263
Food is literally free (slrpnk.net)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml
77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://piefed.blahaj.zone/c/onehundredninetysix/p/449273/food-is-literally-rule

Food is literally rule

Edit: Could you please chill it with the taking everything so bloody seriously? It's low-hanging fruit leftist agitprop from c/196. It doesn't aim to be coherent with the very letter of Marx or whatever leftist group/cult-leader you prefer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 11 months ago (6 children)

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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 11 months ago (4 children)

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

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 11 months 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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)