> It's true that history shows examples of communities managing their common resources over generations. This need not be the default; when it isn't you get the

> It's true that history shows examples of communities managing their common resources over generations. This need not be the default; when it isn't you get the tragedy of the commons It looks like you're agreeing that counterexamples to "tradgedy of the commons" being a default state exist in history yet your conclusion is "tragedy of the commons is the default if a better option isn't employed". Why can't it be true(based off your same evidence) that tragedy of the commons is an unnatural state, and respect for common resources is the default?