6 ms·

I'm not saying we shouldn't protect the environment, control air space, restrict the use of radio frequencies, etc. I'm merely stating that, for better or worse

I'm not saying we shouldn't protect the environment, control air space, restrict the use of radio frequencies, etc. I'm merely stating that, for better or worse, true unregulated commons no longer exist. Any hunter gatherers that still exist are merely tolerated.

ClumsyPilot 6y ago
But how unregulated were the commons? If you were to somehow destroy the commons that the community relies on, would you get away with it? There was always some breaks on outright maniacs, even if it was just getting lynched.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  The commons were regulated communally, yes. They weren't regulated with state power. In a sense, it really was anarchy - but an anarchy that worked.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    It's dismaying that modern state power feels (and is) something entirely distinct from communal. "Of the people, by the people, for the people" was lost long ago.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Indeed. This is, sadly, an unavoidable consequence of a society increasingly based on relations of ownership to maintain social coherence. Communal relationships even under the égide of the state become increasingly difficult and impossible.
      - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
        Back in Russia, my family knew all our neighbours, now in Uk i have no idea who lives left or right of me. Perhaps thats related to the phenomena that although crime rate has gone down fear of crime and kidnappings has gone up.
        sudosysgen 6y ago
        A similar thing is happening in Morocco. So far the best theory I heard of why it happens - which I especially respect because it is so old. The theory is that the increase in reliance on the market to organize one's life leads one to understand the real social relationships in society no longer as relationships between real people, but instead as relationships between material objects, thus alienating people from the societies that are important to them. It stops being because of Walid at the grocery store that you get eggs, but instead because of The Store that you can do so, so why care about Walid anymore? It's not thanks to Pierre down the road that your driveway is clear of snow anymore, it's thanks to The Snow-shoveling Company, defined by the amount of snow left, the average price, and the time at which they come (regulated of course by The Market) that you have a shoveled driveway, so what's the point in caring who Pierre is? As you stop understanding the relationships and the value that allows you to live your life in social terms, there is no longer a reason to care about who your neighbors are unless they actively impede you, and the converse too. I don't know if it's the correct one, but as this sort of phenomenon is so strongly correlates with economic development it rings very true to me.
        ClumsyPilot 6y ago
        There is something to it. There is the whole issue with child freedom, where my parent's generation would roam the entire city from the age of 10, I had to constantly report where I was, and these days kids can't go to school by themselves untill they are 16 or something. They are super-sheltered. This 'zero risk' 'stranger danger' attitude is somehow synonimous with not know who anyone is, and being afraid of them

ClumsyPilot 6y ago

But how unregulated were the commons? If you were to somehow destroy the commons that the community relies on, would you get away with it? There was always some breaks on outright maniacs, even if it was just getting lynched.

sudosysgen 6y ago
The commons were regulated communally, yes. They weren't regulated with state power. In a sense, it really was anarchy - but an anarchy that worked.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  It's dismaying that modern state power feels (and is) something entirely distinct from communal. "Of the people, by the people, for the people" was lost long ago.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Indeed. This is, sadly, an unavoidable consequence of a society increasingly based on relations of ownership to maintain social coherence. Communal relationships even under the égide of the state become increasingly difficult and impossible.
    - ClumsyPilot 6y ago
      Back in Russia, my family knew all our neighbours, now in Uk i have no idea who lives left or right of me. Perhaps thats related to the phenomena that although crime rate has gone down fear of crime and kidnappings has gone up.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        A similar thing is happening in Morocco. So far the best theory I heard of why it happens - which I especially respect because it is so old. The theory is that the increase in reliance on the market to organize one's life leads one to understand the real social relationships in society no longer as relationships between real people, but instead as relationships between material objects, thus alienating people from the societies that are important to them. It stops being because of Walid at the grocery store that you get eggs, but instead because of The Store that you can do so, so why care about Walid anymore? It's not thanks to Pierre down the road that your driveway is clear of snow anymore, it's thanks to The Snow-shoveling Company, defined by the amount of snow left, the average price, and the time at which they come (regulated of course by The Market) that you have a shoveled driveway, so what's the point in caring who Pierre is? As you stop understanding the relationships and the value that allows you to live your life in social terms, there is no longer a reason to care about who your neighbors are unless they actively impede you, and the converse too. I don't know if it's the correct one, but as this sort of phenomenon is so strongly correlates with economic development it rings very true to me.
        ClumsyPilot 6y ago
        There is something to it. There is the whole issue with child freedom, where my parent's generation would roam the entire city from the age of 10, I had to constantly report where I was, and these days kids can't go to school by themselves untill they are 16 or something. They are super-sheltered. This 'zero risk' 'stranger danger' attitude is somehow synonimous with not know who anyone is, and being afraid of them