"The Tragedy of the Commons" is the peak of critiques of communism that are actually just talking about capitalism. "People would overexploit the ecosystem for personal profit" Yeah, imagine if that suddendly happened

I really hate how all the horrible, destructive behaviors created by the incentives of private ownership and capitalism are commonly understood to be “human nature”. If humans naturally behaved the way the fantasy of the the tragedy of the commons assumes we do, we would’ve died out before discovering fire.

Looking at studies that test the "tragedy of the commons" idea, the biggest thing that stood out to me was that the "tragic" scenario only happens when people are not allowed to talk to each other. As soon as the group starts communicating information and decisions are no longer anonymous, the human social instinct takes over and people QUICKLY make collective agreements that result in positive outcomes for all. Alienation is no joke, it's a red flag to always look out for.

"The Tragedy of the Commons" is a self-fulfilling prophesy. When you teach people that a resource is only worth what you can exploit it for, and individual enrichment is the highest value, then people will try and exploit it to enrich themselves with no thought to others or the long-term viability of the resource. The Cliven Bundy incident was essentially that exact tragedy.

Just found this channel. Best KZfaq discovery in years

Andrew has a way of making his videos so engaging. It doesn't feel like a lecture or a sermon. The way Andrew breaks down the information makes it easily digested and understood, I feel like I'm honestly learning with every video.

I cannot express how vital, nourishing and how educational it has been to watch and listen to people who are not like me. Learning from different faces and different voices is the only way we can attain a better world ^.^

It's pretty maddening how even when I got my degree (in econ) that "tragedy of the commons" was, and likely is, still taught in intro courses as if it's a natural law and needs no explanation. When it's really just a thought experiment that presupposes what it's trying to prove, and has so many counterexamples that by rights it should be regarded on the same level as creationism.

🇧🇸 big ups from the Bahamas bro. As a fellow Carribean communist, I was just wondering if you had a reading list I could dig into. I'm a firm believer that we as a Carribean have no need to follow the failing paths of the super powers in our vicinity. I'm just looking for literature that I could use to assist and educate those that I am in contact with. I love what you do and was considering getting into creating. I'm a chef moving into food sciences and agriculture (with a strong peek into mycology) I'm not sure what your primary issues are in Trini but for us in the Bahamas I see food as one of our primary issues. I don't have all the answers but I'd like to assist where my expertise allows. People like you are driving me to do what I do. Keep up the good work.

"The _real_ tragedy of the commons is the loss thereof to the elite few" is one of those things that I think we need to be saying more, for as long as such a significant portion of the population holds the myth to be fact (a i can't write rn)

Lawd this hit hard after I impersonate you for the Chinesefication of the Caribbean section in my last video 😮‍💨 the discourse here has important insight into foreign direct investment for diplomatic means in former colonial countries. Excellent work as always bredda 🙏🏾

Yeah so without turning to hyperbole this video presentation really drove home how close we are ideologically and I feel genuinely positive about that fact. I've been on the platform since the beginning in one form or another and I've never encountered someone so willing to speak openly about ideology while simultaneously putting forth a vision of a better world rather than just critical analysis. This has always been my biggest criticism, crucially outside of internet spaces, and you've really gone ahead and tackled that head on in a really impactful way and I frankly really appreciate it comrade. Take care.

Wrhat I like about this dude is that everytime I think of some issue, he has a video ready and waiting addressing my concerns. Very concientious👍🏾

as someone who studies environmental economics, the tragedy of the commons is akin to the theory of the history of money (that people used to trade etcetera). these gets taught to first-year students in order to make a point that land ownership isn't neccesarily natural or self-evident, and get them thinking about these dynamics. however, it is of course total folklore, like how people used to tell stories about why the seasons change. i don't know how, but economics has mythologized in the same way. it doesn't matter that it's false, you need to know it, in order to understand the framework and talking points people use, to be in on the conversation. there are pleanty of theorists who denote how communal management can be highly succesful for environmental conservation, but their work is much harder to present, because they refuse to stick to a singular narrative.

Each time I think your last video is your best one, your next one comes out. Keep it up, your last three videos especially have been incredible!

Thank you. I was only taught the Tragedy of The Commons, but it's foolish on the front of it. How could something exist for so long, if the Tragedy was true?

I've just starting working on a theatre project/social experiment where, through discussion during a "play", the audience redesigns society from the ground up. Your videos and resources are helping immensely with the ton of research I need to do to be remotely qualified to pull this off. Thank you!

When people call for renationalization of our infrastructures, like rail and energy, it’s essential that the renationalization places ownership directly in the hands of those working in and using the services of each sector. That way, capitalists and their tory politicians won’t be able to sell them off to one another again.

Im jealous of your writing skills and construction of arguments

Holy shit. I'd always thought the tragedy of the commons was like, a real historical event that happened in the 1600s or something, not a completely made up hypothetical scenario based on a bunch of insulting assumptions about farmers made by a guy who has probably never done any farming in his life

In regards to the lie of the tragedy of the commons; I am currently reading a book about the drainage and destruction of the English Fens, much of which was common land. The Fennish commons had lasted centuries and were carefully managed by the local residents, with no formal limit on the amount of grazing animals necessary. In Frampton, a limit was only introduced in 1575 after a lord of the Manor imported 200 cattle to the region from the north of the country, which he then sold on to the London cattle market (Multiple days travel away). It is the elites who are responsible for selfish and destructive use of common resources.

As a colonizer old white man, it's fantastic to be able to listen to younger folx from different places. Keep kicking ass here and on the It Could Happen Here Pod! All power to all the people.

another great one. well put together. well explained. motivational. thank you so much

Another good video makes me think of David graber and David wengrows The Dawn of Everything with its exploration of the commons and anarcho communities

Hate that youtube doesnt show you in my sub feed most times

I think the thing I like so much about the video is how direct it is. Often when the implementation of production and resource management in an anarchic system is discussed, the author tends to give a handwavy explanation that points you towards reading a laundry list of painfully academic books. You strike a great line between detailed and understandable.

Great video! So interesting to think about ideas like this; I'd love to hear more about this topic!

I'm so happy I clicked on this video. I'm going to be sharing this every chance I get. It was enlightening and really makes me want to read more about this topic!

- this communal system can only work in groups in which everybody knows everybody else, and is interacting with the other group members. If someone is living far away or has access to his own resources, independently from those of the group, the system is unable to control this outlier and to keep them from exploiting the resources the wrong way. - the group needs autonomous and direct control over these resources, without any interference coming from remote authorities that might demand eg a minimum production of goods no matter the circumstances (tribute, taxes, five years plans) - both means that these groups cannot exceed a certain size, as that would make it hard to exert the same amount of social control over every member that is obliged to work for the common good (because then it would stay unnoticed when some members with less morale start stealing goods, or trade with outsiders only on their own behalf, destroying the social web) - there will always be a stratification between those whose opinion is deemed to be of special importance, and those who are thought to be unable to understand the greater good. There is no total equality in 'importance of members' or 'count of votes'. - thus the group will constantly face challenges coming even from inside, when younger members want to acquire their own private property or a higher social status. These young people have to be integrated, while they are often oriented towards conflict. - such groups have to think in generations, which makes them very traditional, to the point of becoming dangerously rigid. If changes turn up that have to be adapted to very fast (eg the introduction of cell phones into Africa, or the detection of precious minerals in the soil), this will often become reflected in said conflict between old and young members. Without a proper solution, even a once stable community might break up.

I feel dumb because even though my degree is in econ I always thought "the tragedy of the commons' was about the enclosure of them, lol

Great work as always!

Hey dude, you really do give me hope for the future. Your not only thinking about the short term but also the long term and not just what you think is necessary but also on what you think we deep down should have. It's not just on numbers or logic that even lefties fall into the trap of. That's still all good but really what you advocate for is something that feels altogether more human and gives us the resources to finally feel like we can trust each other again. That trust that you want to build is something I truly believe will push us forward and its far less cynical then what everyone else seems to want.

Comment for the algorithm.

Hello, again an amazing video you made. Very clear and understandable. You're way of explaining is perfect to attract new people. And also you can see the difference between right-wing videos and these, they're fed on fear, this is flourished by hope. Thank you!

Always so grateful your anaylses come with solutions. Thank you again.

The fallacious tragedy of the commons argument reminds me a lot of what I've recently been learning about mutualistic relationships in nature, between plants, animals, and fungi, many of which are being discovered for the first time now (despite modern biology as a field having existed for hundreds of years), because formerly the scientists who studied them couldn't imagine anything but a pure competition based, anthropocentric view.

This was an awesome listen. Thanks for the well thought out content dude!

These videos are such a labor of Love- thank you so much. Dope asf... Love from Bermuda

Andrew yet another phenomenal video! So glad I found your channel! You have a true talent for engaging and teaching comrade!

Thank you so much for talking about this topic. You continue to be one of the best voices on Breadtube

Having read Governing the Commons, this video is an excellent introduction to the concepts it covers. The overview of the requirements for a successfully governed CPR is, I think, a very important piece that needs to be more widely known

The funniest part is that commons has existed for thousands of years durably, private property destroyed the planet in 200 years.

I wish you'd also spoken of the Free & Open Software movement, and the rest of the 'digital' commons.

This is a fantastic, educational breakdown of the concept, its history, and issues. I really applaud your organization of thought here, and I'd love to hear more about anarchist bottom-up confederations/larger scale cooperatives. I'm still learning about anarchy, and have been curious about the approach to bigger infrastructure/large-scale projects, as well as how to manage a non- carcareal state while addressing issues like domestic violence etc. Your videos always give me a clean overview of topics while also providing specifics and case studies to hunt down on my own time, which is a type of learning that works well for me. Thanks!

thank you so much for this video. I learned a lot. I also loved seeing all of the beautiful artwork.

Visionary stuff! I needed this Utopianism today, thanks Andrew 🌱

i love how the very first obstcle to achieving true commons that you mention is burnout. i'm currently in my third year of recovery from burnout and as much as i agree that it is extremely debilitating in regards to productivity i can also say that it is immensely rewarding regarding personal growth and truly comprehending the human experience in general. so may we all burn out and reconnect with our true selves and actual needs, to then build the future we really deserve, toghether. nothing more and nothing less. thank you for another extremely insightful, concise and entertaining presentation

hey andrew, was wondering if you can talk about the “white genocide” conspiracy and its connection to colonialism/imperialism? i think it’s not a coincidence that the two seem to cuddle up to each other. great video as always, btw!

The artwork in your videos is always incredible

So glad I found your channel. Thanks for your content.

I am loving your *voice. What you are doing here is 'important work'. Thankyou for your scholarship.

Comment for the algorithm

Amazing video, well researched and very educating !! keep the good work up :)

i love your taste in artwork. it feels like i learn about a new talented artist or two from every video you post.

I want to preface this with the fact that I follow Marxism for my political theory, however maintain a high degree of respect for Anarchism in general. What is described in the video seems to be a fairly well thought out way of organizing an anarchist society. However, the section titled "How to Manage the Commons" seems to me to be outlining what would be for all intents and purposes a socialist, if not communist, state. Of course, I, being a Marxist, agree with a socialist (or communal) organization regulating the commons. I praise the manner of thought that went into a general overview of such a complex and abstract concept as organizing a post-revolutionary society. and I like the manner of implementing collective ownership of the M.O.P., Democratic society (including democratized workplace). However, my problem with Anarchism is how to defend the revolution against existing capitalist structures?And those sensitive early states much be guarded, and guided towards that finish line. As much as I disagree with anarchists of how to achieve it, we are all working towards that final goal of a stateless and classless society. We cannot forget our common goal, especially in the face of the imperial capitalist order. Anyone looking for a real world, working example of anarchism, I direct you towards the Zapatista movement in Mexico. They've done amazing things for their people, and so close to a marxist project (Cuba) too! In solidarity, comrades! black and red alike!

always here for a dose of HOPE! gratitude comrade

I’ve been watching a lot of your videos recently and I find them extremely compelling, I’ve teetered between state vs no state for a while so it’s great to get more anarchist perspectives

I think we need to highlight examples, whether real or hypothetical, of these systems in order for them to be more firmly rooted in our imagination, and therefore something that can be applied to our communities in action

I am glad you have highlighted Elinor Ostrom's research. I wish this was better known. Are you aware of any follow up to her work? "If it works in practice then it must work in theory." Best answer to bullshit ever!

A surprising commons exists within many corporations. The collection of "in-house tools, equipment, knowledge and resources that allow people to work there.

Such a good video! And thank you for taking out the background music, its more than engaging enough without and makes it waaaay easier to binge your content lol

I love your content. Keep these vids coming!!! Only small issue I have is that I wish, you wouldn't just "read off" your text from the screen or paper. Instead, more like read it, as if you were talking face-to-face to someone. I think that would make your intonation more natural and therefore make it easier for listeners to just focus on the content (less effort to process the words themselves). As you well know, of course there is no need to take this advice. You are already doing great. ✨ Thanks. 🙂 Saying that as a person whose first language isn't English, and who's had some experience with dubbing and producing audio books for visually impaired friends.

algorithm helping

there are a lot of lies like this, like the prisoners' dilemma. they overlook not only the universal fact that snitches get snitches, but more importantly, cohorts always have more common interests with each other than the party or parties detaining them

"He-hee!" I can't with you!🤣🤣🤣

Great video man, so glad to have found your channel. This is the first video of yours I've seen, and what I love about it is how hopeful and inspiring it feels compared with a lot of the fear laden "doom and gloom" political videos I've been watching lately on KZfaq. Subscribed and hit the bell, cheers!

Primitive accumulation: "behind every great fortune is a great crime!"

thank you for having closed captioning on your videos. great video :-]

Well I'm not suprised that a eugenicist coined the idea that communties always are self-destructive. I have noticed that if someone says "everybody in this other group acts with way" they themselves are the one who acts that way

I've been looking into this today and, somehow, no one else got around to mentioning that Hardin was a eugenicist and white supremacist. That seems like pretty key context to understanding his idea on why people can't be left to manage themselves.

Basically, the story of the tragedy of the commons is quite literally just capitalism. The way the actors in that story operate (a made up story by capitalists, mind you) as capitalists do... not as socialized communities do. So of course, the capitalist imagines that "dirty commoners" will destroy the land and resources... because that's what he would do.

I keep thinking that you might enjoy EF SCHUMACHER's "Small is Beautiful: 25 Years Later... with Commentary" if you haven't read it already. There's a chapter on ownership, another on the purpose of the economy, how the people interact with it, etc. While he worked for England's Coal Board, it's surprising how ecological and communal his perspectives can sometimes be. If you've ever heard of "Buddhist Economics", he might have been the one to invent the concept. There's also Herman DALY's "Ecological Economics" book from the 1970s you might like.

I'm all for the anarchistic vision of communal organization akin to the indigenous societies whose viable systems of communal governance have unfortunately been lost to the earth. I tend to believe that the fallback to centralized organizational solutions comes from an unrecognized limit that the human mind has to be sufficiently in tune with all the members of their social circle. This often pops its head up as something called "Dunbar's number", a fundamental limit to how many social connections individuals can manage. Surprise, surprise, the estimates for this number, around 150-300 also happen to be right around the point where you'll find people argue that communal organizations begin to stop working. I truly believe there's a tragedy of the commons, but it's the exact opposite of the reality that we exist in. The neoliberal assumption is that the default state of human nature is selfish greed and the altruists are the exception. In my opinion, the reality is that the default human state is altruistic, and the exception is selfish. This is where the Dunbar's number comes into play for me. The issue I see is when communities extend beyond that number, a few individual actors are able to behave selfishly to take control of the whole system because the community cannot naturally maintain the communal order of everyone. The solution I see out of this is leveraging a form of trustless communication as the base layer for which the commons must exist. This form of communication would be a system where actors who are behaving against the communally agreed upon commons cannot participate in the system. I have a bias to think about this in the digital domain, but partially because this is the easiest, and the fact that there's a captured commons of Open Source Software that underpins the true value of the capital economy, all created without any capital motivation. Trust - this is the place where I believe the commons currently break down, and I think the goal should trying to build toward trustless alternatives that can allow us to break free of biological limits that we have to process the trust of a new individual to the community.

i've been thinking about this a lot. first, if the fear is someone takes more than their share ,how's the solution to give it to the greediest person of all? 2. history has born out private ownership increases destructive exploitation of the land, and c, no one fell for this, so it must be a post facto justification

Another thought provoking video!

Best one yet!

I was just thinking about this earlier. It is really neither this nor that. But a new way. A new third way.

Yay, new Andrewism... That KZfaq did not notify of.

During most pauses along the sentences, you end on a rising tone and at the end of most sentences, you finish on a falling tone. And each self-contained statement is said with a mid-range flat tone. It ends up making you sound somewhat robotic or repetitive throughout the entire video. People don't speak like this when they're talking to other people. They only do it when they're speaking in a video, usually during a video essay or when they're explaining things but never while they're in a dialogue with other real people, so it ends up sounding extraordinarily artificial. It's only a few steps away from being "upspeak," which is the term for when somebody ends literally everything they say on a rising tone, making it sound somewhat like a question. Some of this is just from your normal regional accent but you really are locked into your tone patterns and they sound quite rigid. I used to speak in public and this is something my coaches had to work on me about. It took me months to deprogram my locked-in patterns. I'm not better than anybody here, I just had somebody point it out to me and it was helpful. I hope you find it helpful too.

I'm a Wendell Berrian / Communalist so I think we largely agree. But communism / socialism cannot work because of scale and power vacuums. IE - the critique of communism is legitimate in the sense that when you're organizing large bodies of people in the industrial and post industrial state - inevitably - communism will (9 times of out time) devolve into dictatorships by virtue that EVERY system needs a hierarchy.

This is a really helpful reassessment - these are things I’ve been taught since childhood and my education

"It is one, smooth . . . machine." 3:10

Absolutely in a state of shock and disbelief, that I wasn't even aware of the concept of "socialising" a public service. I've honestly believed in the false dichotemy of "nationalisation versus privatisation". Even the BBC states "Privatisation is the opposite of nationalisation" in the run-up to the UKs 2019 General election. That has been the rhetoric since Margaret Thatcher and is still the rhetoric in the UK today. Whereas socialisation doesn't get the coverage. It makes sense then to acknowledge the option for socialised ownership, for cooperatives and democratic voting rights, mitigating the the tragedy of the commons. But for that we'd need the decision-making not condensed into the hands of only the most wealthy, or the most politically relevant or for whatever reason the biggest shareholders. But it seems advocates of any social movement don't have the institutions and lobbying power of the government or private industry. Where do we start?

This is amazing work.

Andrew, you should read Braiding Sweetgrass by Robin Kimmerer. I’d love a video on your thoughts of its philosophy on getting back to our roots of having a relationship with the land and our people rather than commodifying and privatizing everything.

I must have taken the exact 'wrong' lesson from the Tragedy of the Commons. I took it as an indictment of Capitalism, because each individual using the commons was trying to maximize their own profits at the expense of the community. Aka Capitalism. We must encourage community ownership of the means of production.

I agree with a lot of things in Anarchy, but I don't agree with doing away with the state entirely. It's power should be far more limited and used only for projects that are too large for viable local management. Things like global disease management, mass transit, and space exploration.

10:07 “It ain’t honest, but it’s much” Really captures the rationale and appeal of the whole top-down, exploitative mentality. A clever inversion of basic human morals and values. Basically cheating, on a grand scale. It’s like basically, believers and over-achievers in this ‘strong and crafty man’ ideology really took to this new way of predatory parasitism as the dominant social structure. Strategies within nature, and thus, potentials within human nature. Away we (humanity) went, for the last few thousand and especially few hundred years. Now, we just need to focus on getting more honest, caring, etc., remembering that we would not be here if our ancestors hundreds and thousands of years ago, were immature or superficial in their understanding of these values. We often fail to consider the sophistication and practice required for them. The more people are more honest with themselves and each other, the easier it will be to pull things into harmony, despite the ever-present potential for the predator-parasite side within us, among us, to disrupt, distort and ‘commandeer’ the social mores of humanity.

Great video. Could hear Elinor Ostrom's work throughout. Pretty amazing work she did.

This is great, I'd like to share it with some friends who wish get politically active. I'm excited to check out your other work, I hope they're as good as this one.

Welp, you've just earned a new subscriber.

WE HAD SO MUCH IN COMMON! ohwell

Was thinking of how many of gains from anarchist Provo movement in Netherlands has since been destroyed or moved into privatisation with police and gov support. This video gave me more good for thought on that.

REJECT THE LEFT RIGHT DICHOTOMY! EMBRACE THIRD POSITION! (No, don't do that, it was a joke, I was joking)

Oh this is an awesome point! One that I haven’t been able to articulate before. That it doesn’t have to be owned by shitty people, but apart of the commons we all get access and help from

The bit about privation *and* nationalization having power concentrated in the hands of a small elite group either way reminds me of some old writings (if we can say 2017 is old lol) by John Michael Greer. Do you also read him by any chance?

As a communist, I must admit your videos are great food for thought. Although abolition of the state, class and money is of course an essential part of establishing international communism, people rarely discuss how this would look like and how it would be maintained after a revolution. My question after this video centers mostly around one of the main points of governing the commons. Specifically, how could such a society sanction the occasional opportunists without resorting to mechanisms that resemble today's state-sponsored violence and policing?

You realize the entire reason why civilizations were nomadic is precisely because they depleted local common resources, right? The 1st settlements had the 1st farmlands with the 1st fences.

I'm in agreement with this video's message, but I'm having trouble imagining how this sort of concept would apply to things like trains or other resources that span a large area and have interconnected sections. It seems tricky and wasteful of natural resources to replace the entire existing railway system, so how could such a thing be handled?

Whoa, I didn't know Hardin was so shady. I'll have to read up on that