
The parable of the fisherman - shalmanese
http://blog.figuringshitout.com/the-parable-of-the-fisherman/
======
3pt14159
Tragedy of the commons => common anti-capitalist fodder, whether fish,
pollution, fur, logging, etc.

Also what is not shown here are the millions of people that were able to eat
fish due to its drastic drop in price. The omega balance raising IQs and
resulting in more eco-scientists, sociologists, and general income for the
government or charities for retooling of bronze-age fisherpeople.

~~~
Dylan16807
Yeah, factoring in where the money came from takes the moral in a completely
different direction.

In the end, a lot of people are getting cheaper food, and more fish is being
produced with fewer workers. The suffering is caused by unexpected _change_ ,
not because the corporate fishing fleet is inherently _bad_.

I would argue that the poor working conditions are caused by the temporary
oversupply of fisherman, not by anything inherent to the job structure. Once
that oversupply is corrected, you end up with fisherman working for a good
wage to provide cheaper food to thousands of people. The community as a whole
can work fewer hours and enjoy more of their life.

So capitalism ruthlessly exploited the people it pushed out of a niche, a one-
time cost to a small group of people, in exchange for permanent good effects
for everyone.

Obviously it would be better if the company was giving good wages from the
start, and a social safety net kept that small group from suffering at all.
But even with that terrible side effect, the search for efficiency was a good
thing.

~~~
johnchristopher
> So capitalism ruthlessly exploited the people it pushed out of a niche, a
> one-time cost to a small group of people, in exchange for permanent good
> effects for everyone.

That's pretty much the definition of totalitarianism (the end justify the
means, like in The Prince).

> Obviously it would be better if the company was giving good wages from the
> start, and a social safety net kept that small group from suffering at all.
> But even with that terrible side effect, the search for efficiency was a
> good thing.

Our moral compass should tell us that if achieving efficiency without
exploitation is possible then it must always be chosen over achieving
efficiency with exploitation.

There's another subtle thing to consider here: the capitalists seem to justify
and enforce the means when the terrible side effects only apply to others. The
line between socialist despotism and liberal despotism is a bit blurry.

~~~
sp332
That's a utilitarianism, not totalitarianism. Utilitarianism is a
philosophical outlook, totalitarianism describes a category of government. I
don't think this counts as totalitarian because it was not the government who
did the pushing here.

~~~
johnchristopher
Ah, yes! Good point, upvoted.

------
triplesec
This isn't a story about all capitalism. It's a cautionary tale, a story of
what happens when capital is not responsive to local conditions and social
factors. This is why the concept of Triple Bottom Line accounting was created
[http://www.economist.com/node/14301663](http://www.economist.com/node/14301663)
. However, power in late American capitalism still stems from short-term
decisions in finance, ignoring the issues of natural finite resources, ably
conceptualised by the Rocky Mountain Institute:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Capitalism:_Creating_th...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Capitalism:_Creating_the_Next_Industrial_Revolution)
.

I also recommend the writings of American economist and sociologist Thorstein
Veblen from 100 years ago on how it is remote capital that increases the
likelihood of businesses to have terribly deleterious effects on the physical,
biological and social environment.
[http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/438](http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/438)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorstein_Veblen](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorstein_Veblen)

Change happens, and often it brings benefits: but unless we are mindful, as
say Elon Musk attempts to be, in our desires to improve the world with our
technolgies, then dystopias will follow.

I can also recommend the various works of David Brin on the near to medium
future, whose mind is quite as sharp as Musk's and other meta-systemic
thinkers we know and appreciate.
[http://www.davidbrin.com/](http://www.davidbrin.com/)

------
rturben
This got very dark very quickly.

It does make me wonder though, to what extent are we responsible for the
repercussions of our actions? Where along that chain did it stop becoming the
fault of the businessman, if ever?

~~~
sliverstorm
_Where along that chain did it stop becoming the fault of the businessman, if
ever?_

Current ethics would probably say, it was never the fault of the businessman.
The profits were ripe for the taking; under a capitalist worldview, _someone_
would have taken them, whether or not it was this businessman.

As far as we can tell, the businessman did nothing expressly immoral- the
consequences were externalities, and our moral systems are rarely developed to
encompass anything beyond externalities of the first degree, because let's
face it- externalities are _damn hard_ to predict, understand, or even
monitor.

~~~
rhyme
The profits were already being enjoyed by the fisherman. The problem is that
the profits were rapidly extracted at a rate that the environment could not
support. Sucked dry.

Enter stage left: Sustainability.

As someone posted above, the Triple Bottom Line presents a different concept
of capitalism that takes into account the limited supply of resources that
make profitable life possible. At our current rate of growth, if we do not
refocus efforts on sustainable consumption, we will all end up like the
fisherman.

~~~
deepvibrations
Last sentence particularly rings true for me! Where ever there are profits,
there is also a deficit elsewhere, this is one of the core problems with our
monetary system. We are brought up not to be greedy and to be generous, then
as soon as we enter the real world as adults that need to earn a living, many
are forced to make decisions that are not ethical in order to survive/support
family etc. I have been spending a lot of time looking into the Resource Based
Economy recently and this model seems far superior to anything we have at the
moment, unfortunately, it is so radically different from what we have that it
is going to take a lot of educating and a lot of work to start abandoning our
current failing system in favour of another. Still, I have a lot of hope for
the future, we have everything we need right now to change the world, we just
need everyone to be willing and ready to accept this change!

------
sivers
Brilliant re-write. If you skipped this link, thinking it was going to just be
the well-known tale, look again.

~~~
gojomo
Indeed, I thought it was a repeat, until verifying today's posting date. For
reference, here's a variant of the 'original':

[http://renewablewealth.com/the-parable-of-the-mexican-
fisher...](http://renewablewealth.com/the-parable-of-the-mexican-fisherman/)

------
paulorlando
Nice re-write. The most interesting part: the businessman never knew what
impact his actions had on the fisherman.

~~~
cstrat
I doubt it would have changed his course of action. In his mind, if he didn't
take advantage of the niche opportunity, someone else would.

~~~
paulorlando
True, it wouldn't have changed his actions, but it's interesting to think of
how all that we do has an impact somewhere else. People reading this now are
creating jobs for some and destroying jobs for others. Such is business life.

------
throww1e9u09
This is a famous German short story by Heinrich Böll, from 1963.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekdote_zur_Senkung_der_Arbei...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekdote_zur_Senkung_der_Arbeitsmoral)

~~~
epaga
nope read it again, this one has an alternate ending

------
DateK
"democracy cannot survive overpopulation. Human dignity cannot survive it.
Convenience and decency cannot survive it. As you put more and more people
onto the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't
matter if someone dies." by Isaac Asimov

[http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Overpopulation](http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Overpopulation)

------
shalmanese
Server is struggling, here's the text:

A vacationing American businessman standing on the pier of a quaint coastal
fishing village in southern Mexico watched as a small boat with just one young
Mexican fisherman pulled into the dock. Inside the small boat were several
large yellowfin tuna. Enjoying the warmth of the early afternoon sun, the
American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish.

“How long did it take you to catch them?” the American casually asked.

“Oh, a few hours,” the Mexican fisherman replied.

“Why don’t you stay out longer and catch more fish?” the American businessman
then asked.

The Mexican warmly replied, “With this I have more than enough to support my
family’s needs.”

The businessman then became serious, “But what do you do with the rest of your
time?”

Responding with a smile, the Mexican fisherman answered, “I sleep late, play
with my children, watch ballgames, and take siesta with my wife. Sometimes in
the evenings I take a stroll into the village to see my friends, play the
guitar, sing a few songs…”

The American businessman impatiently interrupted, “Look, I have an MBA from
Harvard, and I can help you to be more profitable. You can start by fishing
several hours longer every day. You can then sell the extra fish you catch.
With the extra money, you can buy a bigger boat. With the additional income
that larger boat will bring, before long you can buy a second boat, then a
third one, and so on, until you have an entire fleet of fishing boats.”

Proud of his own sharp thinking, he excitedly elaborated a grand scheme which
could bring even bigger profits, “Then, instead of selling your catch to a
middleman you’ll be able to sell your fish directly to the processor, or even
open your own cannery. Eventually, you could control the product, processing
and distribution. You could leave this tiny coastal village and move to Mexico
City, or possibly even Los Angeles or New York City, where you could even
further expand your enterprise.”

Having never thought of such things, the Mexican fisherman asked, “But how
long will all this take?”

After a rapid mental calculation, the Harvard MBA pronounced, “Probably about
15-20 years, maybe less if you work really hard.”

“And then what, señor?” asked the fisherman.

“Why, that’s the best part!” answered the businessman with a laugh. “When the
time is right, you would sell your company stock to the public and become very
rich. You would make millions.”

“Millions? Really? What would I do with it all?” asked the young fisherman in
disbelief.

The businessman boasted, “Then you could happily retire with all the money
you’ve made. You could move to a quaint coastal fishing village where you
could sleep late, play with your grandchildren, watch ballgames, and take
siesta with your wife. You could stroll to the village in the evenings where
you could play the guitar and sing with your friends all you want.”

Sensing skepticism from the fisherman, the businessman moves onto the next
boat and finds a more receptive fisherman. The two, sensing an obvious
business opportunity, decide to go into business together. They raise a
venture capital round and a year later, return to the pier outfitted with a
dozen high tech fishing boats.

Immediately, the price of tuna at the pier drops threefold with increased
supply, forcing the young Mexican fisherman to increase his hours at sea just
to maintain his existing standard of living.

Shortly thereafter, all of the shallow water tuna have been caught and the
young Mexican fisherman discovers his tiny boat is incapable of deep water
fishing. Because of his limited savings, he does not have enough capital to
invest in a deep water fishing boat and he is forced to sell his tiny fishing
boat for pennies on the dollar as scrap because advances in technology have
made it obsolete.

After discovering that there is limited demand for an employee whose only
skills are watching ballgames, playing the guitar and taking siestas, the
young Mexican fisherman finds his only option is to take a job working minimum
wage on one of the businessman’s fishing vessels.

Several years later, the fisherman’s joints are shot through from the hard
manual labor of operating on a commercial fishing vessel and an ill timed lift
of a 150lb pallet of tuna finally causes his back to give way, causing
permanent crippling. The fisherman discovers intensive lobbying from the
businessman has weakened workplace protection rules and the fisherman is
summarily let go with only a paltry settlement.

After years of expensive medical treatments and crippling bills, the fisherman
is finally forced to sell his land, passed along to him from generation to
generation, to a development conglomerate run by the businessman who is buying
large tracts of the entire village.

Unbeknownst to the fisherman, the businessman has lobbied for the village to
turn into a protected nature reserve, allowing for the rehabilitation of the
environment and the restocking of fish in it’s pristine waters. The
businessman painstakingly recreates the quaint, costal charm of the village he
once visited, making it a paradise where the wealthy flock to when they want
to retire into a life of easy indolence.

Finally, 15 – 20 years after the original conversation, the fisherman and his
wife are found dead in a homeless shelter. Meanwhile, the businessman retires
to the village having made two successive fortunes first in fisheries and then
in real estate development. He spends his days sleeping late, playing with his
grandchildren, watching high def ESPN ballgames on a 70″ TV, and taking siesta
with his wife. He occasionally strolls down to the village in the evenings
where he regales his fellow millionaires with the story of how he found an
unexploited niche in the marketplace and then took full advantage of it to
make the fortune that got him to the comfortable retirement he enjoys today.

~~~
michaelwww
With no other opportunity and with a deep resentment towards the millionaire,
the fisherman's sons become involved in the drug trade. Violence escalates in
the village to the point that kidnappings for ransom become a popular way to
finance the importation of drugs for resale. The sons kidnap the millionaire's
wife for ransom and kill her when the businessman fails to follow
instructions. Later the millionaire and his new trophy wife are gunned down in
the street. See Acapulco:

[http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2013/07/violence-in-
acapulco-i...](http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2013/07/violence-in-acapulco-
intensifies.html)

------
jrochkind1
Much more realistic than the usual version that ends early.

------
mr12
I think the better story would have been of the 2nd fisherman that was
approached. Same end result only it would have given a better contrasting
perspective.

~~~
vvvVVVvvv
I'm not sure how it could have been more interesting.

The success story ? The happy ending ?

------
mbubb
A tangental question (and not meant to be a critique): Is this a parable? It
too closely mirrors reality and there is no openended quality (ie Talmudic
writings or Jesus parables). Neither is it an allegory.

What do you refer to a story like this? An Epitome? ANecdote? Vignette?

------
oddshocks
This is the post Hacker News needed.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

\-- A fellow Hacker

~~~
karl11
Why?

~~~
Ygg2
Because HN can get so hung up on success at nearly any cost? Programmers
forget their code has real world impact.

------
karl11
Nothing is permanent, innovate, disrupt, adapt or die... So this parable is
about Silicon Valley (businessman) crushing the complacent entrenched
corporations (fisherman) with new technology? Am I missing something?

~~~
jrochkind1
No, the fisherman represents fishermen, and the businessman represents
businessmen.

It's about just what it says it's about: the businessman crushing everyone
else to satisfy his own greed, and destroying the quality of life for anyone
that's not rich.

You know, like real life, as oppposed to the self-serving silicon valley
fantasy where getting rich is somehow socially beneficial.

~~~
Houshalter
The businessman didn't "crush" anyone, he just made the fishing industry a
thousand times more efficient through technology. You see the fisherman losing
his job, not the thousands of villagers who now have cheaper food.

The problem is all the wealth created from this went to the businessman alone
and the fisherman was left with nothing. Because we stupidly live in a society
where everyone depends on the value of their labor to get by. When technology
makes your labor obsolete, as it _should_ , then you have nothing.

~~~
yen223
Call me naive, but I actually believe it is possible nowadays to make labour
obsolete, without making the _labourer_ obsolete.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Really? Because the only people able to get paid after their work has been
automated (textiles, manufacturing) are those who are able to collect from
social safety nets, and they _barely_ get by.

I'm all for a more equitable distribution of wealth though, through a
combination of a much more solid web of social programs and higher taxes
levied on top recipients of income (I dare not confuse those with "earners").

~~~
Ygg2
That depends on the state that makes the social net. Scandinavian countries
make way better social nets.

------
poopicus
I was under the impression that the story was actually about taking chances
when they're offered to you, and about the consequences of letting great
opportunities pass you by. Not so much about the whole ethical
responsibilities of big business.

------
bowerbird
dynamite. sounds like real life. modern greek tragedy.

unless we humans decide to harness greed, and quickly, we will shortly follow
all of the other large mammals to the mass extinction which we engineered
ourselves.

-bowerbird

------
jzf
in the original, the fisherman returns to a life he had before the MBA came
into his life. The original story was meant to teach us the evils of money.
But!! The thing that is missed is that the fisherman made a fortune and now
has Health insurance good medical care can pay for his kids to be well
educated can fund his nations defense his tax dollars help fund stuff like
figuring out the cure for cancer Has helped to produce wealth money is not
evil folks.

------
VladRussian2
it isn't just about capitalism, it is generic principle of living systems
evolution - it isn't possible to stay in static balance with environment
forever as environment will change [will be "disrupted" or "paradigm shifted"
in local parlance] sooner or later.

------
asah
nice story, Hang.

------
jerlundy
Communist propaganda. Shame on you successful one percenters.

------
jonperl
Well that was a surprise turn around. Great for the entrepreneur, not so great
for the kind natured protagonist.

Also
[http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/misc/patfitty.gif](http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/misc/patfitty.gif)

