So a giant party can clean up after itself, but 4th of July in Tahoe for example is a toxic mess. I wish more people would practice these principles. It’s impressive how well this is cleaned up.
The Japanese clean up after everyone including the shitty few who don't clean up after themselves.
Compare that to USA, Go to the National Mall (the grass in DC) on the 4th of July. See it's covered in people. Check on the 5th of July. The entire place will be covered in trash and refuse.
If 2% of the people on the mall on the 4th don’t clean up after themselves and the 98% don’t pick up the slack, it will be disgusting, even if 98% of the people are responsible for their own trash. Americans draw a hard line on trash that is theirs and trash that isn’t. Japanese do not.
My theory is that in Japan people see it as their responsibility to clean up, regardless of who made the mess. In the west, most people are only concerned with their own mess.
It's kinda the opposite of "responsible for yourself," it's a civic sense that extends to include everyone and everything around you - including things that weren't directly caused by you-as-individal.
In the case of the cherry blossoms, they were planted for the enjoyment of the people, and thus the people who come to enjoy them are a part of that system. The cherry blossom viewing events where thousands of people come to picnic, only is a "thing" because thousands of people come - everyone there is a participant by virtue of attending. Thus they hold part of the responsibility for the outcome of the event and the aftermath.
I know. Use the $600/person or whatever cost is now to have trash service out there. Ever think of that?
Edit: You can even see their financials here
https://burningman.org/about-us/what-we-do/financials-public...
Burning Man is a community and society, and often pitches itself that way, and attendees come away feeling that way - they're "Burners," any city in the world they go to they can probably find other Burners they've never met and hang out, and to truly understand the Burn you really just have to attend.
But the values, and event, and many attendees, reject this fact with the "radical self reliance" value. People try to work around it by doing Theme camps - tribes within a tribe. Oh you're self reliant all right, you and the rest of your suburb with whom you organized to bring water and toilet paper. But no no no, that line stops at the edge of your camp, beyond that lies only community WITHOUT responsibility.
In reality there is no community without responsibility. MOOP blows around. Your sound affects other people. And if someone is suffering from thirst or hunger at the Burn, you absolutely have a responsibility to them as a member of your community to share food and water.
This radical self reliance thing just shifts the burden of managing people to the theme camp level, without any guarantee that any given theme camp is actually itself a good member of the community (other than processes that take a while e.g. the MOOP map).
The Burn is big but so are towns. There's already infrastructure for sewage, there should be as well for trash, and imo food and shelter as well. That doesn't require violating any of the principles, and a form of "radical self reliance" can be maintained through "radical participation" wherein people can identify a problem they want to resolve about the Burn and resolve it, or organize a working group or syndic to do so.
If you turn the event into a giant plug and play (if the org is providing food and shelter and trash and everything else), you've just created some variant of Coachella instead, and I sure as hell don't want that. The difficulty is part of the point and what makes it so worthwhile, the kind of people who self-select into doing all that work are people I want to be around. It's supposed to be a community of builders and doers (i.e. participants), not people who show up for a fun time while everything is catered for them.
Exactly my point, so why do we maintain this illusion through one specific principle that we are "radically self reliant" when that evidently isn't the case? Just look through this thread: multiple people rejecting the idea of shared trash bins as "opposed to the values." How is a shared trash bin opposed to the values when we very easily all share toilets that we all as a community keep clean?
Coachella is a for-profit event with Organizers and Spectators, I don't think it's a good comparison, just because of shared trash bins at the Burn.
> It's supposed to be a community of builders and doers (i.e. participants), not people who show up for a fun time while everything is catered for them.
Right, it already is that, and adding shared trash bins won't make it not that. We've just shifted responsibility for managing that onto the theme camps. And in any case, we don't have a magical enforcement mechanism for the values - nothing about changing what we consider a "shared community responsibility" causes our ability to gatekeep lazy people to diminish, the same mechanism of social pressure is there either way.
Meanwhile, our community is failing to handle the very real fact that people are dumping their trash in the streets of Reno, and Reno is, appropriately, attributing this failure to our community as a whole.
My Coachella comment was more in response to your suggestion that even infra for food and shelter should be provided. FWIW I also love Coachella, but that's because I love music - many people there sure don't follow leave no trace principles and that doesn't sit well with me either.
> How is a shared trash bin opposed to the values when we very easily all share toilets that we all as a community keep clean?
I think it's a spectrum. From completely no services at all to everything provided. My view is that providing things like toilets and medical services are something that we all (or at least most) agree makes the city a better place with no real downside. Trash is more complicated - I believe that does compromise the principles too much because of how people behave if dumpsters were to exist. I think people would be more irresponsible than they are now, because "someone else will take care of it" on playa. You also end up with tragedy of the commons problems like some camps dumping way more than others and perhaps filling things up so much that other camps can't even dispose of their stuff, and at that point how do you enforce or manage that? You could start charging by volume or something, but then that just starts to degrade the principles even more and commodifies things. I'd rather people figure their garbage problem out on their own and not expect someone else to handle it, even if it means that sometimes people do the wrong thing. How we manage the problem in Reno, I'm not sure - TBH, if people started getting in trouble for doing it in a real way, like getting charged with illegal dumping, that'd be fine with me. It would certainly be a disincentive to do it once enough Burners get in real shit for doing irresponsible things like that. I'd have no sympathy for them, that's a personal accountability thing.
Right, but that's not happening, because people are dumping in Reno so someone else has to handle it :p
I'm a bit confused by how you said "provided." This may be a USA Burn vs regional Burn misunderstanding - it sounds like the USA burn has a larger divide between Organizers and Participant? For Japan / Taiwan, if there's communal trash, that doesn't mean trash is provided, it just means we organized group trash handling, increased ticket price if necessary, added voluntary shifts to pick up around a dumpster or whatever.
Here's the list of approved providers:
https://burningman.org/black-rock-city/preparation/infrastru...
But it will change participant behavior. Most attendees work very hard to reduce the amount of trash they generate at a burn, period. This is why people bring reusable cups and plates and silverware, etc. If you provide trash services, people will be more willing to bring trash - after all, it's easy to dispose of. And this violates the LNT principle.
(Also, despite having lived in Portland, Reno seems to be the worse city in my experience with people complaining about everything on Reddit.)
But as highlighted elsewhere, it's definitely more of a cultural problem than anything. It's always depressing just casually observing the amount of abandoned tents on the way out and the amount of litter either put in the wrong recycling bins or just discarded less than yards from them. And the problems isn't just the cost which could be spent on good causes - £750,000+ [0] but the accidental effect of say a cow eating a tent peg (it's a working farm).
As someone who litter picks and talks to litter picking groups it's definitely a big problem nationwide sadly.
Probably unsurprisngly this always seems to be much worse in the higher traffic areas with the main stages than it is in say the Green or Healing field areas though their might be demographic and contextual reasons for that also. I've not been to any of the other main UK festivals in a long time, e.g. Reading, V Festival etc. but I'm guessing they aren't going to be any better?
[0] - https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/whats-on/music-nightlife/glas...
Not just tents, but all sorts of camping gear, carts, clothes, food, gimmics, and so on. Many in good condition. Aside from the waste having to be cleared, it's very wasteful to throw away good stuff.
I am convinced this is a cultural problem indeed. Stuff like a tent or a gas-burner is cheap. Cheap compared to what it cost (in % of monthly income) decades ago, and cheap compared to the ticket and other spendings on that festival.
The cost of a tent (or the costs of some cans of food, some shirts, a funny hat, an inflatable flamingo, a chair) is nothing on the total bill of a festival. That new tent you bought, costs about as much as that beer you spilled when you bumped into that drunk dude.
So, purely economically, it makes sense to just leave it behind. Why carry your (now dirty) tent, food, cloths, etc home, when you can leave it, have a more pleasant return trip, and just buy new stuff next year.
I think this is a very good analogy for why we are unable to stop ruining the world in an ever increasing pace.
I once paid 40 euros to get back my 70 euro tent. If I had a 30 euro tent (the cheapest tent they sold), it wouldn't have made sense, economically.
It was that our economics are flawed.
In your example, the issue is quite clear: costs are externalized. The cost to remove your tent is externalized by the festival across all visitors: guest who clean up after themselves, pay for guests that pollute. via increased ticket costs.
And the costs of pollution, emissions, etc are not in the price of the tent, they are for a large part shifted to future generations and for a smaller part paid by Chinese and European tax payers, etc.
A "pure", "capitalist" economy would make the buyer of that tent pay for all of that. In which case a tent is so expensive, you'll gladly pay an extra €40. And in which case repairability durability or sustainability decrease the price: a throwaway will cost more in the shop than one that'll last decades.
It’s certainly worse than not having the event in the first place, but it is quite literally better about garbage than any large scale gathering on the planet. Burners do still need to be better about leaving their trash in Reno, but even with that it’s hard to see how it’s not monumentally better than virtually anything else.
Going back to the event itself, I attended Lightning in a Bottle once. I was absolutely disgusted at the end of it. Entire camps quite literally just left, abandoning everything. Brand new equipment and the boxes it was sold in just left for others to deal with. And not just isolated groups either, people had done this absolutely everywhere.
If you have a lot of trash, most economical option is often to go to the public transfer stations or landfills in the Reno area (but that only works if they are open).
Also, there are services on the side of the highway that accept trash for $N per bag. Only give your trash to someone if you can see the dumpster it’s going into and the dumpster is not full. There have been scams where people charged to accept trash and then just left it there to get blown around the desert. Alternatively, you could drive your trash all the way home and let your local utilities handle it. But when I’ve had my cargo trailer piled with leaking garbage bags I’ve wanted to get rid of it ASAP.
Overflowing private dumpsters, leaving garbage in the rental car, just leaving it in a heap somewhere, etc. The tell tale dust gives it away. The issue isn't people who stop by the Reno waste processing facility and pay for it to be tossed, it's the people who decide to dump in the city instead of in the desert.
1. Burners drop trash with people offering to dispose of it for $5 a bag or so, they end up dumping it somewhere else.
2. Burners drop trash at the major hotels and casinos, who buy dumpsters to attract the burners and then people from the local area toss the dumpsters scavaging for things.
3. The normal trash dumping issues Reno has are, for two weeks a year, blamed on burners instead of the locals. I seriously doubt trash bags full of baby diapers, mail and construction debris (all examples I see on the Reno subreddit every year) are from Burning Man.
There are already legit places in Gerlach, Reno, Lakeview and Ceaderville where you can dump trash and know its going to be disposed properly, but not everyone going is really hip to spotting the trash scams and all that.
Unfortunately all this mixes with the percentage of people going to Burning Man who don't dispose of their trash respectfully and it becomes a large, hard to quantify issue.