Influential lobby: first they wanted slaves, now they want animal trophies.

When I talk about the need to ban sports recreational hunting and when we promote such initiatives in society, it provokes a very aggressive position primarily among the high-ranking circles of hunters within the authorities. Today, officials with significant influence in the government openly unite into "clubs," score points for each other for killing more wild animals, and travel around the world on "hunting safaris." Their main task is to kill as many of the strongest, most beautiful, and largest animals as possible! To strike at the genetic legacy of populations.

This is called "trophy hunting," and it is part of the sports recreational killing industry. Some simply shoot "for the soul" at whoever they encounter in the wild, while others, with colossal wealth and power, set themselves the goal of obtaining a valuable hunting trophy.

Today in my material, I want to tell you how strongly the paid killing industry in our time correlates with practices that, until quite recently, were considered "normal" in society and were also actively lobbied by officials.

I will not go too far: there are enough examples in history. Let us take only the most objective and relatively recent one, by the standards of time: slavery in the 1800s.

Why these years specifically? The fact is that the event horizon is only about 200 years; just a few generations ago. By the 1800s, many countries around the world had begun gradually abolishing slavery, but it remained active in various corners of the planet due to the strongest lobbying within governments.

I will provide examples.

1. The United States of America — by the 1800s, slavery remained in the southern states (Virginia, Georgia, South and North Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and others).

   
   

2. Brazil — remained the largest country in the Western Hemisphere where slavery persisted until 1888 (officially abolished by the "Golden Law").

   
   

3. Cuba and other Caribbean islands — slavery continued under Spanish rule, although the British fleet actively suppressed the transatlantic slave trade after 1807.

   
   

4. The British Empire — formally abolished the transatlantic slave trade in 1807, and slavery in the colonies in 1834.

   
   

5. France — repeatedly abolished and reinstated slavery in the colonies (specifically, after the French Revolution in 1794, slavery was abolished, but in 1802 Napoleon reinstated it; final abolition in all colonies occurred in 1848).

   
   
6. Spanish and Portuguese colonies — in Spanish colonies, the abolition process dragged on until the last quarter of the 19th century, while Portugal officially abolished slavery in 1869.

So, within just 200 years, slavery still officially existed in "great civilization." People were treated as cattle, shackled, and forced to work for their masters! One could become wealthy, buy several slaves, and do with them whatever one wished: make them work, rape them, or cut them into pieces.

And it seems incredible, right? How could this be possible in today's understanding? You and your family could simply be bought — completely officially. You could work on plantations day and night alongside your small children, who, if unable to endure the "burdens of slavery," would immediately be struck on the head with a blunt object. Right before your eyes. Many children were simply drowned; this was quite a common practice.

In those 1800s, society around the world was already actively resisting slavery. People declared their right to freedom! Many took to the streets to say: we are alive, real, and our lives belong to us.

However, clinging to archaic notions, highly influential movements within governments were created to promote slavery by all means. They referred to "traditions" and "the experience of our fathers," arguing that without slavery, the economy would collapse. Moreover, they pointed to poor slaveholders in remote regions, who would have nothing to eat if they lost their slaves.

"Old men in the wilderness cannot survive without slaves! Advocating for the abolition of slavery is advocating for the death of unfortunate old men!" they said.

INFLUENTIAL LOBBY

I want to highlight specific lobbies to understand the scale of their influence.

In the USA, a party called the "Slaveholder Party" was created. Abolitionists in the North coined the term "Slave Power," which referred to a group of influential politicians, planters, and businessmen advocating for the expansion of slavery. That is, they not only sought to preserve slavery but to expand it!

What we see today in the same recreational hunting, where officials feel it is not enough and literally demand to kill more animals!

While preparing my material, I read in chronicles about many slavery lobbyists in the USA, the most famous of whom include:

• John C. Calhoun — Vice President, Senator from South Carolina. He openly considered slavery a "positive good" and opposed any restrictions on its expansion.

  
  
• Jefferson Davis — future President of the Confederacy. Before the Civil War, he was a senator and Secretary of War, defending the right of southern residents to own slaves.

Additionally, the party included auxiliary associations, both formal and informal. For example, there was a group of radical slavery propagandists called the "Fire-Eaters," who even demanded the secession of southern regions if they were not allowed to own slaves. And in 1854, a secret organization "Knights of the Golden Circle" was founded, which, using its colossal influence, attempted to expand US slavery territories, including Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean.

During these same times, similar political lobbies existed in Brazil. The local aristocracy and planters (especially in the states of Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais, and São Paulo) formed the backbone of politics for a long time, opposing the abolition of slavery. And in the imperial government under Pedro II, there was a strong segment of high-ranking officials and senators connected to large plantations, actively blocking abolitionist projects until the 1870s.

Here, it is worth noting that an abolitionist is someone who advocates for the repeal of a law, custom, or practice deemed unjust. The term is most commonly used in the context of the abolition of slavery! That is why I use it in my material.

JUSTIFICATIONS

As I mentioned earlier, there were many justifications for slavery. Moreover, there is a direct correlation with how officials today justify their right to kill wild animals!

Arguments for slavery followed the same lines. They said that plantation agriculture was impossible without slave labor; they tried to justify slavery with ideas of a "civilizing mission," including claims that slaves were "incapable" of independent existence.

Do you not find similarities with how recreational hunting is justified today?

"If we don't kill animals, they will all go extinct!"

The same was said about slaves, word for word.

Furthermore, slavery was justified by distorting biblical texts, asserting that slavery was "God's law" or at least "a perfectly acceptable way of life." Since religion held a special place in those days, this allowed for effective brainwashing of parishioners.

Thus, slavery, from the perspective of highly influential lobbies just 200 years ago, was deemed necessary for the economy, for "saving" the lives of the slaves themselves, and also as "our traditions, culture, and right to deprive others of freedom."

The same is done by the modern hunting lobby in power, but in the context of wild animals.

In the 19th century, the upper strata of parliament or legislative assemblies in the USA actively blocked any attempts to abolish slavery, using the power they were given. In our time, many politicians, officials, and even public figures affiliated with recreational hunting also actively block bans on it and even promote laws legalizing the killing of the rarest species of animals in the wild.

During the slavery era of the 1800s, officials appealed to "divine" justifications, manipulating public opinion through religion, often bribing priests who would preach to their congregations, declaring that "God is not against slavery."

In our time, religion is not as strong, and references to God in the context of justifying recreational hunting would seem highly dubious. Therefore, the hunting lobby actively refers to "scientific research," many of which are funded by them, or the authors of these studies are avid trophy hunters!

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately in the second half of the 19th century, the abolitionist movement became a global trend supported around the world. But this was much clearer to people because it affected their personal destinies, their lives.

This can be compared to the fact that if the objects of sports recreational hunting were people deprived of the right to protection, I am sure many would rise up and try to defend their right to life. But when it comes to the life of some wild beast in a remote wilderness, people do not show empathy. They do not understand the pain of others.

This is precisely why such an overtly criminal archaic "entertainment" has survived to the present day and is still actively supported worldwide!

But recognition is already growing that sports recreational hunting is a crime against wildlife. Especially when there are global meta-studies by world scientists: in the past 45 years, humans have exterminated over 70% of all living species on the planet.

People are beginning to ask themselves: "How can one kill animals for fun, knowing that less than 30% of animals remain on Earth?"

In both cases — slavery and sports recreational hunting — powerful groups in power (senators, ministers, and influential officials) block any changes and lobby exclusively for their personal interests.

But times are changing!

Ignoring the global destruction of wildlife worldwide is already becoming impossible. And I believe that, just like slavery once was, it is time to introduce a complete ban on any recreational hunting! 

OUR INITIATIVE

I believe that the first step towards global change should be a federal ban on all representatives of the government engaging in sports recreational hunting! If animal killing is lobbied by high-ranking circles within the government, who write laws for themselves, then the introduction of the ban must begin with them.

We have launched a public initiative for a complete ban on all representatives of the government engaging in sports hunting in Russia. They may try to justify hunting to society, but they cannot justify their own actions of killing animals for "sport and trophies." All officials receive salaries from the country's budget, which is formed thanks to taxpayers!

Do we want officials to kill animals with our money? For them to travel around the world, shooting the last inhabitants of ecosystems already torn to shreds?

Take part in our initiative. Take direct actions you can undertake to help us achieve change.

Participate

Help us in our fight!

Our Mission — Life.

© PAVEL PASHKOV