• motruck@lemmy.zip
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    9
    ·
    22 hours ago

    This is why history repeats itself. New generations grow up, just like you did, thinking all this shit has been this way forever and it is just how it is. It is hard as a human to get perspective around that. So the cycle continues.

  • minorkeys@sh.itjust.works
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    8
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    It is normal. Its just not entirely in alignment with biology. This entire system requires constant upkeep to compensate for that misalignment. I want to be on a beach eating fruit from the trees and fucking and dancing and signing all day. Unfortunately, I need to pay another human for the right to exist in whatever space I’m currently occupying so they don’t commit violence against me.

  • GhostFace@lemmy.today
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    51
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Say it louder please.

    There’s 8 billion people on this earth and the competition is getting really tiring. It’s not even merit based any more and I’m not sure when it last was.

        • Toga77@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          Wow.

          Back right up.

          All they said was humanity needed to be precious again.

          We never stopped being human, we did stop viewing each other as human in a lot of circumstances.

          Your instant move to “get rid of everyone” is a bit telling itself.

          There is more than enough to go around even now, stop letting billionaires convince you otherwise.

          • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
            Aquileo | link
            Aquileo | fedilink
            English
            Aquileo | arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            I knew very well it would be interpreted that way 😈

            Even better that I figured how to mitigate depreciation issues anyway.

            1: End the purely materialist/transactional society.

            2: Ironically, more local and less global communities.

            3: Less unplanned children pooped out.

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
            Aquileo | link
            Aquileo | fedilink
            Aquileo | arrow-up
            9
            Aquileo | arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            Humans aren’t precious because there’s like 8 billion of us. 300 years ago it was probably more like 600-700 million (highest estimates around a billion) and it took more humans to achieve less work.

            Under capitalism, more people means cheaper workforce because more competition between workers. Individual worker is valued less. Under communism you don’t put a dollar figure on a human the same way, but they’re still more expendable when you can just get another one to do the same job.

            I’m not advocating for mass genocide or eugenics, I’m just saying that’s how it is and we better get used to it. Things are precious when they’re scarce. We’re not scarce.

            • Toga77@lemmy.world
              Aquileo | link
              Aquileo | fedilink
              Aquileo | arrow-up
              3
              Aquileo | arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 day ago

              No one is forcing you to feel that humans are or are not precious and this argument is very troubling…

              If you cannot see why, please seek help.

              • Demdaru@lemmy.world
                Aquileo | link
                Aquileo | fedilink
                Aquileo | arrow-up
                1
                Aquileo | arrow-down
                1
                ·
                20 hours ago

                Dude gave arguments for the PoV he presented and all you give back is sentimental approach coupled with accusation xD

                Truth is, humanity always perceived value of other humans by the filter of what can they do. Capitalism, communism, no matter - it still holds it.

                Even in small communities a lazy, drunk neigbour is gonna be seen as barely worth anything coupled to industrious, hard working neighbour. We just are like this. All humans are innately egoistic to some degree and they perceive value of others through what they can gain from them.

                Few folk are empathetic enough to perceive every single person as precious, yet even they crumble in certain scenarios, mostly connected to estimating worth of people who inconvienience them and their family.

              • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                Aquileo | link
                Aquileo | fedilink
                Aquileo | arrow-up
                3
                Aquileo | arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                I thought we were talking about society, i.e a collection of 8 billion humans, and how it values each of those 8 billion humans, not me personally.

                • Toga77@lemmy.world
                  Aquileo | link
                  Aquileo | fedilink
                  Aquileo | arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Ahh, well maybe lead with this isn’t what I believe rather than a strong statement lol.

                  Anyways yes what you said is a correct assessment of where we are, but not where we have to be.

                  All I’m saying is society has devalued and dehumanized itself.

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your getting downvoted but at the core of it too many people want to occupy too little space.

          I personally think UBI should be applied selectively in order to make living in rural and semi rural areas more appealing and encourage people to retire early. Everyone wants to live where everything is and all the cool stuff happens but most of us are working too much and dont have enough money to do any of it.

          The idea of moving to a town of a few hundred people isnt very appealing unless you tell me that you can still get by without NEEDING to work.

  • Nobody@anarchist.nexus
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    English
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    51
    ·
    2 days ago

    We’re running hunter gatherer hardware with intense survival instincts designed to protect us from getting eaten by sabretooth tigers in the age of anxiety.

    • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      16
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      We pay in sabertooth tigers for sabertooth tigers, and hey, your sabertooth tiger boss would like to show you a sabertooth tiger, just scroll down on your mobile sabertooth tiger, skip a few sabertooth tigers, click the tiger, and then you should see a sabertooth tiger.

      And do not sleep. There are tigers.

      • PangurBan@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        6
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Tbh humans have it better now than ever before. Making claims of “normal” is pretty silly, lol. Long life spans aren’t normal. Retirement is not normal. Not living in fear of wild animals is not normal. Etc.

        But yes, things can be and therefore should be better. That’s the only real argument. Saying anything else just harms the cause.

        • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          5
          Aquileo | arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Of course retirement is normal, societies have taken care of the elderly and infirm, people with disabilities of any kind, children, and so on.

          Are you kidding?

  • Dewey McBrewster@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    30
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    27
    ·
    Aquileo | edit-2
    2 days ago

    I beg to differ.

    An anthropologist should know about food scarcity. For thousands of years the family unit, tribe or village was under extreme competition from neighboring people and animals for resources.

    There is a video from cameras on monkeys. They literally spend their whole day looking for food. Or in other words, every waking hour is spent in the pursuit of sustenance. Pre-tractor man was the same. Without modern capitalist agriculture you would be toiling on the farm tending to sheep, chickens, plowing fields, milking cows and all the myriad of tasks needed to fulfill the food groups you so nonchalantly stuff your face with. It be non-stop work for all the variety you currently take for granted.

    The world, with low life-expectancies, was hazardous with no medicines, protections from the weather or modern law. Which i think brings a bit of stress when a festering carbuncle could mean your death. But thanks to innovation, it can now be easily cured by companies who seek monetary reward. I’ll take this normal over the other one.

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      25
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’re severely underestimating the emiseration that happened under capitalism. Yes, peasant work is hard work. But living standards for the proletariat plummeted during the industrial revolution. Peasants didn’t have 14 hour shifts in the factories.

      And you conflate technological progress with capitalism.

      Also: if your environment can sustain a hunter-gatherer mode of production, you actually have quite a lot of leisure time.

    • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      40
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      You could have agriculture without modern capitalism.

      We have people who treat Eve online optimization like a full time job for example. If their needs were met, I think they’d work happily on optimizing tractor schedules and crop rotation plans

      I would probably do my job for free if I didn’t have to think about retirement and keeping my house and filling my belly. I just like what I do and I find it rewarding. The problem is still resource allocation.

      No, I don’t think centralizing power and central planning will solve this either, I’m just saying people will be productive even without money.

        • sunnie@slrpnk.net
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          English
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’ve learned that some people hate starting projects but really like taking something that’s already been planned out and working it out to completion.

          Made me feel better about getting my pleasure from planning and starting projects then losing interest once things started coming together.

    • bloogoose@lemmy.zip
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      34
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Buddy, I grew up in the south where most of our food came from a vegetable garden and canning. We cut firewood for heat and had water from a spring. I can tell you it absolutely does not take all the waking day to tend to all that.

      • Dewey McBrewster@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        14
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 days ago

        And did you tap latex trees for the rubber? Did you smelt ore for the metal? Did you buy the glass from a company that was used to can those vegetables or did you refine it yourself?

        No. The seeds came from a catalog. The hatchet to chop the wood from a store.

        Modern conveyance made it so you wouldn’t have to spend all day tending to survival. Yet the author seems to imply that life is harder now, than in the past.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      9
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Serfs also had to pay like 2/3 of their produce to their lords. When was the last time, humanity really had to struggle for food (and not because they had to enable a wasteful upper class)? Before we settled down, invented agriculture?

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        6
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The invention of agriculture didn’t end the struggle for food. Early agriculture was a much harder way of life than hunting and gathering at the time. The first agriculturist peoples were severely malnourished compared to their h-g neighbours. They had a very poor diet of limited variety, and a lot less available meat.

        Early agriculturists were also easy pickings for hunter gatherers to raid their food stores and plunder everything. Between the poor soil, poor variety of crops, poor nutrition and low protein, infestations of mould and vermin, and constant attacks by raiders, life for these folks was an extreme struggle.

        Looking at that situation, it should be a lot easier to see why agriculturalist societies soon developed militaries and became warlike. And why local lords demanding 2/3 of your produce was a fair trade for having a military that would drive its enemies hundreds of miles away from your farm.

      • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        5
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because that’s the foundation of a civilization? When humanity was able to produce more per farmer than they could eat is when society flourished the most. That allows other people to live off the farmer’s back and do other things. That might sound like they were taking advantage of them, but if Pythagoras and Archimedes and everyone else had to spent their days in the field, we wouldn’t have all that we do now. And I’m sure the farmers didn’t mind when those non-farmers came up with the tractor.

    • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      12
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nobody cares if you beg to differ if your examples are all about farming. Farming was historically a last resort when you couldn’t live off the land by foraging and hunting. It was more common in less fruitful locations. Read some anthropology before you speak on it. Or learn more about modern agriculture and how shitty its returns are for the investment. Which is unsurprising considering modern agriculture is just shoving 3-5 crops in a bunch of places where they don’t want to grow and praying there’s enough nitrogen in the soil this year.

      • Dewey McBrewster@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        2
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’ve read Wrangham, Haw, Girard, Fields and others, but for the sake of brevity I chose one of many facets.

        The author states that modern life is stressful and not normal. Personally i rather walk into an air-conditioned market than worry if my arrow hits home after sweating in ambush all day just to eat.

        I think it was more normal to work hard, experience competition, and feel stresses of survival for most of human kinds existence, and that only now in the last few hundred years have we had it truly easy, even with poor agricultural returns.

        • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          18
          Aquileo | arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Don’t know what to say! Branch out maybe.

          Of course you’d rather have an easy moment in time than a hard day. If your air conditioned trip to the market is preceded by ten hours combined time commuting to, from, and performing work then I think you just prefer being inside to out. Because that’s a long day for a hunter and not something they’d do five to seven days a week. For a lot of human history people had so much time on their hands that they would throw random festivals, make giant earthworks, form intricate gift giving rituals to keep up relations with faraway tribes. Not everyone, sure! But enough that you know about all of this.

          I’d rather gather berries for forty minutes! Or wade around on Californian shores trapping fish in the silty shallows. Or live in a world where we ate what we grew instead of feeding it to cattle or turning it into ethanol fuel. All of which are ways of life that have been practiced before, and ways of life that are perfectly possible, which begs the question, where on earth does the opposition to doing better come from? You’re not a fuckin monkey.

          • LwL@lemmy.world
            Aquileo | link
            Aquileo | fedilink
            Aquileo | arrow-up
            3
            Aquileo | arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            People still throw random festivals, make art and spend time interacting with others. I’d absolutely not rather spend 40 minutes gathering berries than work 40 hours a week if the latter means I have a heated home, modern amenities, a computer, no worries about having enough food, etc.

            Those things sometimes not being given even with more work is a fucking problem, especially since it’s only to make the rich richer, but gathering some food for yourself does not give you access to all the other things that other people made that you use daily.

    • untorquer@quokk.au
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Dr. Agro doesn’t reference ancient history. Her work centers contemporary cultures as well as those historically concurrent with capitalism. E.g. within those few hundred years.

    • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      3
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      1
      ·
      Aquileo | edit-2
      2 days ago

      monkeys. They literally spend their whole day looking for food

      Makes me a bit less proud to be their descendant. Why couldn’t we descend from the stately raven. Corvids consistently show that they have a lot of free time. Same with parrots.

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    English
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    10
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    Appeal to nature is not a valid argument.

    Can’t believe this stupid shit is being upvoted. We are perfectly capable of designing our own social structures using our brains.

    • Ecco the dolphin@lemmy.ml
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 days ago

      She’s an anthropologist, she’s referencing what was normal during much of human history/prehistory.

      Its worth pointing out it wasn’t always this way, its not inevitable. Its all optional. We designed these social structures with our brains.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        English
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        1
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        3
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Normal where? When? Surely every community in earth was not using the same social construct and survival strategy, no? She’s a shit anthropologist then.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        2
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        We didn’t design them though. They evolved. What people (economists and politicians) thought they were designing is not how things turned out. The end product was a result of social forces.

        Like a bunch of bees inside a beach ball, all flying in different directions: what happens to the beach ball?

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          English
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Wait, does it matter that they’re bees and not just flies? Are they stinging the inside of the ball or something? Wouldn’t the forces cancel out when flying? Can they have a dance-off to decide which direction to roll the ball by crawling?

            • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
              Aquileo | link
              Aquileo | fedilink
              English
              Aquileo | arrow-up
              1
              ·
              21 hours ago

              But if a bee is flying inside a ball and pushes against the side, what’s causing the ball to move relative to the earth? None of the wind can escape, it’s just air moving around inside the ball.

                • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
                  Aquileo | link
                  Aquileo | fedilink
                  English
                  Aquileo | arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  But the hamster is rolling the ball, not flying, so it can take advantage of friction with the ground times the normal force. If a flying bee hits the wall of the ball, then it’s pushing back on air and the net momentum of the ball and its contents is unchanged.

                  I think the ball filled with bees would just fall to the ground.

    • phil@lemmy.openitco.de
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I understand that “normal” is a confusing term by nature and isn’t the same as “natural”. The norm is pretty much what we can observe (plus bias), which might be natural or not (plus bias).

      Here, i suppose it’s just a shortest way of saying “I think it doesn’t have to be this way”.

    • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      The post appears to be an overall response to the idea that modern society as we know it is “just how it is.” The point isn’t “be like our ancient ancestors” so much as “the system we have now isn’t the only way things can be.” That is, we’ve all grown up in this society with the work grind as our default. Some people will defend the way things are on the basis of it being some aspect of “human nature” to always compete and work hard, but societies of the past survived through co-operation and sharing resources. It’s pretty much the opposite to what is expected today.

      What’s a valid argument in favor of today’s system? Wouldn’t that be a recency bias?

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        English
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        People generally like working i.e. creating stuff and even if we had all resources met I’d argue that majority of people will continue on creating. In fact the universal basic income experiments prove exactly that every time.

        • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Right. Working of our own volition, on projects of our choosing. Not high-pressure “grind” lifestyles that serve to enrich a small few while we overwork ourselves just to scrape by. I’d love to make art all day, for my own enjoyment. Not commissioned, not hired to do it, so not as “work.” The post isn’t about hobbies, though, it’s about being pressured into a stressful lifestyle.

  • Commiunism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    7
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    16
    ·
    Aquileo | edit-2
    2 days ago

    Saying how a system of production that the entire world had adopted for at least 100 years now and one that history was continuously progressing towards for a couple thousand years isn’t normal is a bit wild ngl. What is normal then, the previous mode of production which was feudalism? Primitive communism which wasn’t a thing in the majority of the world for thousands of years? Or is it some different ahistoric ideal that somehow is the normal despite never existing?

    Edit: Was made aware of this person’s website and holy fuck, not only do they have nothing of value to say (like the quote in the post) but they’re also one of those spiritual grifter types selling overpriced courses. Imagine falling for this crap

    • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      2
      ·
      23 hours ago

      a system of production that the entire world had adopted for at least 100 years now and one that history was continuously progressing towards for a couple thousand years isn’t normal is a bit wild ngl

      Was made aware of this person’s website and holy fuck, not only do they have nothing of value to say (like the quote in the post) but they’re also one of those spiritual grifter types selling overpriced courses

      So, what you’re saying is the system we’re progressing towards is, grifters selling overpriced shit?

      Look around. There’s a system of production and selling that overpriced shit in prices the system itself decides, not on actual value of it.

      It cares little about innovation and sustainability but a lot about shareholders value.

      It’s almost like we’re forced into it by people who colonized, slaved people off, genocided, and looted the world for thousand of years.

      Imagine falling for “this” crap

      • Commiunism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Normal =/= good, but merely the norm, what is usual or what is expected. At points in history, slavery and colonialism were the normal for powers who could afford it, doesn’t make it healthy or good - it just was. A mode of production that dominates the entire world and has done so for 100+ years is by definition the current normal, to say otherwise is absurd and leads to the conclusion that what’s normal doesn’t even exist (anymore), which doesn’t make any sense.

        There’s much better arguments one can make such as how capital is destructive, alienates people from species being, how it runs on worker exploitation (in a non-moral but materialist sense), how it’s irrational when it comes to organizing production (anarchy of markets where nothing is planned leading to tons of waste, inefficiency), etc.

        As for my edit, I’m not sure how you’ve read it as anything more than me attacking a leftoid grifter peddling nonsense that leftists vaguely agree with and making absolute bank by charging hundreds of dollars for it.