The obvious counterargument is that this is not utilitarianism. True utilitarianism would account for the utility of preserving California’s wilderness for generations to come. The underlying critique there is that it is impossible to quantify the effects of any action in “utils”, because any single action can have an infinite number of side effects, which can all be valued differently by different people.

This reads more like a critique of traditional “hand of the market” capitalism, which actually is, by definition, unable to account for the long term effects of actions. The national park system is a perfect example of the government having to step in to prevent capitalism from sucking short term gains out of a long-term valuable system!

Expand full comment