Comment by marcus_holmes

Be the change you want to see in the world.

You can only control your actions.

Also taking the action of starting to organise some collective action is a good thing. But don't continue eating fish until everyone else agrees not to, because that becomes self-defeating.

This is organizing.

We're inviting you to join the collective of people who don't eat fish.

Our main activity is finding and encouraging others to not eat fish. If you'd like to organize more collective action, we will probably be interested!

But the baseline is actually inaction. First, do no harm.

That is a complete paradox because you not only cannot have collective organized action without individual ones but the previous is entirely composed of the latter.

why not both, if the point for both is to reach the same goal?

Exactly. The tragedy of the commons makes it so that individual action of eating the fish is the most rational move.

Mobilizing people to act irrationally is challenging unless they are forced to do it by law.

and that's why things like ikejime are needed. It instantly kills the fish and destroys its nervous system in the same way we do for cattle. It's absolutely unbelievable that it is not a common practice. And it also extends the quality of the fish and the duration for conservation.

I am a freshwater fisherman myself, and I do it on any fish I intend to keep, and release them very quickly otherwise.

Catching your own fish, and eating that, is fine. Even if everyone who could do that, caught the fish they intended to eat, the oceans would be fine.

It's the massive industrial trawlers that scoop up entire ecosystems that we need to stop.