chat

8560 readers

88 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net

Sulvy@hexbear.net

oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net

Wakmrow@hexbear.net

LeninWeave@hexbear.net

Doesn't the tragedy of the commons also apply to the free market? (hexbear.net)

submitted 1 week ago by Awoo@hexbear.net to c/chat@hexbear.net

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Ignore whether or not we actually agree with the tragedy of the commons for a moment.

If free land anyone is allowed to use is inevitably going to result in individuals acting in their own self interest depleting the resources of the fields and ultimately bringing about collective ruin.... Does that not apply to like... All of capitalism? On the planet?

The capitalists are incentivised to act in their individual interests, and they will do so to the ultimate collective ruin of the entire planet.

That is the tragedy of the commons expanded to an international scale, and if one believes in the tragedy of the commons then one must also believe in the other.

The commons must be centrally controlled and managed in the collective interest.

The market must be centrally controlled and managed in the collective interest.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is an interesting thought. In neoclassical production theory oil is treated simply as scarce input capital, not as a limited natural resource (as the pasture is considered in the tragedy). If we consider oil as being the common pool resource in our capitalism/free market model, when oil runs out what happens to the market when there are no longer any goods being produced that can go into the supply side?

Further thought to consider... is oil managed by the free market on a global scale today? Is it state run? Or cartel managed? The tragedy is resolved through cooperative resource management. I wonder what the world would look like if oil was cooperatively managed on a global scale? I don't mean that there is a global government structure in place that centrally manages oil, I mean a type of cooperative, polycentric governance system?

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Or cartel managed?

Cartel, generally speaking. The OPEC+ alliance has intentionally withheld oil to inflate prices previously.

You mention oil but it's also extremely true for deforestation, fishing, farming and several other things. Including water too actually.

[–] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 3 points 6 days ago

You mention oil but it's also extremely true for deforestation, fishing, farming and several other things. Including water too actually.

It is! It seems as though our cut-throat capitalism or our central government models aren't really the best options for those life essential common pool resources. Can we try the third option next maybe, cooperation?

Not sure how deep into the tragedy you are but if you are unfamiliar, I'd recommend reading about Elinor_Ostrom's work in cooperative resource management.