Hunters and animal rights activists: Vittorio Feltri, on the animal rights turning point given to Forza Italia by Silvio Berlusconi, "From animal rights activists I do not shoot hunters".
The animalist turning point made by Silvio Berlusconi - at Dudù's request - in Forza Italia's politics has created some problems for the party in its relations with hunters. Who felt betrayed and abandoned by the old friend of the former Cavaliere, who had always protected and pampered them, if only because the category, although divided into various associations, is very crowded - about 800 thousand individuals inseparable from the shotgun, to which added the induced formed by gunsmiths, merchants of sporting goods and family - as well as compact, having in common the interest of being protected from attacks periodically launched by those who are against the organized extermination of game. The hunters, in order to go flat, first of all pretend to keep shooting and detest anyone who tries to stop them. So when it comes to voting (for politics and for Europeans, even for regional ones), their choices are often - almost always - influenced by the passion for the so-called hunting art: they give preference to the party (or parties) that do not threaten to disarm them. It goes without saying that they therefore constitute a very important constituency from which to draw suffrages in quantity, provided that those who aspire to "catch them" guarantee not to prohibit hunting.
At a guess, right and left have so far shared the votes of the "fusiliers" equally because neither the first nor the second have ever dared to oppose the venation. So much so that the referendums called by animal rights activists to abolish it have regularly failed as politics, terrified of irritating hunters, has been careful not to support them. This is an indisputable fact. Now, at least in theory, we change register. Berlusconi falls in love with Dudù, a splendid white poodle that many idiots make fun of just because he lives in Arcore, and he understands that politics must not neglect pets; therefore he recommends to the managers of Forza Italia to include in the program the defense - and the care - of animals considered by millions of Italians as members of the family and deserving of every attention.
Sounds good to me. But there is a but. How can animal rights feelings be reconciled with hunting? A conflict arises. The hunters fear that the new Forza Italia line is antithetical to theirs; and animal rights activists do not conceive that a party attentive to the needs of dogs, cats, etc. is tolerant of those who happily kill birds, roe deer, wild boars, and so on. It is difficult to find a compromise, but not impossible.
Let's start by saying that hunting, if you don't know the rules, makes an impression because its ultimate goal is the killing of innocent living beings. It comes naturally to say: what fun is there in slaughtering poor birds or mammals that do no harm to anyone? I admit: it is a superficial reasoning. The overpopulation of certain game alters the ecological balance, and the need to maintain a harmony in nature, which allows the various species to survive, is instead indisputable. An example. Wild boars are multiplying dramatically in Italy. If hunting for these fast-reproducing suidae were not allowed every now and then, it would be a disaster for the entire ecosystem.
The same can be said for all the fauna that the (disciplined) intervention of hunters is able to control so that one species does not prevail over others, given that the environment in our country has been neglected for too many years. Analyzing history, it turns out that man for millennia was a hunter for purely food reasons. It used to either catch prey or skip a meal. This is no longer the case, it is worse. To feed ourselves we invented intensive farming: poor beasts that are born within small enclosures, huddled together, grow without a minimum of freedom, in the most atrocious suffering and, finally, are killed in a repugnant way.
The so-called beef cattle do not pity anyone. People eat steaks, hams and sausages peacefully and with relish. He doesn't wonder where they come from. It does not matter that lambs and kids are slaughtered for Easter, when they are only a few weeks old, with a cruelty that wounds the heart. Some animals - first of all poultry - are considered insensitive things, objects that can be subjected to torture. There is no good soul who protests to see trucks crammed with cattle or pigs - perhaps under the August sun - being transported who knows where to be cold.
So many daily horrors go unnoticed before our eyes clouded by indifference, but if a hunter strikes a pheasant or a woodcock we are scandalized and plead for the elimination of the bird. We are inconsistent. The pig can be slaughtered and roasted: the conscience does not sting. But woe betide you if you stick a thrush with shot from a cartridge: you are an executioner. We are a little stupid. Better a hunter or a butcher or a poultry seller? It is legitimate to decimate the pigeons that poop on the spiers of the Milan Cathedral, but it is forbidden to fill the game bag with finches. Isn't this irrational?
I do not absolve those who enjoy pulling the trigger. But if I condemn them, I must condemn the fishermen as well: perhaps even the sole and sea bass cry when they end up in the net or hooked by the hook. The tragedy is that nature is merciless: a meat grinder in which the weakest succumb to the strongest. Man is bad, but he likes to pose as good. Don't touch my cat and my dog. I love them as children.
Vittorio Feltri
Source: IlGiornale
(April 22, 2014)