The Tragedy of Common Ownership

[steel_ag]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xriTh6TzNro&feature=related

[steel_ag]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDRFTPF0Y&NR=1

[steel_ag]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR7Zs4si9gU&NR=1

[G2Rad]

variations of the same problem # 11 here

thanks

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

The tragedy of the commons is a dilemma arising from the situation in which multiple individuals, acting independently and rationally consulting their own self-interest, will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource, even when it is clear that it is not in anyone's long-term interest for this to happen. This dilemma was first described in an influential article titled "The Tragedy of the Commons," written by Garrett Hardin and first published in the journal Science in 1968.[1]

Hardin's Commons Theory is frequently cited to support the notion of sustainable development, meshing economic growth and environmental protection, and has had an effect on numerous current issues. An asserted impending "tragedy of the commons" is frequently warned of as a consequence for adopting policies which restrict private property.[2][3]

Central to Hardin's article is an example (first sketched in an 1833 pamphlet by William Forster Lloyd) of a hypothetical and simplified situation based on medieval land tenure in Europe, of herders sharing a common parcel of land, on which they are each entitled to let their cows graze. In Hardin's example, it is in each herder's interest to put the next (and succeeding) cows he acquires onto the land, even if the quality of the common is damaged for all as a result, through overgrazing. The herder receives all of the benefits from an additional cow, while the damage to the common is shared by the entire group. If all herders make this individually rational economic decision, the common will be depleted or even destroyed, to the detriment of all.

[Glass]

My personal opinion is that this tragedy of the commons mind set is only valid to an expansionist capitalist mind set. It always assumes that the demands on the land will expand. Sure the land is a finite resource and the utilisation of that land could be one of three things, less than, equal to or more than the ideal degree of utilisation of that land. Two of those fit the capitalist perspective. One is a positive one and the other negative in a capitalists mind. Equal to is not one of them.

I believe capitalism and free enterprise are different things. Most capitalists see commons as a potential exploitable resource like a pasture when in fact they are just vacant bush land. Like a nature reserve. When you look at this argument it's just an attempt to get approval to exploit what are basically national parks in the UK. Some of them might not look much like wilderness anymore but they are still open spaces that shouldn't even have animals grazing on them in the first place. Just because they are not developed does not mean they are abandoned. The argument that its a tragedy doesn't sit well with me.

[Santa]

The tragedy of the commons is that without commons people have no public space remaining in which to exercise social rights such as peaceful assembly, and many other societal needs.

Without a protected commons, the concept of "the people" becomes irrelevant and therefore a government of, for and by "the people" loses validity. There is no "place" for people without commons.

Once everything becomes privatized there's only room left for fictional entities; corporations/government entities and consumers... not a people. A people need to be able to go about their business, to move about freely in order to develop a civil social structure. If all travel ways are private, then all people will be nothing more than guests at the mercy of fewer and fewer owners. Guests have no rights, only privileges bestowed by owners.

This is what lies at the heart of fascism. Privatizing the entire world into the hands of a few owners and fencing everyone else into paddocks.

This is fast becoming our reality today.

[palani]

The Arab cultures rely upon common use of land. North Africa under the Romans used to be fairly green. Now it seems to be non-stop desert. One of the first space flyovers of the Sahara desert revealed a large wedgeshaped piece of green land. It was photographed from space and, upon checking, was found to be private property in which the owner used the method of rotation to keep from over-grazing.

The Vietnam war was perceived to be a social struggle between wealthy landowners and poor peasants. The S Vietnamese government experimented with taking land away from wealthy people and dividing it among the peasants and thereby destroyed their economy. Peasants wanted to be rich but they really didn't want to work to earn the riches, simply found it easier to take under the guise of politics.

Private property is what has raised western culture to where it is. It would be a shame to abandon the concept for common ownership and socialism at this stage.

[Glass]

I thought I would poke this thread.

keehah posted a couple youtubes in the steampunk thread. The second video that was posted was pretty striking to me. What it shows is one of the best examples that you could come up with to show what the "commons" actually is, or at least one aspect of what it is.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1HEOG7MbbYY
The video starts in a railway station and follows a raiway line that becomes a road that becomes a track that becomes a trail that stretches for hundreds of miles and was probably in use for 100's of years. As the video goes along they pass people riding, driving, walking along this track as it passes through villages. This road is an ancient throughfare and is part of the commons.

Many people mistakenly believe that government build highways and byways but the truth of the matter is they don't. They improve highways and byways but they don't make them. Under common law, improvements to the land go with the land. So if a road exists and someone comes along and improves it, so what? It does not mean they have the right to demand compensation from anyone for travelling along the improved section of road. Toll Roads anyone?

Many major roads, highways and byways are very old roads. A lot of them were establised by indigenous peoples over many generations. White guy just came along and romanized it.

Thanks keehah. This video is perfect to demonstrating the Joy of the Commons.

If you guys can see UK tv video this 5th Gear segment goes along the "greeen roads" of Uk from left to right. To me, green roads are remnants of the commons.

http://fwd.channel5.com/fifth-gear/videos/features/coast-to-coast-challenge