the more I learn about the :ancap-good: :gayroller-2000: guy the more I enshrine the incident in my head as the shining example of the petit bourgeois tantrum, esp since it’s infinitely easier to use in conversation compared to holding an impromptu Class Characteristics of Fascism 301 seminar
I was at a party joking around about this dudes rampage with a friend and his wife overheard us and asked “Wealthy white guy?” and both of us just went :yea:
he had enough disposable income and free time to build a killdozer, smells like kulak
being 'off-grid' is a class-signifier to these people, its got no relationship to financial capacity (they often own businesses and large tracts of land). theres some truth to 'cash-poor' but in my experience even when they get an infusion of cash they do not use it to ameliorate the obvious (grid connection, sewage, etc.)
better not to question the eldritch logicks of small business brain. nests of 'self-reliance', felt entitlement, and petty grudges
:shrug-outta-hecks: kulak shit (may stalin punish him in the afterlife)
small town petty bourgeois. he had just enough to make himself miserable that the peasants didn't kneel before his majesty.
If he can afford a brand new bulldozer he was rich. If i had that kind of money i could not work for the rest of my life and spend my time reading and maybe even writing theory.
From what I recall the town bent over backwards for years trying to get him hooked up, he just wouldn't do it.
I worked for a landscaping company one summer where there was one 'customer' that refused to cut the weeds down on his property or pay for it and had threatened employees attempting to do it with a gun, so they sent a patrol car there every summer to guard the weed whackers.
Americans. What a fucking concept.
Every time I've done any kind of job out in the 'burbs I'm always edgy for the first few minutes on site because that's the fun time when you get to find out if the property owner thinks the giant van that says "BOBS LANDSCAPING" full of tools and random teenagers and shit is actually coming to rob him.
Lol 1 week of learning water law and history makes you so goddamn pissed if you’re already preemptively against things like private property and the exploitation of water
A thousand people owning little plots of land along the riverbank and dealing with the various negative externalizations of river-land development: Broke, Lame, Anti-Intellectual
One single individual having a property title than spans the entire river as well as all of its tributaries and estuaries: Woke, Based, Genius
Real Estate Monopolies are Good Aktuly. The Free Market Has Spoken.
The river not belonging to a single entity is a massive inefficiency, all those people and animals using it for drinking water basically provides no value vs a big industrial development upstream that generates cash and jobs
Nobody will pay to maintain the river if it's commonly owned. It needs to be owned by a single individual who will have financial incentivization to maintain, wait what's that noise behi- :stalin-gun-1: :stalin-gun-2:
but then they flow into the ocean! clearly what we need to do is write up a deed for all the water in the world and sell it to the highest bidder.
Or trees. Every single insurance provider has a tree lawyer on speed dial to call whenever there's a claim that involves a tree in any way.
Tree law is actually pretty complex, and is a very viable career.
It's a real thing, but it's often a thing lawyers like to joke about, in that it exemplifies how ridiculously complex the law is, in that there's a field of law about a very mundane object everyone has seen, but you don't think about a lot.
Every municipality has their own laws on trees and how liability is determined when it comes to trees. And trees are not completely confined to borders. Sometimes, the roots of one tree go into another municipality or state, sometimes the branches hang over another, sometimes, a tree that's in one town falls down into another... tree lawyers are basically there to know who's liable and what the law says for every one of those situations, and many other things.
It's a great example of how common law systems are completely insane bullshit written down by extremely unserious people.
One of my customers complains frequently about the previous neighbor taking a foot of her property line when they rebuilt the fence.
i mean, those commons ain't gonna enclose themselves!
In my area oak trees are protected and you get massive fines for cutting them down (not that it stops developers from cutting them down anyway)
A big issue in tree law is angry property owners who cut down or poison trees on neighbouring properties because they're "ruining their view".
"Hey try this new private property thing! Stuff that's publicly accessible and usable can now be used by one guy!"
"Oh, sure, cool, what about like, the fact that most of us frequently make use of the same things, how do we solve that?"
"...uh, a million billion accountants?"
Tell that to hell state that is Iowa where certain rivers and streams can be private property. Compared to neighboring states of MN and Wisconsin which have what is referred to as wet foot laws. https://www.iowadnr.gov/idnr/Fishing/Where-to-Fish/Trout-Streams/Stream-Details?lakeCode=TYR03
Fucked.
But you can't drain it or dam it without specific permit right? Nor dump radioactive shit or something like that, right?
Right?
I would hope so, but I haven't really looked into it as much as water access rights as that affects me as a fisherman more.
I need to know more about this. Sounds like a version of Sealand that isn't quite as dumb.
BTW the Sealand website is so unintentionally hilarious: https://sealandgov.org/
