Umm, you don't have to time travel to see see back breaking farm work, finding people with measeles, children working, or being mauled a by bear.
this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2026
468 points (97.4% liked)
Comic Strips
21210 readers
3582 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"If traveling to non-touristic locations in second and third world countries was available."
I hear the Appalachians are beautiful this time of year.
People don't get that we can have healthier more natural food, access to nature, and still live in and industrial society.
The other points tho. Valid.
What, measles is more healthy than not? It is deadly, even after you get over it, it cancels your immune system learning up until you got measles.
Measles is the actual opposite of healthy.
No I'm agreeing with the satirical point not the literal one present lol. Measles is a disease lmfao ofc it's shit. And those kids are suffering
If we ever develop Time Travel and time travel tourism we'd have a load of people going back in time and screaming that it's "woke" because it doesn't match their exact idea of the past.
The opposite is also true; ancient Greece now has a cultural reputation for being very progressive when it comes to homosexuality, but... If you actually read the kinds of things Ancient Greeks say about it... I mean sure, they mention gay a lot more, but there's a lot of making fun of gayness.
Imagine going back in time to touristically "immerse" yourself in the "progressive" ancient Greeks, and all you find are rich people and states owning slaves and everyone making fun of gay people.
I mean, if we developed it tomorrow, sure.
I don't know how, but I still have hope that at some point in the future, the majority of people aren't idiots. And then we manage to get it to stay that way.
There are two constants in life; idiots and death.
The last panel has a point though.
We have literally lost our connection to nature to the point we are actively destroying our ability to survive on this planet as a species for ephemeral, arbitrary gain for a few elite individuals and the majority of people see no problems with it.
The biggest mistake man ever made was to believe ourselves to be above nature, that it is something to which we were divinely given ownership over, to be used and discarded as we saw fit, instead of something we are intrinsically part of.
Humans are above nature in many very real and very tangible ways, and have been since the invention of fire or clothing or farming or any number of other things. It is not a mistake to believe that.
The mistake is in believing that the foundation doesn't matter because you're above it.
We are above nature like an anteater that can destroy an entire ant nest is above nature. Except we do it at a scale that the rest of nature can not replenish itself. But it is our nature. Unfortunately.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Are we though? You might think we conquered it, but time had proven natural and physical phenomena can out power us. Just look into the future, anything can happen, including human extinction.
Fire wasn't invented. Ants can and do farm. You are not above or more worthy than any animal, and you should acknowledge that.
Fire was invented -- just because it existed before humans harnessed does not mean harnessing it was not an invention, just like how hammer-shaped rocks existing doesn't invalidate the invention of hammers, or the Sun doing nuclear fusion doesn't invalidate the invention of the fusion reactor. Ants and bees absolutely suck at farming compared to humans. Both me and you are way above and better than every animal, and you should acknowledge that.
I invite you to present actual arguments instead of what are basically just tired catchphrases.
On what grounds do you think that ants suck at farming? They are able to sustain large communities without causing ecological catastrophes. (of course, size is a factor in this specific aspect)
And, intelligence or skill doesn't make any animal species better than others. You are an animal, deal with it.
On what grounds do you think that ants suck at farming?
For example on the metric of how much of their populace has to be farming to sustain the colony. For modern industrialized humans it's some single-digit percentage, while for ants it's probably something like 50%-80% (with the rest of the ants doing nursing).
And, intelligence or skill doesn't make any animal species better than others. You are an animal, deal with it.
Having the intelligence and capability to rise above nature like humans have done is precisely what makes one animal species better than others. The fact that all current humans are animals was never in dispute -- though as far as I'm concerned, being human is not contingent upon being an animal.
I presume, based on prior experience, that the fixation of humans not being better/more worthy/above other animals stems from some kind of anarchist opposition to any and all hierarchies, and so I feel like I need to clarify: being above the natural world does not absolve humans of responsibility to it nor is it a carte blanche to treat lower animals however we desire. Quite the contrary. A lion is incapable of considering the ethical implications of eating meat, so we can hardly fault it for running down a gazelle, forcing it down and then slowly killing it over several minutes before eating it. Humans are capable of that, so we can fault humans for factory farming meat.
Saying we're above nature sounds like we're better than it/better without it (which some people seem to think but please, let's not give that idea more traction by declaring it a fact).
I think it's more like humans are trying to separate themselves from nature.
This is just semantics, but I mean... nature isn't good. Nature is really terrible, actually. It's an endless cycle of violence, death and entropy that has killed literally all of our ancestors and will kill us just as quickly if we give it the chance (to paraphrase one of my favourite games, The Talos Principle II). Being better than nature is an ideal anyone who isn't some kind of insane social darwinist should strive for.
While I'm pretty sure I wholly agree with the sentiment of the majority of people saying it, I resent this "man is part of nature" argument because at face value it romanticizes suffering. Nature is dying by 40 if you're lucky, and by 5 if you're not. It's your entire tribe starving to death because a volcano you didn't even know about erupted on the other side of the world. It's being killed or enslaved by another tribe's raiding party because they want something you have (you may argue that this is human action, not nature, but chimps go to war and chimps are animals in nature, ergo war is part of nature). I am glad to be above a lot of that, and I hope future humans can be even further removed from it.
Of course what most people mean when they say that humans aren't (or shouldn't be) above nature is just that they think we should stop destroying the planet in the various completely unnecessary ways we do, and that if we don't it'll bite us in the ass, and I fully agree with that. I just don't vibe with the way it's phrased.
Chimps don't have buttons that can annihilate entire cities at once. They don't go out their way to spends years, decades, centuries to develop items and techniques to inflict the maximum amount of pain onto another chimp.
Yeah and crows don't have electric drills yet they are still capable of tool use. What is your point?
That we (as a species, not inviduals) totally do outdo chimps, or any other animal species, in cruelty. In my mind, the peak of cruelty isn't mindlessly tearing someone apart maenad-style, but instead calmly designing and building and using instruments for the sole purpose of being cruel.
Mostly no disagreement there, though I want to say that chimps do not go to war out of cruelty. Chimps go to war because they live in scarcity and it increases the war gene's odds of survival.
In the past this was also the primary reason humans went to war. In modern times we have invented many new reasons, but usually even those do not boil down to simple cruelty (though there's many cases in history where one could argue cruelty was the primary motivation). Usually war wields cruelty as an instrument, not the other way around.
plus we get a lot of health issues by the loss of the microbiota we used to cultivate from closer contact with nature
Yeah, what we're doing now is exactly because we detached outself from the nature, which makes us couldn't see how the change of the natural environment would affect our own survival. We're literally blind by our own power.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I would love to visit revolutionary Catalonia, just to witness its glory before it was stamped out by the cold boot of fascism
*betrayed by the USSR and then taken over by fascists
Yes it was sad that the Republicans did what they did yet still they were the only people whom the anarchists could have worked with
You definitely fit the theme of this meme
It wasn't perfect by any means and the quality of life in modern day Vietnam far outpases it, still there's a certain beauty that can't be understated of the most successful anarchist experement
The scenery in Vietnam is very beautiful
Calling it successful is quite a stretch. If anything, it's can accurately be categorized as a failure.
I didn't say it was successful only that it was the most successful :c (there haven't been any successful modern anarchist experiments)
Almost a political compass... almost....
If they had someone visitng the french revolution talking about how awesome it is we'd have one for each quadrant and the antivaxxer can go as a centrist panel
Is THAT why they call gay men "bears"? I always thought it was just because they were hairy....
No, it's just hairy + fat = bear.
No, it's because their noses are their penises.
No, it's just beary + hat = Cher
No, it's just hairy + fat = bear.