4 ms·
This authors mindset is unfathomable to me: "repairing the damage caused by centuries of private land ownership."
by frankharv 2y ago
This authors mindset is unfathomable to me:
"repairing the damage caused by centuries of private land ownership."
- ajkjk 2y agoWell they're writing to change minds like yours.
- g4zj 2y agoCould you elaborate on this?
- bigstrat2003 2y agoTrying to be charitable, I think maybe it's just a cultural thing. If someone grew up immersed in a culture which tells them that walking everywhere is a natural right of man, then it wouldn't be surprising if they think of private land ownership as being heinous. It's a very alien view to me, but values shaped by culture generally are. It's just how it is.
- rsynnott 2y agoMany countries allow private land ownership, but also have a right to roam; the land ownership is qualified (as indeed almost all land ownership is nearly everywhere; that's how eminent domain works).
- ajkjk 2y agoI think the claim is more like: "We grew up in a culture that forgot how the freedom to go everywhere ought to be something we value. I have remembered that this is a good thing to value, and you should too."
- ta1243 2y agoDo you not think this would start to repair the damage?
- s1artibartfast 2y agoI think they are objecting to how the article assumes that the damage exists and people agree upon this. What exactly is the damage?
- hansjorg 2y agoThe damage being that people have been conditioned to being unfree in a very fundamental sense.
- s1artibartfast 2y agocan you expand on that? I'm unfree in a lot of ways. Not all of them damaging. I cant walk into someone's house, use their toothbrush, and grope them. It sounds like there is some theory of damage stemming from lack of specific freedoms, but it certainly hasn't been articulated.
- hansjorg 2y agoFor some people freedom means being able to violently deny others to roam the land, to deny access lakes, to deny foraging for berries and mushrooms and even to deny them access to the coastline and the ocean. For them, freedom might entail being able to deny these basic modes of being e.g. based on monetary worth, social standing or even ethnicity (like country clubs in the US). If that's what you consider freedom, I don't think I'm going to be able to convince you otherwise.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoyou didnt answer the question about what "the damage" is. It is a simple question. Instead, you evaded it and tried to redirect the topic.
- ta1243 2y agoThe use of the land is removed from the people
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- francisofascii 2y agoIf you were to ever try to create a new railway, or even a small hiking trail along an existing body of water, you will discover it would have been much easier centuries ago before the local municipalities gave away all the land. It is a hard thing to undo, is the point. You wish you could go back in time and set aside the necessary land for trails, parks, etc.