4 ms·

The book "The Dawn of Everything" by Graeber and Wengrow touches on this: the anthropological record suggests that even people from very long times ago (even be

The book "The Dawn of Everything" by Graeber and Wengrow touches on this: the anthropological record suggests that even people from very long times ago (even before we observe the first "big" civilizations) have moved and migrated all the time. The system we have now where nation states guarding their borders by tracking their citizen's movements is, regarding the entirety of human history, a strange and absurd anomaly. The book suggests that humanity has always relied on three substansive aspects of freedom which we've lost over the years in place of formal freedoms imposed by liberalism: - The freedom to move away or relocate from one's surroundings - The freedom to ignore or disobey commands issued by others - The freedom to shape entirely new social realities, or shift back and forth between different ones. I highly recommend reading the book if you have any interest on this.

JoeAltmaier 5y ago
Seems questionable. Those nomadic tribes of yore may have found the next ecosystem over was already inhabited. Aggression and territorialism has also been around a very long time.
- mc32 5y ago
  And... population densities in pre-antiquity was very low in great areas allowing this free roaming, as you said, if there was already and established population and a new one tried squeezing in, it very likely would end up in confrontation, if they were unrelated. But people keep on romanticizing pastoralism and nomadic life.
  - cyber_kinetist 5y ago
    Many of the people who are fleeing to find a better life (whether it be prehistoric or modern) aren't doing it because of "romantic pastoralism", a lot of it is to flee from existing oppressive relationships and create new better ones (war, conflict, drought, abusive families). Don't you think that core tenet of freedom isn't worth pursuing? The book is definitely not romanticizing nomadic life, it says that the movement of persons have been one of the defining aspects of human life (given a plethora of anthropological records) that we have gradually lost due to the rise of modern states, the tracking of individual citizens and their movements, and strict management of borders.
    - mc32 5y ago
      People didn't move as individuals without group protection. Historically you typically moved with the group/tribe. Historically one did not leave the group to escape things that have modern definitions but did not historically. Historically there was outcasting, banishing, exiling etc., which was a punishment knowing those people would be in a precarious position to survive outside the tribe.
Georgelemental 5y ago
Humans have been moving around since forever. Peaceful coexistence with the people who were there before? Not so much, the archeological record generals tends more to the "pile of smashed skulls" end of the scale

JoeAltmaier 5y ago

Seems questionable. Those nomadic tribes of yore may have found the next ecosystem over was already inhabited. Aggression and territorialism has also been around a very long time.

mc32 5y ago
And... population densities in pre-antiquity was very low in great areas allowing this free roaming, as you said, if there was already and established population and a new one tried squeezing in, it very likely would end up in confrontation, if they were unrelated. But people keep on romanticizing pastoralism and nomadic life.
- cyber_kinetist 5y ago
  Many of the people who are fleeing to find a better life (whether it be prehistoric or modern) aren't doing it because of "romantic pastoralism", a lot of it is to flee from existing oppressive relationships and create new better ones (war, conflict, drought, abusive families). Don't you think that core tenet of freedom isn't worth pursuing? The book is definitely not romanticizing nomadic life, it says that the movement of persons have been one of the defining aspects of human life (given a plethora of anthropological records) that we have gradually lost due to the rise of modern states, the tracking of individual citizens and their movements, and strict management of borders.
  - mc32 5y ago
    People didn't move as individuals without group protection. Historically you typically moved with the group/tribe. Historically one did not leave the group to escape things that have modern definitions but did not historically. Historically there was outcasting, banishing, exiling etc., which was a punishment knowing those people would be in a precarious position to survive outside the tribe.

Georgelemental 5y ago

Humans have been moving around since forever. Peaceful coexistence with the people who were there before? Not so much, the archeological record generals tends more to the "pile of smashed skulls" end of the scale