this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2026
286 points (97.7% liked)

Political Memes

12214 readers
1153 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I believe the scientific consensus among historical anthropologists is, and I quote in an Australian accent for some reason:

"we're a right bunch of dickheads we sure are, ain't we"

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Actually, it's the exact opposite.

Humans are a communal species who, if not for the arbitrary social institutions which sprang up within the last 5000 years of humanity's 120000 years on this planet that incentivize us to go against our nature, have an unending capacity for empathy and solidarity. If we didn't, we never would have formed communities to begin with.

Read Graeber.

[–] baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

homo sapiens genocided our competitors

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We also intermingled and incorporated them into our society in equal capacity. Anyone with a nut allergy has genes that were associated with neanderthals. All humans of non-African descent contain 1-2% neanderthal DNA in their genome. It's just a coincidence that we outbreed them to the point they, over the course of millennia, faded as modern homo sapien became the dominant species.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The DNA presence only confirms that there was interbreeding happening, not what kind of conditions they were happening under. Knowing what I know about our species, especially from the early days, IMO its equally likely that we intermingled via war/conquest (in the form it would have existed for hunter/gatherer societies) and incorporated via slavery. My guess is that history contains examples of both (peaceful and violent exchanges) for each of Neanderthal, homo erectus, and Denisovians, plus maybe others that history isn't as aware of, depending on how diverse hominids got before homo sapiens got settled in everywhere.

Our species is capable of the full spectrum from good to evil and even today we have a large amount of psychopaths in leadership positions.

Though we are the first species to be aware that other species have gone extinct and wonder how much of that was directly because of us. And it's not like any homo sapiens that exist today have any responsibility for what happened to species that went extinct before recorded history began anywhere on this planet.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Slavery wasn't really a thing in pre historic Hunter gatherer society:

"Somewhat more convincing are statistical surveys of large numbers of societies that show that slavery is rare among hunter-gatherers, is sometimes present in incipient agricultural societies, and then becomes common among societies with more advanced agriculture. Up to this point slavery seems to increase with increasing social and economic complexity."

Source

Which makes sense, the benefit of slavery is that the master can expropriate all the surplus a person can generate, but hunter gatherers don't really generate surplus. Combine this with the difficulty of keeping someone against there will without a state and people specialized in violence to keep them in line and slavery isn't really that viable.

In general hunter gatherer tribes were anarchic as consensus and social cohesion were necessary both to make sure you don't starve and to be able to fight off other tribes

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, I don't think they would have been like modern slaves but more like bully/bullied relationships where those at the bottom aren't forced to do labour but get targetted for various forms of abuse, including sexual, which would have sometimes resulted in a child.

They probably wouldn't be abused by everyone in the group. Other apes like chimps show sympathy to individuals that get picked on by more dominant individuals, so I'd expect some of us were like that back then, too. But other apes also demonstrate that some individuals can just be assholes or otherwise decent but can get in bad moods.

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago

That is not a question we have an actual answer to yet though. So any strong claim like that is based entirely on your own personal opinions, not facts.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

We also genocided ourselves in prehistory

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thank you for pointing to Graeber. "Dawn of Everything" was such a good book, it really changed my view on humanity.

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Even primitive folks have weapons and combat injuries appear in ancient archeological records too.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They also have plenty of archeological evidence of taking care of the sick or elderly even when doing so would be a resource drain, which means they cared enough about the sanctity of life to help someone who was I need even if it was not mutually beneficial to do so.

I never said conflict doesn't happen.

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They still are today. I thought you wanted to make the point of the people from the past being fundamentally different/pure.

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No, I was objecting to the misanthropic point that "humans are inherently bad".

This quote from Graeber said it best.

We are projects of collective self-creation. What if we approached human history that way? What if we treat people, from the beginning, as imaginative, intelligent, playful creatures who deserve to be understood as such? What if, instead of telling a story about how our species fell from some idyllic state of equality, we ask how we came to be trapped in such tight conceptual shackles that we can no longer even imagine the possibility of reinventing ourselves?

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 0 points 2 weeks ago

... Had to read that last sentence thrice. Thought it said trapped in tight shackles of inequality, instead of what it actually says.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Prior to those institutions, right around the birth of agriculture, 90% of men were killed. There are massive pits of Neolithic people murdered in this war.