Environmentalism

[FirstAscent]

You've already been called out because of your ignorant post about nets.

Wow, I have been called out. 

The article I quoted is speaking of harvesting fish. Nets are not a new concept in fish farming.

Yes - you've been called out. Your vision of herding whales like livestock and using nets to demarcate property boundaries across the ocean is absurd.

[1713557514]

1713557514

[1713557514]

1713557514

[1713557514]

1713557514

[1713557514]

1713557514

[1713557514]

1713557514

[Elwar]

And if a warship comes along...the small community becomes history.  

To be clear...are you saying that the use of force by a government against someone that has not initiated force against that government is a bad thing?

[Elwar]

Yes - you've been called out. Your vision of herding whales like livestock and using nets to demarcate property boundaries across the ocean is absurd.

And you would rather treat humans like cattle instead? Or perhaps sheep?

[Elwar]

Your vision of herding whales like livestock and using nets to demarcate property boundaries across the ocean is absurd.

The whales would probably not be conducive to nets, but fish would...and they do already as the story posted shows.

For whales, GPS would be an option.

The tragedy of the commons is that, without ownership then it is a free for all. First one to get it all wins. With no consequences.

This is the same with the government leasing out timber land and other natural resources to be bleed dry with no considerations for the future use of that land. If someone actually owned it, they would want the value to continue forever.

[FirstAscent]

Yes - you've been called out. Your vision of herding whales like livestock and using nets to demarcate property boundaries across the ocean is absurd.

And you would rather treat humans like cattle instead? Or perhaps sheep?

What is that line from Spider-Man?

"With great power comes great responsibility."

Just because you have the power and the technology to radically alter your environment does not mean it is the responsible thing to do. Educate yourself. Proposing solutions dreamed up by others, and linking to them here, does not mean anything. How much do you really know about the ramifications of the things you're suggesting?

How much do you know about marine ecosystems? You want to propose solutions and defend those solutions? Then acquire knowledge.

[Elwar]

How much do you know about marine ecosystems? You want to propose solutions and defend those solutions? Then acquire knowledge.

I have acquired plenty of knowledge on free market environmentalism. What knowledge do you have of it? Perhaps you should acquire knowledge.

A good start would be "Healing our World" by Mary Ruwart
http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/chap8.html

[Hawker]

And if a warship comes along...the small community becomes history.  

To be clear...are you saying that the use of force by a government against someone that has not initiated force against that government is a bad thing?

I am saying that if you try to interfere with the fishing fleet of a nation, they will defend their fleet.

[Rassah]

What would you do in that situation? Give up and quit?

I'd not get into such a ridiculous situation.  I don't have years to waste settling the oceans and I don't have a navy that could defeat the states that would have to be forced to accept my homestead.

Huh, OK. Can we all just agree that you have a severe lack of imagination, and leave it at that?

Is that your way of saying that homesteading the Antarctic seas requires a hyperactive imagination?  As in its just a fantasy?

Just my way of saying that you can't even bring yourself to try to imagine being in that situation, or any that have been proposed. Every time someone brings up an example of how else things might work, or asks you to imagine yourself in a different world and think through the situation yourself, you, for whatever reason, can't or won't, instead just avoiding even the thought of it and resorting to replies of "that's not the way things are in the real world," or, "it needs government to work, period" without explanation, or diverting the conversation to strawmen and insults. I'm really thinking there's something wrong with you

[Rassah]

Again, the key issue is that the Japanese and every other nation with a navy has to accept your "seastead"  I love the concept, but to scale up to the point where is matters, it will need a navy to defend it.

What kind of a navy does Monaco, Haiti, Cuba, or Sealand, or any other small nation in the world ha... never mind. Every powerful nation will always invade and take control of any small nation without an army, because it's always preferable to spend your own money to fight a war than to increase your money through trade. Am I right?
Seriously, how can you ask this without taking the time to think about it? Maybe it would help if you thought of real life examples of what you propose would happen before you post your ideas?

[Elwar]

I am saying that if you try to interfere with the fishing fleet of a nation, they will defend their fleet.

It is great that you are coming up with all of these "holes" that nobody has considered with seasteading.

But you may be enlightened to actually do some research to know that others too have considered it and look for ways at solving them.

http://www.seasteading.org/search/node/defending

Of course, government is always the concern. Somalia is being stifled because of UN attacks. The answer to most threats of war is to trade peacefully with a nation and its citizens so that attacks would be unproductive and harm the nation doing the attacking as much as the one being attacked.

[FirstAscent]

How much do you know about marine ecosystems? You want to propose solutions and defend those solutions? Then acquire knowledge.

I have acquired plenty of knowledge on free market environmentalism. What knowledge do you have of it? Perhaps you should acquire knowledge.

A good start would be "Healing our World" by Mary Ruwart
http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/chap8.html

I have already addressed this issue a hundred times. The problems with all the libertarian proposals are fences, barriers, edge effects, inconsistent application, entrusting stewardship in part to those who are ignorant of effects, greed, fragmentation, etc., etc., etc.

[Elwar]

But leave the vast expanse of ocean out there wild and free.

Before Hawker responds, I figured I would help him out with this one.

Hawker: But what about people who want to go out and fish? How can you keep boats out of the ocean? What if the Japanese Navy wants people to kill whales, there is nothing you can do about it. How are you going to stop people from going to the beach? People on beaches step on ocean creatures. How do you stop that? 80% of people live within 2 miles of the ocean, how will you keep them out of the water? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swimming

[Elwar]

I have already addressed this issue a hundred times. The problems with all the libertarian proposals are fences, barriers, edge effects, inconsistent application, entrusting stewardship in part to those who are ignorant of effects, greed, fragmentation, etc., etc., etc.

You cannot stop greed. The best you can do is direct it toward being beneficial.

To try to fight greed only works with guns and oppression.

[FirstAscent]

I have already addressed this issue a hundred times. The problems with all the libertarian proposals are fences, barriers, edge effects, inconsistent application, entrusting stewardship in part to those who are ignorant of effects, greed, fragmentation, etc., etc., etc.

You cannot stop greed. The best you can do is direct it toward being beneficial.

Exactly. Read the thread on Guiding Markets.

And regarding using your imagination, by all means, get to it. There are environmental issues out there that need imagination. But you need to understand things like edge effects, trophic cascades, riparian zones, ice albedo feedback loops, biodiversity, etc. while applying your imagination.

[Elwar]

I have already addressed this issue a hundred times. The problems with all the libertarian proposals are fences, barriers, edge effects, inconsistent application, entrusting stewardship in part to those who are ignorant of effects, greed, fragmentation, etc., etc., etc.

You cannot stop greed. The best you can do is direct it toward being beneficial.

Exactly. Read the thread on Guiding Markets.

And regarding using your imagination, by all means, get to it. There are environmental issues out there that need imagination. But you need to understand things like edge effects, trophic cascades, riparian zones, ice albedo feedback loops, biodiversity, etc. while applying your imagination.

Using your imagination and using brain power to come up with solutions is a much better way than just fighting humanity, as tends to be the environmentalist solution.

[FirstAscent]

Using your imagination and using brain power to come up with solutions is a much better way than just fighting humanity, as tends to be the environmentalist solution.

I don't think you're aware of what "the environmentalist solution" is. However, I'm sure you have your preconceived notion of what it is. All that aside, for about the tenth time, learn about ecology, ecosystems, and the environment. A book written by a libertarian pharmaceutical research scientist does not exactly qualify as learning about such things.

[Rassah]

Using your imagination and using brain power to come up with solutions is a much better way than just fighting humanity, as tends to be the environmentalist solution.

I don't think you're aware of what "the environmentalist solution" is. However, I'm sure you have your preconceived notion of what it is. All that aside, for about the tenth time, learn about ecology, ecosystems, and the environment. A book written by a libertarian pharmaceutical research scientist does not exactly qualify as learning about such things.

Who knows more about a subject, someone who is interested in it and uses it as a hobby, or someone who's livelyhood and business depends on it? Wouldn't someone maintaining a chunk of the ocean to keep fish and whales for sale know way more about the environment and how to keep it working right than pretty much anyone else? Or are you worried about whale and fish populations exploding to the detriment of other species?

[FirstAscent]

Using your imagination and using brain power to come up with solutions is a much better way than just fighting humanity, as tends to be the environmentalist solution.

I don't think you're aware of what "the environmentalist solution" is. However, I'm sure you have your preconceived notion of what it is. All that aside, for about the tenth time, learn about ecology, ecosystems, and the environment. A book written by a libertarian pharmaceutical research scientist does not exactly qualify as learning about such things.

Who knows more about a subject, someone who is interested in it and uses it as a hobby, or someone who's livelyhood and business depends on it? Wouldn't someone maintaining a chunk of the ocean to keep fish and whales for sale know way more about the environment and how to keep it working right than pretty much anyone else?

No.

Cattle ranchers and businesses selling stuff are not attempting conservation. They're attempting maintaining a black bottom line year to year. Why compare them to a hobbyist? Compare them to conservationists, ecologists, etc.

I can assure you that conservationists and ecologists do not cite cattle ranchers as being pro environment. As an example, here are the leading causes of deforestation in the Brazilian rainforest:

- Clearing for cattle pasture
- Colonization and subsequent subsistence agriculture
- Infrastructure improvements
- Commercial agriculture
- Logging

Things cattle ranchers do:

- Put up fences (bad for ecosystems)
- Poison, shoot and trap wolves (disrupts trophic cascading effects)
- Lobby for hunting of wolves (same as above)
- Overgraze to optimize business, but at the detriment of the environment

Or are you worried about whale and fish populations exploding to the detriment of other species?

See above. Once again, the environment is not something you just slap your favorite political ideology onto. Learn about ecology.

[NghtRppr]

Cattle ranchers and businesses selling stuff are not attempting conservation.

That's the point. That's not their goal yet that's what they are achieving. Look at cows and buffaloes. They are practically the same animals. Yet, cows haven't been hunted to near extinction. Why? Why don't farmers go out into their fields and shoot all their cows dead today? Because if they do that, they won't have them tomorrow. Cows are privately owned. There's no rush to "kill as many as you can while you can" like was the case with buffaloes. Another example is with forests. If you sell forests to the highest bidder, they don't clear cut the land and never replant. Why? Because they'll be out of business within a few years. They want to make their resources last so they will replant new crops. Once you get rid of the commons, there's no more tragedy.

[FirstAscent]

Cattle ranchers and businesses selling stuff are not attempting conservation.

That's the point. That's not their goal yet that's what they are achieving. Look at cows and buffaloes. They are practically the same animals. Yet, cows haven't been hunted to near extinction. Why? Why don't farmers go out into their fields and shoot all their cows dead today? Because if they do that, they won't have them tomorrow. Cows are privately owned. There's no rush to "kill as many as you can while you can" like was the case with buffaloes. Another example is with forests. If you sell forests to the highest bidder, they don't clear cut the land and never replant. Why? Because they'll be out of business within a few years. They want to make their resources last so they will replant new crops. Once you get rid of the commons, there's no more tragedy.

*Sigh*

Nobody listens.

Cows and replanted trees are not synonymous with ecosystems and old growth forests. There's a difference, and it has to do with the future of the planet.

Huge fucking difference.