from:alt.conspiracy As, always, Caveat Lector Om K ----- Click Here: <A HREF="aol://5863:126/alt.conspiracy:627429">"Tragedy of the Commons" (was Rainbow Gathering 2000)</A> ----- Subject: "Tragedy of the Commons" (was Rainbow Gathering 2000) From: <A HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> Date: Thu, Jul 13, 2000 5:19 PM Message-id: <8klma7$b09$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Tragedy of the Commons" (was Rainbow Gathering 2000) Author: allenbutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2000/07/06 Forum: alt.gathering.rainbow Forwarded from another list sevice. Allen --------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lawrence Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 14:50:05 -0400 Subject: Re: "Tragedy of the Commons" (was Rainbow Gathering 2000) The use of the national forests by Rainbow is not a simple matter on which to form an opinion, and merits some dialogue. I'm moved first to offer some context w/ regard to the tragedy of the commons: gatherings are not without ecological impact, but they do not destroy "the forest" (like sheep herders collectively destroy the village common). Moreover, to the extent that gatherings do result in the virtually permanent compaction of trail surfaces and burning of (mostly) dead forest litter; 1. this occurs in a minuscule fraction of the forest commons & 2. arguably benefits recreational use and reduces fire near-future hazard. My intent, however, is not to be an apologist for the Rainbow, though I've enjoyed gatherings tremendously. Following the 1997 TOES in Denver I joined the gathering in the Blue Mountains. The ecological cost of the Rainbow (and I'd argue it is small) is merited by the social and environmental benefit, though its all very debatable. Note that in large measure people at the gatherings self-organize to provide for one-another's welfare. While some folks are no more than thieves, and more than a few are looking to come away from the Gathering richer than when they came - this is not what characterizes the Gatherings. In fact it is the inverse, people look for ways to give to oneanother that creates a greater good than Smith's invisible hand of self-serving ever could. The means of exchange is something like Love, with profit being the province of those who have not yet learned better. This is the gift economy struggling to survive. A person can show up with nothing - as was alluded to in an earlier posting, and eat for free for over a month without lifting a finger. Most folks figure out reasonably quickly that life improves if they do help out to provide for the collective good. Folks with money contribute to the magic hat passed around at the evening meal circle and here and there. If you have never participated the anarchistic construction of a forest village from scratch to serve 15,000+ it is an experience you will never forget. People learn about the environment first hand. The public health dangers accompanying this many people is spelled out again and again. Ecologically sensitive areas such as aquifer recharge zones are marked with entreaties to stay out. Fire dangers, and all the other associated concerns you might imagine some Rainbow has already worked up a rant about. People hear all about it. Not everybody is receptive, but many people learn as much about the ecology of the place they're in, and its needs/hazards, as they do the psychological foundation for alternative economy. Serious good happens. People stay afterwards to ensure that paths are seeded, trash is hauled out, firepits are covered, etc... Its not perfect, you can't erase the effects of 15,000 people in a relatively compact area, but it does not destroy the forest either. National forests are for mixed use. After a Gathering they are still there for mixed use - can't say that about clear-cutting. The Gathering does not destroy the commons by any stretch of the imagination, and I posit that the benefit from use of the Forest in this manner far outweighs the ecological cost - particularly noting the impact of other uses! -LM Garrett Hardin, TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS >have you actually gone to a place that we used and seen for your self? yes. >and how much destruction does our government sponsor by subsidising >exploitive resource extraction that abuses OUR land and makes us pay >for it?!? True. The govt HAS sponsored subsidizing exploitive resource extraction. However, we are trying to change that. But just because the govt has done it doesn't mean that we should do it as well. It's everyone's job as stewards of our commonly held land to provide oversight and hold the govt accountable, and eventually change the utilitarian mission of the Forest Service. However it is easier to throw stones than it is to constantly apply pressure and oversight to change things, which takes a great deal of time. The biggest threat to public lands now comes at a time when the Forest Service is shifting from its utilitarian-based to a recreation-based form of management. Because of the legacy of Milton Friedman's free market-based capitalism, our "free-market" Republican Congress has constantly withheld funds for adequate management. Subsequently the Forest Service (and the Park Service) is venturing into "private-public partnerships" to alleviate cash shortages. Private business has no "business" being involved in our publicly held lands. Organizations like PERC (Political Economy Research Center, <A HREF="http://www.perc.org/)">http://www.perc.org/)</A> bills themselves as "Free market solutions to environmental problems". They (along with the CATO Institute) have a plan to privatize public lands in less than 50 years (<A HREF="http://www.cato.org/new/12-99/12-09-99r2.html)">http://www.cato.org/ new/12-99/12-09-99r2.html)</A>. And this should scare the be-jesus out of everyone. Terry Anderson, Executive Director of PERC, is GEORGE W. BUSH'S PUBLIC LANDS POLICY ADVISOR in his presidential campaign. I verified this personally by calling PERC (they are located here in Bozeman) and asked them point blank if this was true. We have far more to fear from these "free marketeers" who believe the market will solve everything than ever did from a few logging companies. At least we could provide public comment and sue when inappropriate decisions were made. The best authority on the threats to our public lands from motorized wreckreation and these public-private ventures is Scott Silver at WildWilderness, <A HREF="http://www.wildwilderness.org">http://www.wildwildern ess.org</A>. Also, if all on this list have not read "Tragedy of the Commons", it is worth the time. It was required reading in a political science class last year. Although it starts off with a discussion of nuclear war (it was written during the cold war) it quickly shifts to what I consider the essence of the piece. The Tragedy of the Commons (the original), by Garrett Hardin (1968), <A HREF="http://www.dieoff.org/page95.htm">http://www.dieoff.org/page95.htm</A > Tragedy of the Commons Re-stated, by Jay Hanson, 6/14/97, <A HREF="http://www.dieoff.org/page109.htm">http://www.dieoff.org/page109.htm< /A> THE FATAL FREEDOM (the Tragedy of the Commons), by Jay Hanson 8/29/97, <A HREF="http://www.dieoff.org/page79.htm">http://www.dieoff.org/page79.htm</A > The Rainbow Family, while being well-intentioned, is out of touch with the true gravity of the situation. Yours, Drusha ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility". -Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914) ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º = "A commons is destroyed by uncontrolled use" Sent via Deja.com <A HREF="http://www.deja.com/">http://www.deja.com/</A> Before you buy. ----- Aloha, He'Ping, Om, Shalom, Salaam. Em Hotep, Peace Be, All My Relations. Omnia Bona Bonis, Adieu, Adios, Aloha. Amen. Roads End <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
