7 ms·

I see this when dispersed camping, simple things like cleaning up at the campsite before leaving. Most people don’t have a problem with it but there are small g

I see this when dispersed camping, simple things like cleaning up at the campsite before leaving. Most people don’t have a problem with it but there are small groups who don’t care about anything. Those small groups tend to ruin it for everyone. You don’t see that at managed campgrounds because you will be fined.

zozbot234 6y ago
> At a managed campground you don’t see this because you’ll be fined. Thus proving the superiority of private property over the complete anarchy of the commons.
- brianberns 6y ago
  Those aren't the only two options. You can have public property that isn't anarchy. That's how national parks work in the US.
  - almost_usual 6y ago
    State Parks and National Parks usually have zero tolerance for unwieldy behavior. National Forests are where you’ll see gunshot holes in signs and occasionally trash. I’ve seen entire burnt out vehicles in CA National Forests, it’s a little more wild west.
Lowgain 6y ago
>I see this when dispersed camping, simple things like cleaning up at the campsite before leaving. Most people don’t have a problem with it but there are small groups who don’t care about anything. Those small groups tend to ruin it for everyone. As I understand it, an anarchist camping group (for lack of a better name) could still collectively agree on and enforce rules - in many ways still a "managed" campground, just with more shared ownership
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- bencollier49 6y ago
  You mean, decide by voting and agree on penalties for people who break the rules?
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Yes! But in a way that works via consensus and that doesn't establish unnecessary hierarchies. For example, you could have people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties and have the primary stakeholders vote on penalties.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - bencollier49 6y ago
      > people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties In a sort of ceremony where you swear to follow the rules of the - oh I don't know, country? - that you're joining?
      - names_are_hard 6y ago
        It often seems to me that when talking to people about alternative mechanisms for organizing society we end up just rediscovering our current systems from first principles. At times it feels silly but I think it's a great technique for educating. I try to do this at work when a new engineer tries to argue that the current system is overcomplicated and there is an easier alternative. Just ask questions, point out edge cases and watch them gradually rebuild the current solution. Doesn't always work, sometimes the current solution actually sucks. But more often than not they come to understand that by the time they're finished ironing it the details, their proposal is not meaningfully different from what we have.
- MacsHeadroom 6y ago
agumonkey 6y ago
If the cleaners decide to 'educate' the non cleaners, would they be seen has (hier)archists now ? The small group ruining things is akin to the broken window. It requires some kind of regular process / hygiene to maintain the system in a good enough condition.

zozbot234 6y ago

> At a managed campground you don’t see this because you’ll be fined. Thus proving the superiority of private property over the complete anarchy of the commons.

brianberns 6y ago
Those aren't the only two options. You can have public property that isn't anarchy. That's how national parks work in the US.
- almost_usual 6y ago
  State Parks and National Parks usually have zero tolerance for unwieldy behavior. National Forests are where you’ll see gunshot holes in signs and occasionally trash. I’ve seen entire burnt out vehicles in CA National Forests, it’s a little more wild west.

Lowgain 6y ago

>I see this when dispersed camping, simple things like cleaning up at the campsite before leaving. Most people don’t have a problem with it but there are small groups who don’t care about anything. Those small groups tend to ruin it for everyone. As I understand it, an anarchist camping group (for lack of a better name) could still collectively agree on and enforce rules - in many ways still a "managed" campground, just with more shared ownership

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bencollier49 6y ago
You mean, decide by voting and agree on penalties for people who break the rules?
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Yes! But in a way that works via consensus and that doesn't establish unnecessary hierarchies. For example, you could have people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties and have the primary stakeholders vote on penalties.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - bencollier49 6y ago
    > people coming in voluntarily agree to the penalties In a sort of ceremony where you swear to follow the rules of the - oh I don't know, country? - that you're joining?
    - names_are_hard 6y ago
      It often seems to me that when talking to people about alternative mechanisms for organizing society we end up just rediscovering our current systems from first principles. At times it feels silly but I think it's a great technique for educating. I try to do this at work when a new engineer tries to argue that the current system is overcomplicated and there is an easier alternative. Just ask questions, point out edge cases and watch them gradually rebuild the current solution. Doesn't always work, sometimes the current solution actually sucks. But more often than not they come to understand that by the time they're finished ironing it the details, their proposal is not meaningfully different from what we have.
MacsHeadroom 6y ago

agumonkey 6y ago

If the cleaners decide to 'educate' the non cleaners, would they be seen has (hier)archists now ? The small group ruining things is akin to the broken window. It requires some kind of regular process / hygiene to maintain the system in a good enough condition.