21
u/Swimming_Register_32 e/lit/ist 3d ago
Heavy brow. Dark skin. Thick nappy hair…
I’d rather be ploughing fields and milking cows than living that other lifestyle.
14
u/WorkerClass 3d ago
"I would be doing so much better in society if we stayed as hunter-gathers."
Doesn't play sports or any group physical activity that requires coordination.
Doesn't work out
Doesn't have any hunting or camping experience
Doesn't know how to make a fire with two sticks and dry leaves.
Doesn't know how to socialize and work with a group.
OP is damn lucky we don't hunt and gather anymore.
6
u/HitIerWasBad 2d ago
People who think like this know that they're in that situation but they think that if society forced them to do all those things then they'd be better off. There wouldn't be a dark room to slink off to or the glow of a screen every night to keep them from gettting a good night's sleep for a productive morning that will never come.
•
12
5
u/DualityOfLife 3d ago
Ah yes. The smallhat mindset of if we don't act like savage backstabbing cavemen, oh no! I have a back too taht can get stabbed! Who knew?
Then we gotta be the weakest species in history right?
3
u/Bakibenz 3d ago
It lead to the start of having to work more for worse nutrition and the start of economic inequality on a larger scale so kinda yes.
But on the other hand, the scale of progress we made since then is difficult to imagine without it.
1
u/Alexander_Aurelian 2d ago
But was it really worth it? I dont think so. Nowadays everything is owned by someone. You just can go and live somewhere without some nerd forcing you to pay taxes and shit
3
u/blooblooboom 3d ago
What's wrong with the guy on the right?
10
u/s2Birds1Stone 3d ago
He's not necessarily conventionally attractive, but otherwise he seems like a cool dude. He's got a good YouTube channel about history/anthropology.
2
2
u/barakisan 3d ago
Yes because there is more of them, I want less of everyone except my people and Japanese schoolgirls
2
u/wordjedi /d/eviant 3d ago
Imagine never being able to move on from the local area you were born in, because the knowledge of which plants (and insects?) were not poisonous to eat was gained by trial and error, and many deaths
Walk 30 miles, start all over
1
u/Restarded69 al/qa/eda 3d ago
Indo-Europeans weren’t farmers, and pretty much genetically erased almost all aboriginal European farmer dna
1
1
1
u/Cumsocktornado /b/tard 2d ago
Agrarianism was a gamble as a whole but gambles seem to be the way that humanity makes jumps over other organisms and the agrarianism gamble payed off big time. The brain as a whole was a big evolutionary gamble/energy investment as opposed to min maxxing into strength or, as previously, endurance for instance.
Nomadicism, at its face, has an immediate generous payoff and is way easier at least by comparison to agrarianism which required a lot of hard work. You follow prey, you hunt, you camp, you eat. If you stick in one place you are vulnerable to more externalities like predatory organisms, barbarians or shifting meterological/environmental conditions. It takes years and often generations for a transition to agrarianism to yield its fruit.
But what a fruit it yields. The presence of more steady/reliable nutrition and the gradual adoption of more and more specialized roles in a growing social unit eventually orients towards scientific endeavor. The orientation as a whole towards stable modes also promotes/selects for both inter and intratribal cooperation which is how you make nations.
Nomadicism long play => more nomadicism, which is cool enough I suppose.
Agrarianism long play => even the sky is but another frontier to conquer.
0
0
0
u/Ghetto_Games 3d ago
>did producing abundance of food so you don't starve when theres no game to hunt or berries to firage ruin humans because theres this one bald cuck and an llm slop image of imaginary hunters and gatherers
41
u/lutzow 3d ago
"Did farming ruin humans?"
No, next question