Comment on Not a good sign
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 7 hours agoI am uninterested in comparing the moral qualities of generations. Humans are humans.
I am interested in the scale of the violence done by these generations against the earth as it will never be able to be surpassed without fully annihilating the human race.
800 years from now no one is going to care how sorry everyone was now about the damage they have done, what matters is the impact.
so like, people can have both bad ideas and good. i don’t know enough about hardin, but the basic concept is a useful model to get people understanding a basic concept. is it a political narrative? i mean it’s macroeconomics. the entire damn field is politics under a veneer. their best model is barely better than flipping a coin.
don’t get me started on micro though, that field is just gambling analysis.
i don’t have a chip on my shoulder or nothin’
We really need to stop throwing away useful terms and concepts because their progenitors don’t turn out to be role models. Knowledge doesn’t always come from perfect sources. “Tragedy of the Commons” has no basis in race as a concept as I understand it, I don’t see why the guy who coined the term being a racist POS means I should take a moral stance on it.
… but, you know, fuck that guy.
supersquirrel: "The betrayal of generations from the 20th century against the future quality of life of humanity will be remembered for thousands of years." Also supersquirrel: "I am uninterested in comparing the moral qualities of generations. Humans are humans."
Barley_Man@sopuli.xyz 7 hours ago
I did not know the history of the term tragedy of the commons. Thanks for educating me on that, I will now reconsider using that specific term in the future. However overgrazing is a real issue historically and still today. Overgrazing in the modern Sahel is a great contributor to the advancing of the savanna for example.
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 7 hours ago
Oh definitely, my issue with the concept of the Tragedy Of The Commons is not that shared wealth is not vulnerable but rather that the idea that humans innately cannot function in an environment while preserving and growing a shared commons without some kind of system of authoritarian control and violence actively preserving that shared commons is a deeply political, problematic and scientifically incorrect way of understanding people.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
i dunno. the community garden run by the local MS-13 has the weirdest red drip system, but my begonias have never looked better.
partial_accumen@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
I would imagine a system you’re suggesting would first have to eliminate scarcity of resources. We certainly have the ability to do that with our technology today but choose not to do so. Wouldn’t it require a turn to benevolence by all involved in the society to achieve that? If so, that doesn’t sound like a likely outcome. What, in your opinion, would it take to escape the Tragedy of Commons that is likely to actually occur?
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 6 hours ago
Provide evidence for this claim.
I understand this has been established as our cultural intuition but it is a near axiomatic assumption that upon examination has very little evidence to support it, whether we look to the natural world or to human societies.