Thursday, October 29, 2026

Hate, fear and bigotry is all the GOP has to offer — but will it sell?

The Republican Party no longer has anything constructive to say about anything or anyone, so what is its closing argument in the 2026 midterm elections? Hate, fear, and bigotry. On Sunday, Trump claimed that if Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Dr. Abdul El-Sayed won, he’d “invite hordes of jihadis to our shores.”

We’ve become so numbed to Trump’s bigotry that it’s necessary to remind ourselves that the president of the United States is now accusing an American citizen who’s running for the Senate of posing a danger to America because he’s Muslim.

Trump’s rants against Representative Ilhan Omar draw on the same Islamophobia. He’s launched a criminal investigation against her based on an allegation that she came to the United States fraudulently. He charged recently that her real name is Ilhan Nur Said Elmi and “her last name is, incredibly, also the exact name of her brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, the person they said she married and had children with.”

He’s called her “garbage” and “a scammer” who comes from “a non-country, basically. Somalia has no government, has no nothing. … All they do is run around shooting each other.” Again, the president of the United States is investigating a member of Congress because she was born in Somalia and is Muslim. Of course, hateful bigotry is nothing new for Trump. But until recently the Republican Party as a whole had avoided Trump’s bottom-feeding shite.

A few weeks ago, Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, claimed that Dr. El-Sayed slept in an Osama “bin Laden jersey.”

On Monday, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., while campaigning against Dr. El-Sayed, falsely accused him of being associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and then baselessly claimed that the rise of the Brotherhood (an Islamist political movement founded in 1928) had created “stagnant societies” in which Arabs do not win major global awards such as Nobel Prizes and “don’t produce literature.”

I once worked for RFK Jr.’s father. Junior’s bigotry would appall Robert F. Kennedy, whose life was dedicated to fighting such crap. But when it comes to mimicking Trump’s hatefulness, no one comes as close as JD Vance.

At a recent rally in Michigan, Vance branded El-Sayed a “little weasel” who harbored hatred for the U.S. and said he should “shut his mouth and show a little gratitude” to America. Vance’s bigotry extends beyond Islamophobia. Vance has tried to suggest that Texas Democratic Senatorial candidate James Talarico is gay. Campaigning in Texas on October 13 for Talarico’s Republican opponent, Ken Paxton, Vance answered a man who shouted that he loved him by saying he felt the same but in a “platonic” way, adding: “I’m not James Talarico.”

Then, insinuating that a positive statement Talarico once made about transgender children harbored something sinister in Talarico’s past, Vance alluded to Talarico’s internet search history before admitting he was “just guessing.”

Yet Vance thinks it’s fine to weaponize childhood sexual assault. He vigorously defends Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy’s campaign ad featuring the estranged birth mother of Democratic candidate Amy Acton calling her daughter a “liar” and mocking her mental health — without mentioning that the mother had lost custody of Acton after Acton’s stepfather was indicted for raping Acton as a child. Vance even blasted fellow Republicans who spoke out against the ad, calling their criticism “disgusting” and telling them to “stop whining” because “politics is a tough business.”

The midterm elections are bringing out this filth because Republicans dare not talk about the economy, which they and Trump have wrecked for most people; or foreign policy, in which Canada has become an enemy and Putin a friend; or the violent dragnet of their domestic policy, in which American citizens have been shot and killed by masked ICE agents.

All they have left with which to appeal to Americans is fear of the “other,” hate of Muslims and LGBTQ+ people, and blatant bigotry toward anyone who’s different. If this is enough for a majority of voters to keep them in control of Congress and deliver them governorships, our nation is a lot worse off than I feared.

-Robert Reich, Truthdig


Reading Ulysses at the Martello Tower by Chris Hedges

 


Dublin: It is a blustery, overcast morning on the Irish coast. I am standing on the roof of the Martello Tower, looking down at bathers diving from a rock into the Forty Foot in Dublin Bay on the beach at Sandycove. I hold James Joyce’s “Ulysses.”

With nothing but the wind to disturb me, I open the book. I read the first chapter, which Joyce — who lived briefly in this decommissioned coastal fortification — set in the tower”

“Stately, plump Buck Mulligan came down from the stairhead, bearing a bowl of lather on which a mirror and a razor lay crossed,” I read. “A yellow dressing-gown, ungirdled, was sustained gently behind him by the mild morning air. He held the bowl aloft and intoned: Introibo ad altare Dei.”

The Latin translation is “I will go in to the altar of God,” the opening of Mass in the Catholic Church for centuries.

There is the stench of corruption in the opening chapter, with Mulligan intoning a dark Mass to Stephen Dedalus, who has spurned his mother’s request to pray at her deathbed. Dedalus, cast out from his father’s house, is soon exiled from the tower to wander Dublin. His refusal to bow before authority, whether embodied in the Roman Catholic Church or the British colonizers, makes him an outcast, like the novel’s protagonist, Leopold Bloom.

We too are being orphaned in our own land.

I cope with the savagery around me by reading. I retreat into past worlds and past lives. I revel in the lyricism and musicality of great writing. I heed the wisdom of our ancestors.

Joyce detests what we should all detest. War. Violence. Nationalism, including Irish nationalism. Grasping capitalists. Fatuous pundits and journalists. Pseudo-intellectuals. Utopian dreamers. Pompous politicians. Bullies and brutes. He distrusts causes and noble ideals. 

Joyce knows the more inflated the rhetoric — “the big words that make us so unhappy,” as Dedalus says in the novel — the more the demand for human sacrifice. He chronicles the foibles, idiosyncrasies and struggles that define our lives. Like V. S. Pritchett — another writer I love — he reminds us that no one is ordinary.

Joyce’s heroes do not adorn recruitment posters enticing young men to fight in the suicidal folly of World War I, underway when he wrote much of the novel. Bloom’s bodily functions, including defecation and masturbation, are described in detail, scenes that led to the book being banned for obscenity in the United States and Britain and in the Soviet Union for “not conforming to the policy of socialist realism.”

But the point was to bring Bloom down to earth. Bloom is unmistakably human, yet filled with pathos, empathy and a desperate yearning for love. Heroism, Joyce shows us, is defined by the ability to endure suffering, rather than inflict it.

There is much in this world, from the genocide in Gaza to the consolidation of fascism in the U.S., which warrants despair. But when it becomes overwhelming, there is the reassuring comfort of novels like “Ulysses,” which is set on one day, June 16, 1904. It improbably casts a Jewish advertising salesman as a hero, as a modern Odysseus, struggling to hold on to goodness and kindness in a world where the cruel and heartless triumph.

The vulgar, such as the cad and womanizer Blazes Boylan in the novel — like Donald Trump — lack Bloom’s capacity for introspection. Words, for them, conceal more than they reveal. Joyce’s characters are portrayed with all our human complexity, ambiguity and inconsistency. They struggle with the contradictory and warring fragments of human nature — our plurality of identities.

Joyce, who lived in self-imposed exile in Paris, did not socialize with the literary grandees and fashionable denizens who congregated in the exclusive Faubourg Saint-Germain salons. His intimate circle encompassed waiters, fruit vendors, bank clerks and hotel concierges. The salons entranced Marcel Proust until Proust confronted their cruelty and hypocrisy in the final volume of “In Search of Lost Time.”

Joyce had little time for the bookish, the pretentious and pedants. At a dinner in Paris, to the consternation of the hosts, he chatted with Proust not about modernism and literature, but their physical ailments and shared fondness for dark chocolate truffles.

Proust, Joyce recalled, “would only talk about duchesses, while I was more concerned with their chambermaids.”

Marxist critics, like many of Joyce’s contemporaries, recoiled at his depiction of our irrevocably flawed human nature and his disdain for the myth of human progress. For Joyce, we are not headed toward a classless utopia, or any utopia.

“I don’t know why they attack me,” Joyce said to his friend Eugene Jolas. “Nobody in any of my books is worth more than a thousand pounds.”

He understood that national myths are used to obscure our looming mortality, to create meaning out of chaos and to fool us into thinking we are bigger than ourselves. Joyce revels in the messiness of life, puncturing our self-delusions and the ways we present ourselves to the world. He obliterates the fatuous binary narratives we spin out in the name of conventional morality.

“If we go to him thinking he may be the apostle of brotherhood, he shows us brothers in violent quarrel,” Richard Ellmann writes in his biography of Joyce. “If we go to him to find a defender of the family, he presents his central hero — the cuckold. If we ask him to be the celebrant of the isolated individual, Joyce shows isolation making him morose and defenseless. If we look for the spokesman of life, he introduces us to the dead.”

Late in the afternoon, rain clouds lowering overhead, I go to Glasnevin Cemetery in Dublin to see the graves of famous revolutionaries, including Roger Casement. Casement, who exposed Belgian atrocities in the Congo, was a fierce opponent of the British Empire, which Dedalus sums up as composed of “beer, beef, business, bibles, bulldogs, battleships, buggery and bishops.”

Casement was originally buried on the grounds of Pentonville Prison in London, where he was hanged for treason after attempting to smuggle 20,000 Mosin-Nagant 1891 rifles, along with machine guns and millions of rounds of ammunition from Germany to arm Irish nationalists in the ill-fated 1916 uprising. His body was repatriated to Ireland in 1965, where he lay in state in Dublin for five days and received a full state funeral with military honors.

I stand before the graves of the Irish revolutionaries Michael Collins and Countess Constance Markievicz. I peer up at the 180-foot granite tower marking the tomb of Daniel O’Connell, the 19th-century nationalist leader. I stop at the grave of Maud Gonne, the actress and activist who the poet William Butler Yeats compared to Helen of Troy and who spurned his numerous marriage proposals.

“I have spread my dreams under your feet,” Yeats writes. “Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.”

Joyce models the chapters in his book on the episodes in “The Odyssey,” but his intentions diverge radically from Homer. Homer celebrates the military prowess and martial feats Joyce despises. Critics have busied themselves, and wasted our time, scouring “Ulysses” and Homer for parallels, mistaking Joyce’s superstructure for Joyce’s vision.

Joyce sets chapter six in this 124-acre graveyard that now holds 1.5 million souls. Odysseus in “The Odyssey” descends to Hades to meet the prophet Tiresias to discover how he can return to Ithaca. In Joyce’s hands, Hades does not conjure up spirits or prophecies but the awful finality of death.

Bloom attends the funeral in the cemetery for the drunkard Paddy Dignam. Bloom mourns the loss of his son, Rudy, who died 11 days after his birth a decade earlier. He envisions him as a young boy in an Eton suit. He remembers his father, who killed himself by drinking poison and, in his suicide note, begged Bloom to take care of his dog Athos. He struggles with the knowledge that in the afternoon his wife, Molly, has a rendezvous with her lover, Blazes Boylan. He endures the antisemitic slights of his fellow mourners. He looks at the plot where Rudy and his mother are buried and imagines his own burial.

He surveys the acres of tombs around him with their “saddened angles, crosses, broken pillars, family vaults, stone hopes praying with upcast eyes.” “How many!” he says. “All these here once walked round Dublin. Faithful departed. As you are now so once were we.” He watches the cemetery caretaker in a “well cut frock coat” who he suspects is weighing up the mourners “to see which will go next.”

“Well it is a long rest,” he thinks of those buried around him. “Feel no more. It’s the moment you feel. Must be damned unpleasant. Can’t believe it at first. Mistake must be: someone else. Try the house opposite. Wait, I wanted to. I haven’t yet. Then darkened death chamber. Light they want. Whispering around you. Would you like to see a priest?

“Then rambling and wandering. Delirium all you hid all your life. The death struggle. His sleep is not natural. Press his lower eyelid. Watching his nose pointed is his jaw sinking are the soles of his feet yellow. Pull the pillow away and finish it off on the floor since he’s doomed. Devil in that picture of sinner’s death showing him a woman. Dying to embrace her in his shirt. Last act of Lucia. Shall I nevermore behold thee? Bam! Expires. Gone at last. People talk about you a bit: forget you. Don’t forget to pray for him. Remember him in your prayers. Even Parnell. Ivy day dying out. Then they follow: dropping into a hole one after the other.”

He sees “an obese grey rat” along the side of a crypt and thinks, “one of those chaps would make short work of a fellow. Pick his bones clean no matter who it was… Wonder does the news go about whenever a fresh one is let down. Underground communication. We learned that from them. Wouldn’t be surprised. Regular square feed for them. Flies come before he’s well dead. Got wind of Dignam. They wouldn’t care about the smell of it.”

There are sections of “Ulysses” that should be read out loud. Joyce wrote about Dublin’s red-light district, Night town, as if it were a play. 

The characters’ names are set off in capital letters and there are italicized stage directions. Molly’s soliloquy at the end of the book, which lacks punctuation, is also better heard, as I was able to do when Eunice Wong performed it on stage in New York. RTÉ, Ireland’s national broadcaster, produced an audiobook of “Ulysses” in 1982 with a different actor for each character. You can link to the recording here.

We are not headed for a good place. The walls are closing in. We too are becoming outcasts. Novels such as “Ulysses,” as Dedalus says, provide “the eternal affirmation” of the human spirit. They remind us why we were put on this earth. They make us feel less alone. They sustain our souls.

-Chris Hedges


A Poster in my Library



Wednesday, October 28, 2026

Losing in Court Isn’t Enough: DOJ Must Be Sanctioned

In the run-up to the midterms, district and circuit federal court judges have done an admirable job in beating back absurd, abusive Trump regime legal maneuvers that are utterly lacking in merit. Moreover, they are apparently designed to either disrupt the midterms or assure the unraveling autocrat in the Oval Office that his dutiful lackeys at the Justice Department are doing everything possible to try to do just that. Alternatively, the flurry of vindictive actions against long-held presidential enemies — such as Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and former FBI director James Comey — is simply meant to distract the addled president; catnip for a demented feline, if you will.

The range of abusive, nonsensical actions is breathtaking:

-Sending an unverified list of semi-suspected noncitizen voters to have their ballots set aside;

-Rushing to the 9th Circuit prematurely for relief;

-Challenging the results of a not-yet-transpired Alaska Senate race;

-Pounding on doors to interrogate suspected noncitizen voters;

-Defying a district court in racing to destroy hundreds of trees at the East Potomac Golf Course (and then coming up with a cock and bull story that contradicts Trump’s own social media post that this is not part of a “final plan”);

-Filing an “information” (not seeking or failing and not obtaining) indictment to try to fudge the statute of limitations in a third vindictive effort to prosecute James Comey;

-Rummaging through decades-old immigration paperwork to try to strip Rep. Omar of citizenship.

While it remains a mystery how any federal court official issued a search warrant for Omar’s home, overall the courts — to their credit — have rebuffed DOJ’s legal gamesmanship, often in exceptionally harsh language.

From the 9th Circuit’s snub of the non-emergency, “emergency” appeal in California:

The United States’s claimed emergency, at least in part, is a self-constructed one. At least part of the delay here is attributable to the United States’s own delay in filing suit, in realizing that existing California state law governs the issuance and processing of ballots, in recognizing that California has millions of registered voters and processes ballots on a schedule aligned with that scale, and in communicating to the court its desired relief.

The concurrence from Trump-appointed Judge Bennett was even more dismissive (and on the merits, to boot):

Despite these various mechanisms to challenge the eligibility of a voter, Plaintiff prefers that this court require a different procedure to effectuate a challenge to over 20,000 voters solely because, in a different context, the California Legislature permits the segregation of ballots. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363 (providing for the segregation of ballots in a recount). But Plaintiff’s preference does not carry with it the force of law. . . .

Beyond the infeasibility of and risks associated with segregating tens of thousands of ballots, Defendants also lack the ability to verify voters’ citizenship status before December 4, 2026—the deadline for counties to certify their election results to the Secretary of State. . . . Plaintiff seeks equitable relief, asking us to order Defendants to set aside vote-by-mail ballots from over 20,000 individuals whom Plaintiff believes are likely noncitizens. 

But Plaintiff offers no workable plan as to how this could be accomplished, let alone how it could be accomplished without burdening Defendants more than necessary. Instead, Plaintiff simply claims that California has an existing regulation, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363, which provides for ballot segregation. But as discussed, that regulation is inapplicable.

From the golf course case, Judge Ana Reyes all but called the government lawyers a pack of liars (multiple times):

The Government felled hundreds of trees from East Potomac Golf Course without real notice even though it knew of the scheduled removal at least a week prior. And even though the Court literally warned against bulldozers bulldozing on no real notice. … And even though the Court was equally clear that it did not want an act-first ask-forgiveness-later situation. … All this is concerning. 

The Government appears to have set the timing of the tree removal and late notice to impede Plaintiffs’ ability to seek Court intervention. And its recent actions call into question other representations it has made to the Court over these many months. …

Government counsel argues that President Trump, who discussed the Plan to redesign the Course no fewer than five times, has “at most . . . has given preliminary thought to” the Washington National Plan. That claim does not square with the record. The Court cannot disbelieve the President’s clear, repeated statements of fact when those statements find support in the record and the Government has presented no credible evidence to contradict him.

And yet, even defeats for the government’s patently frivolous actions and refreshing rebukes from courts leave us unmoved. The government, particularly Attorney General Todd Blanche and his flunkies, suffer no adverse consequences from trying every trick in the book — no matter how frivolous, no matter how legally unsound and constitutionally abusive. Indeed, they may well get ‘atta boys for having angered federal court judges.

Donald Trump gives US Attorney General Todd Blanche a pat on the back after a roundtable in the East Room of the White House on October 21, 2026. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images)

Unless and until DOJ lawyers themselves face sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 and referral to state bar associations for misconduct, the incentive to keep abusing the federal court system will remain. Frankly, handing out more-than-justified sanctions would stiffen the spines of DOJ attorneys, encouraging them to push back against their political bosses. 

Ultimately, contempt citations (of the sort now the subject of heated litigation in the D.C. Circuit, concerning the Trump regime’s defiance of Judge James Boasberg’s directive to turn around planes filled with deportees headed to CECOT) may be required to halt this relentless assault on the rule of law.

Aside from a new president, the most effective and entirely justified remedy for such widespread, shameless abuse of the justice system is impeachment of Attorney General Todd Blanche. Even before the current spate of lawless, partisan actions, Blanche’s record (e.g., ongoing defiance of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, refusal to investigate publicly disclosed instances of graft involving the president’s inner circle) and his repeated appearances in partisan campaign settings violate his oath of office and make a mockery of his department’s title (“Justice” Department).

In sum, courts deserve kudos for holding the line against Trump autocratic abuses. But extraordinary times and unprecedented abuse require that they do more. Sanctions and contempt citations must be meted out when appropriate. The new Congress will have an obligation to act as well, starting with the impeachment of an unfit partisan hack occupying the august role of attorney general.

-Jennifer Rubin, The Contrarian is community-supported. Help fund bold journalism and critical lawsuits to stop Trump’s corruption by becoming a paid subscriber. Join the fight now.

 

Monday, October 26, 2026

As for the Orange Monkey

 


As for the Orange Monkey (a slur on monkeys), we now know openly and easily de facto just what a Russian kompromat he was and has always been. Impeached but not found guilty by the weak and frightened Republicans, Schiff warned that without penalty he will stage a revolt again. 

He was right, just as they all were in the DOJ in finding him closely connected to Russian influence.  We are stuck with a traitor who gives aid and comfort to the enemy in front of us all. He is exactly what we all supposed and feared from the day they came down the escalator to announce his hatred for non-whites and desire to be the only one to make us great again. 

A suspected pedophile, hated by his mother, unable to manage an honest business, abhorred by real businessmen in New York, without any love or even consideration for people, teaching his twisted children to be disgusting grifters like himself, so stupidly tricked into a war that has undermined our current economy, and ruined the reputation of a country honored and valued for its rule of law and largesse. He’s truly a waste of flesh. 

-John Dillon

 

Sunday, October 25, 2026

Why are we still trapping and killing wolves and coyotes during the sixth mass extinction crisis?

 


A wolf leaves Yellowstone National Park. It follows the scent of elk, crosses an invisible boundary and enters Montana. Nothing in the landscape tells it that the rules have changed. Yet an animal protected and studied inside the park can now legally be shot or trapped. We call Yellowstone’s wolf restoration a conservation triumph. Why, then, do we permit the killing of the very animals we worked so hard to bring back?

Murdering wolves is the antithesis to conservation.

In 1995, gray wolves returned to Yellowstone after decades of absence following their extermination from the region. Their restoration became one of America’s most celebrated conservation achievements. But the protections surrounding these animals remain fragmented. Yellowstone’s wolves regularly move beyond park boundaries, particularly when following migrating elk. They cannot distinguish a protected landscape from a hunting district. We have created an unfair playing field, and then we congratulate ourselves when the wolf loses.

In February 2021, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte trapped and shot a radio-collared wolf known as 1155M, approximately 10 miles north of Yellowstone. The wolf had been born inside the park and collared by wildlife biologists. Gianforte had a valid wolf license but had not completed the required wolf-trapping certification course. State wildlife officials issued him a written warning. The governor subsequently completed the course. His actions were widely reported, but the larger question extends beyond one public official: What does it say about our conservation priorities when animals tracked for scientific research can be legally killed just outside the landscapes established to protect them?

The consequences are measurable. According to Yellowstone’s 2022 Wolf Project report, approximately 19 percent of wolves primarily using the park were killed during the 2021–22 hunting season. Researchers also documented changes in pack structure, including the dissolution of two packs. Although Yellowstone’s year-end wolf population increased, a population count alone cannot capture the disruption of family groups, the loss of breeding animals or the consequences for long-term research.

Why are we still trapping and killing wolves and coyotes during the sixth mass extinction crisis? At a time when humanity should be repairing the ecosystems it has fragmented, we continue to target native predators for fulfilling their ecological roles. An international scientific assessment estimates that approximately one million animal and plant species face extinction threats. Habitat destruction, exploitation, climate change and pollution are unraveling ecological relationships around the world. Yet our approach to predators too often reflects an older belief that nature must be controlled rather than understood.

Wolves are keystone predators. They are the gatekeepers of biodiversity, helping maintain the intricate relationships among wildlife species, ecosystems and habitats. Their presence influences prey populations, supports scavengers and can contribute to vegetation recovery and the restoration of wildlife habitats. Coyotes also perform important ecological functions, including regulating smaller mammals and sustaining food webs. These native predators are not obstacles to conservation. They are integral to the ecological systems we claim to protect.

The documentary How Wolves Change Rivers brought the concept of trophic cascades to a broad audience, showing how predators can influence entire ecological communities. Some of its claims, particularly those involving river channels, remain scientifically debated. Yellowstone’s recovery is shaped by many factors, including climate, vegetation, water and other wildlife. But that complexity strengthens the case for humility. We still have much to learn about the consequences of removing predators from functioning ecosystems.

Ranchers can suffer real financial losses when wolves or coyotes kill livestock. Wildlife managers must also consider public safety and local ecological conditions. But acknowledging these concerns does not require accepting recreational predator killing as a conservation necessity. Nonlethal approaches, including range riders, livestock guardian animals and improved fencing, can reduce some conflicts. Their effectiveness varies, and they require sustained investment. That is a challenge worth meeting.

We should also distinguish the temporary capture of wildlife for scientific monitoring from lethal trapping. Research collars help scientists understand migration, survival and family structure. Killing an animal for recreation serves a fundamentally different purpose.

We have converted vast landscapes into agricultural operations, highways and housing developments, then blamed wildlife for attempting to survive in the remaining fragments of its ancestral habitat. Rather than continually demanding that predators surrender their lives to accommodate human expansion, shouldn’t we be asking how human activities can change to accommodate the natural world?

The issue is not whether every wolf or coyote population is endangered. Coyotes remain widespread, and wolf populations differ substantially across regions. The question is whether wildlife policy adequately values predators’ ecological functions, social relationships and contributions to healthy habitats. Abundance alone does not make an animal disposable.

State wildlife agencies should strengthen protections for wolves that routinely cross Yellowstone’s boundaries, evaluate the ecological effects of lethal trapping and expand funding for coexistence programs. They should also make the scientific basis for predator-killing policies transparent to the public. Conservation should be judged not merely by how many animals remain alive, but by whether their populations can fulfill their ecological roles.

What are we teaching younger generations when killing a wolf becomes an occasion for applause? A rifle does not make a human ecologically superior to a predator. Neither does a photograph of its lifeless body. Wolves hunt to survive and feed their young. They communicate, cooperate and maintain intricate family relationships. Their value exists independently of our approval.

We cannot proclaim our love for wilderness while treating its inhabitants as disposable trophies. We cannot claim to be guardians of biodiversity while dismantling the relationships that sustain it. We have made the rules, drawn the boundaries and equipped ourselves with the weapons. The wolf has only its instincts, its family and its will to live.

If we are responsible for creating the conditions that endanger wolves, shouldn’t we also be responsible for protecting their right to exist?

Sources and References

1. National Park Service: Yellowstone Wolf Management

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/management/wolf.htm

2. National Park Service: 2022 Yellowstone Wolf Project Annual Report

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/upload/2022-Web-Wolf-Report.pdf

3. Mountain West News Bureau, March 23, 2021: Montana Governor Given Written Warning After Trapping, Killing of Yellowstone Wolf

https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2021-03-23/montana-governor-given-written-warning-after-trapping-killing-of-yellowstone-wolf

4. Montana Public Radio, March 24, 2021: Gianforte Takes Wolf Trapping Course Following Warning

https://www.mtpr.org/montana-news/2021-03-24/gianforte-takes-wolf-trapping-course-following-warning

5. IPBES: 2019 Global Biodiversity Assessment

https://www.ipbes.net/global-assessment

6. National Park Service: Yellowstone Wolf Ecology

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolf.htm

7. USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: Wildlife Services

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife-services

Christine Villabona-Kuntz is the founder of Pure Trixie Productions, an independent conservation media initiative focused on biodiversity, wildlife protection and ecological restoration.

 

“I felt love, concern and care from the whale”

 


Eight years into studying whales, Nan Hauser believed she understood their size and strength. Then one afternoon off Rarotonga she felt a pressure she had never felt before — a 40‑ton humpback whale pressing its head against her body and lifting her toward the surface.

At first, she thought the animal was playing too roughly. She tried to push away, but the whale kept tucking her under its pectoral fin. For seven and a half minutes the great creature nudged and nudged, even raising her clear of the water on its flipper.

Only when she glimpsed a second silhouette did she understand. The “whale” moving side to side was actually an 18‑foot tiger shark, arched in attack posture. In that instant the humpback positioned her on its head and raced toward her boat, shielding her with its massive body. Within ten minutes she was safely back on deck, shaking with shock and gratitude.

Hauser, a lifelong marine biologist, had never experienced anything like it. “I felt love, concern and care from the whale,” she told The Guardian. She had spent her career filming these animals quietly, believing the best way to understand them was to let them be. Now one seemed to understand her vulnerability and acted.

Scientists note that humpbacks have been documented interfering when predators attack other species, behaviour some call “mobbing”. Whether the whale’s act was true altruism or an instinct honed by eons of kin‑selected behaviour, Hauser felt the encounter as a deliberate choice.

The story didn’t end there. A year later Hauser was back in the Cook Islands when a familiar tail surfaced. She recognised the whale by the notches on its fluke and the scar on its head. As she slid into the water the whale approached, looked her in the eye and extended its giant fin. She rubbed its face and began to cry. The whale lingered near her boat for twenty minutes before swimming away.

There is no moral to pin on a whale’s fin, no proof that a giant mammal meant to save a human. There is only a moment when a life hung between a predator and a protector and something ancient stirred.

Perhaps this is what happens when we spend enough time listening rather than dominating: another being may recognise us as kin. In a world where we often assume only humans are capable of compassion, a humpback whale carrying a scientist to safety suggests the ocean itself may be watching over us.

#WhaleGuardian #HumpbackRescue #MarineLife #InterspeciesAltruism #OceanConnection #WildCompassion #ProtectiveWhale #NatureStories #HumanAnimalBond #LoveAndRespect