before and - all the kerfuffle notwithstanding - will probably do it again. The parallels, I’m not seeing them.
I specifically said “around this whole issue.” But how about the quote I responded to?
Jason said “It appears the dentist is sorry he killed a lion that had some celebrity, but would happily kill another,” which clearly implies that killing a lion under any other circumstances would be just as bad. But I’m not willing to make the jump from condemning deliberately and illegally baiting out and killing a protected lion, using a particularly stupid and sadistic method, to condemning killing a lion under any circumstances whatsoever. My understanding is that there are legal ways to hunt lions, and if this guy were to do that and use a rifle like someone who’s heard of the 20th century…I would still think it was stupid and wasteful, but it’d be a lot less inherently reprehensible. And anyway I’m certainly not required to eat e.g. bacon, so I’ve got shaky moral ground condemning anyone who destroys an animal for their own personal luxury/entertainment.
There are lots of good reasons to be pissed at this guy, but “he killed a charismatic megafauna” isn’t a very well-thought-out one.
For my part I’m just disturbed by people who kill for fun (lions, deers, whatever).
Yes we have to kill animals to eat them but I don’t have to make a weekend sport out of it with beer and friends.
It’s an necessary evil not recreation or sport.
So the fact that they’re a threatened (or, depending on which definition you like, an endangered) species doesn’t carry any weight with you?
I had no idea that the lion I took was a known, local favorite, was collared and part of a study until the end of the hunt.
I thought it was just some other stupid lion who totally had it coming.
‘charismatic’ isn’t a very kind or generous summary. How about ‘apex’?
apex megafauna is what that Lion was. Not all lions are. That one was. That matters and his taking that lion makes a mockery of whatever respect he claims to have for the cats and also for the people whose cash cow he shot.
Fortunately, he can be extradited.
In fairness, responses here are based on this guy’s own account as communicated to his customers.
And man, was he trying to pack some fucking nuance in there!
This animal lived in a national park, not a game preserve. As in, “one of the places where humans entrust nature to maintain its own balance without human intervention.” There weren’t any fences keeping the lions in, so if the population ever got too high they would simply follow their natural inclination to search for new territories elsewhere.
If there were enough lions doing THAT then they wouldn’t have to have lured this one out of the park where it was legally protected.
