Glenn Fleishman"The Tragedy of the Commons" was written by a eugenicist and was effectively debunked as ahistorical fantasy decades ago. More propaganda in the service of privatizing public space and resources. Pass it on. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-the-commons/
Dallman Ross@glennf I read this. I have to say I'm disappointed Mildenberger fails to distinguish between a scurrilous author and his thesis. What kind of a person — or creep — Hardin was is not much related to whether his thesis has teeth. What his motives were or what the motives are today of Nazis or eugenicists or whomever who use the thesis to selfish advantage does not speak to whether the thesis has teeth. It's like saying trains shouldn't run on time, because Mussolini wanted them to run on time.
Jeremy D. Goodwin // JDG@spamless @glennf Your response sounds like the response of someone who has not read the article he is criticizing.
@JeremyDGoodwin @glennf I said I read it, and I read it. Yes, of course not everything people do with a commons is destructive. I don't think the thesis claims that is so.
Yes, of course plenty of people have good intentions and motivations. I don't think the thesis claims no one does.
@JeremyDGoodwin @glennf I don't have a full-length article on the Scientific American Blog Network to respond in, or the time to do that anyway. I had 500 characters. I used 496, I think. I cut some stuff out that didn't fit. I was left with the hope that the underpinning thought would come through.
DB Schwein@spamless @JeremyDGoodwin @glennf
Your first ~225 words focus on separating the author from his work, and sadness that this article didn't do that. Which, of course, it did...pretty early on.
It seems like someone who only has 500 words wouldn't waste 50% on something easily debunked.
@deirdrebeth @JeremyDGoodwin @glennf I don't have 500 words. I have 500 *characters*. Mastodon, or my instance of it at least, is still microblogging. I disagree with your claim. The whole weight and tenor of his piece was to instruct us on what a scumbag the author and his sympathizers were and are.