266
Food is literally free
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2025
266 points (92.1% liked)
Antiwork
9555 readers
1 users here now
-
We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.
-
We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.
Partnerships:
- Matrix/Element chatroom
- Discord (channel: #antiwork)
- IRC: #antiwork on IRCNow.org (i.e., connect to ircs://irc.ircnow.org and
/join #antiwork) - Your facebook group link here
- Your x link here
- lemmy.ca/c/antiwork
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
No one is asking for complete transition to hunting and gathering.
๐๐ปโโ๏ธ
Ok. This person is.
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.
Only if society allows private ownership of the means of production. Collective ownership is a thing.
That's not true. Land can be held in the commons.
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.
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.
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.
Why? Historically, cultural norms were established to keep the peace.
The historical context today is different, though. Land is way easier to defend than back when raiding pastoralist tribes could ransack the place.
That's an unsubstantiated claim that is wrong afaik.
And Bonobos don't. Cherry-picking species is not a generisable argument.
Hunter-gatherers don't really have that concept of land.
Look at how Guyausa sales is managed.