• eleitl@lemmy.zip
    75·
    17 days ago

    Sustainable population of hunter-gatherers for this planet is just a few millions.

      • eleitl@lemmy.zip
        67·
        17 days ago

        As soon as you add agriculture you’ll get land ownership and conflict. Food stops being free, if you take it, you’ll get killed.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.netOP
          92·
          17 days ago

          As soon as you add agriculture you’ll get land ownership

          That’s not true. Land can be held in the commons.

          • onnekas@sopuli.xyz
            63·
            17 days ago

            Sure, but even if the land is held by the commons someone has to do the actual farming, someone has to bring that food to you , someone has to build the road and the truck that makes this even possible, someone needs to feed you with a spoon because you don’t want to work.

            Congratulations in this scenario lots of people need to work, except for you.

            • Prunebutt@slrpnk.netOP
              71·
              17 days ago

              I think there’s a mismatch of definitions here: The original post probably means “wage labour” when they wrote “work”. It’s in the second paragraph.

          • eleitl@lemmy.zip
            44·
            17 days ago

            This assumes unversal jurisdictions. This is not what happenes when hunter-gatherers and even nomadic pastoralists attempt to use the agricultural land, which can be in the commons, according to the local agricultural society. Problem is, the others don’t see it that way.

            This is for the sake of argument. In practice, all animals are territorial, and chimpansee societies go to war with each other over territory. So you will get hunter-gatherers attacking other tribes, for access to prime territory.

            • Prunebutt@slrpnk.netOP
              42·
              17 days ago

              This assumes unversal jurisdictions.

              Why? Historically, cultural norms were established to keep the peace.

              This is not what happenes when hunter-gatherers and even nomadic pastoralists attempt to use the agricultural land, which can be in the commons, according to the local agricultural society. Problem is, the others don’t see it that way.

              The historical context today is different, though. Land is way easier to defend than back when raiding pastoralist tribes could ransack the place.

              In practice, all animals are territorial

              That’s an unsubstantiated claim that is wrong afaik.

              and chimpansee societies go to war with each other

              And Bonobos don’t. Cherry-picking species is not a generisable argument.

              So you will get hunter-gatherers attacking other tribes, for access to prime territory.

              Hunter-gatherers don’t really have that concept of land.

        • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
          81·
          17 days ago

          Only if society allows private ownership of the means of production. Collective ownership is a thing.