The backlash against overtourism • Hacker News Board

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#111

Post by chasingthewind » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:00 PM UTC

jolesf wrote: post #3

“To be a mass tourist, for me, is to become a pure late-date American: alien, ignorant, greedy for something you cannot ever have, disappointed in a way you can never admit. It is to spoil, by way of sheer ontology, the very unspoiledness you are there to experience, It is to impose yourself on places that in all non-economic ways would be better, realer, without you. It is, in lines and gridlock and transaction afte…

I personally hate travel and can identify with some of what he expressed here, but at a deeper level this throbs with a kind of elitism that really bothers me. I imagine replacing the words "mass tourist" with "immigrant" and the sentence almost reads like one of today's despicable screeds against the "alien" invader. Is there even any possible solution to the "problem" of some people living in or near a place that others would wish to visit or even move to? What gives one set of people the right to live in/visit a place and denies others that same right? It's not an easy problem and a well crafted paragraph by a talented writer doesn't transform it into one.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#112

Post by okal » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:05 PM UTC

Namari wrote: post #106

okal wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't downvote the GP, but my impulse to disagree with population control is due to the likelihood that, in my experience, it's not the population groups that have the largest adverse impact on the planet (highly industrialised, middle to high income societies) that are generally the target of this sentiment.

Maybe but if you reduce the population from whatever group, there is less needs for everything and because everything is related it will an worldwide impact. Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5Gppi-O3a8 and you'll see that all is linked and the more we are the more we will consume this planet.

I know how the principle works. My comment is addressing the ethics of it. I'm expressing my belief that if we're to choose this path, as a species, we should prioritise reducing the population of societies with a large per capita footprint. That won't fly, because those are also the societies with the most firepower.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#113

Post by csomar » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:07 PM UTC

Fuxy wrote: post #14

I found the quote “tourists go home, refugees welcome” quite funny. So what their basically saying is they would rather kick out tourists that bring in and spend quite a lot of money effectively boosting the economy in favour of some refugees the government will have to spend a large amount of money on... and you wonder why the contry's economy is in such a bad shape when the citizens advocate shooting themselves in…

I don't think they mean it literally but it is rather an indirect "You are just as worse as the refugees if not worse".

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#114

Post by buboard » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:08 PM UTC

CodeSheikh wrote: post #103

I don't want to sound harsh but aren't some of those European countries struggling financially and tourism money is the least hectic way to bring in new revenues where it affects (positively) across the entire food-chain (from visa fees to airline tickets to food carts on the streets). Why such a backlash? It can be governed and moderated but blatantly discouraging tourism is not a solution.

Absolutely it is, more so for the poorer southern regions. But tourism is like a natural resource, it becomes a curse. Requiring mostly unskilled workers, it doesnt help diversification of the economy. Most of the tourist-based economies are in third world countries.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#115

Post by badminton1 » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:09 PM UTC

Tourism is the easiest way to become a 1% polluter.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#116

Post by grogenaut » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

This was one of the undertones of the Hyperion series. People from Rich planets setting gates to gorgeous poor ones and then slowly destroying the unique cultures shaped by totally different planets for their comfort. Also evil AI and man that guy hates the Catholic Church.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#117

Post by thinkingemote » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:13 PM UTC

Fuxy wrote: post #14

I found the quote “tourists go home, refugees welcome” quite funny. So what their basically saying is they would rather kick out tourists that bring in and spend quite a lot of money effectively boosting the economy in favour of some refugees the government will have to spend a large amount of money on... and you wonder why the contry's economy is in such a bad shape when the citizens advocate shooting themselves in…

To understand it better, there is a similarity in the USA. In San Francisco there are similar signs saying "tech workers out, refugees welcome!"

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#118

Post by andrepd » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

l_t wrote: post #18

esotericn wrote: post #4

Mass tourism is being treated as unique when really, we're discovering that everyone cannot have a "good" standard of living. We can't all go travelling, we won't fit in the same place and we'll boil the earth doing so. We can't all have a car because we'll boil the earth. If we develop EV's and don't boil the earth, they won't all fit downtown. We can't all live in the country, that's not sustainable either. We can'…

Well, we can certainly get better as a culture about promoting moderation and social consciousness over greed and winner-takes-all mentality. Competition will always exist, and we should accept that, but it's not a binary thing, it's a spectrum. I for one would be happy to see our society move to a less competitive, more collaborative mode.

You've summarized succinctly my position. I agree 100%.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#119

Post by tomp » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

robben1234 wrote: post #42

I won't argue about off topic issues, but I don't think mass tourism is killing any sights. Ignorance kills natural sights, over advertisement kills human created sights. Nearby Venice there's so much interesting stuff and small cities, a bit further are big cities. None of them really struggles with tourists as much as Venice. Maybe you'll see a huge line for Firenze Duomo but that's it, streets and other sights are…

Don't tell them!

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#120

Post by csomar » Tue, Oct 30, 2018, 5:22 PM UTC

Couldn't this be a failure from the European cities in question?

While European countries are on the top of the list, the cities? Not that much.

The first one is Bangkok. With around 22 million tourists. Paris is third with 18 million. Interestingly, Paris has more things to see, a more extensive metro system (actually waaa..y more extensive). Yet, I seem to be more bothered by tourists in Paris than in Bangkok.

In Bangkok, the tourism is spread around the city. There is the Sukhumvit line which is quite a lot of BTS stations. It is full of hotels but things are spread out. You do see lots of tourists but there doesn't seem to be a problem of tourists overcrowding as in Paris.

Paris has failed to grow outside of Paris 1-6. There isn't much space to build there, so things got messy. What Paris should have done is create a whole new region (regions?) for young tourists, couples, families, and old tourists. Each region is separate. They can be a bit far but not too far. Tourists traveling around will find their mates instead of stumbling on locals.

Other cities that adapted better to tourists: Dubai, Hong Kong, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur. All on the top list.