Comment by ninetyninenine

Comment by ninetyninenine a day ago

4 replies

You're saying this because you actually don't understand a huge part of what I'm talking about: The tragedy of the commons. You didn't look it up, so your answer here is completely mistaken. MY entire ARGUMENT is based on that, and that is EXACTLY what theory Y is. It is the negative consequence of theory Y. You need to understand my argument before responding. Perhaps it's my fault for expecting most people to know what the tragedy of the commons is:

The tragedy of the commons is a paradox in which individually rational behavior leads to a collectively irrational and destructive outcome. It is not a story about bad people doing bad things. It is a story about good people doing exactly what makes sense—and still destroying something vital in the process.

Imagine a shared resource: a pasture open to all local herders. Each herder faces a choice:

  1. Add another animal and gain the full benefit of that animal’s growth.

  2. The cost? Slightly more wear on the pasture, but that cost is shared by everyone.
Rational choice says: add another animal. You gain, others share the cost.

But now every herder thinks this way. They all add more animals. Soon, the pasture is overgrazed. The grass dies. The system collapses. Everyone loses—including the ones who were just “doing what made sense.”

Let’s be crystal clear:

  1. Individually: Adding another animal is logical. The gain is personal.

  2. Collectively: If everyone does it, the shared resource is destroyed.

  3. Result: Rational behavior by all leads to a guaranteed catastrophe.
This is not about greed or malice. It’s about structure. It’s a situation where doing the right thing for yourself creates the wrong outcome for everyone.

The tragedy of the commons is not a flaw in people. It is a flaw in unregulated systems.

It is inescapable unless external mechanisms change the incentives. And that is what makes it truly tragic: it unfolds from reason itself.

That external MECHANISM is what I mean by AUTHORITY. You need some law to control it. The tragedy of the commons is the reason to almost all the environmental problems we face on earth today. Overfishing, global warming, pollution. Why do you drive a car when you know it harms the earth? What exactly is being DONE to make it so you don't harm the earth. Is it your individual choice, or are people in positions of AUTHORITY pushing for it and trying to save the earth by changing the law and changing the underlying infrastructure. I assure you, if authority wasn't part of the equation there's no hope of stopping global warming.

You and I are exactly talking about theory Y.

Now. That being said. What happens when you let theory Y run rampant? That's pre-civilization anarchy. Hunter-Gatherer groups because of: No authority. Make sense? I mean think about it. What group in all of human civilization has Zero authority? Hunter-Gather groups. Groups that were NEVER part of civilization in the first place.

If you have authority you can start controlling people and making people build things that kick start civilization. Canals, public works, all things that they wouldn't build on their own because of the tragedy of the commons.

This isn't even a personal opinion I'm talking about here. This is academic opinion. People who study these things say what I'm saying and all I'm doing is regurgitating it. But, of course arm chair expert marcus_holmes knows best and can trump all of academia with theory Y.

marcus_holmes a day ago

I wrote out a whole response but decided not to bother replying to this post. I'm not an armchair expert and this kind of ad-hominem bullshit is not worth wasting my time on.

  • ninetyninenine a day ago

    Your previous response and this one was just garbage. Just flippantly dismissed all of what I wrote and came up with a response that showed you wrote it without even understanding half of what I’m talking about. Additionally saying I’m just randomly applying a theory out of some arbitrary choice is just offensive. Did I not say this is academia? This is the study of anthropology? Don’t play this as if you have some moral high ground when your response was rude.

    I’m not interested in your reply because I think it’s dishonest. You clearly didn’t know what was going on and now you’re just trying to defend a position. You’re not charitably exploring a concept or idea.

floydnoel 21 hours ago

some of us understand that tragedy of the commons situations are almost exclusively caused by governments themselves.

more authority doesn't help in those situations, it is the root of the problem.

  • ninetyninenine 20 hours ago

    Governments cause it? Why don’t you read the paper and the actual theory before making up shit.