If conservation easements are so good, why are they referenced only with the euphemism, “ways to protect property and family farms from subdivisions and development, and conservation of water quality, wildlife, scenic views and a healthy environment”?

I’m slow to buy in to the fallacy of the commons. The three sharpest libertarians I know now advocate compensation for externalities and community-level visioning and governance. The staunchest property rights activist in Buncombe County wants to incorporate her environs now that a developer has clearcut a whole mountain for a subdivision.

The only people who seem to be capable of averting their eyes anymore are Ms. Clinton’s interns.