• UnicodeHamSic [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, not to be glib. It does look like we are functionally then same as our recent ancestors. Like, hundred thousand years ago on the plains of Africa the homo-sapians there would be indistinguishable from any person off the street today after a wash and shave.

    • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      It's not a question of of similarity in terms of how we look, or our intelligence. It's a question of whether "human nature" is an immutable thing that exists. Marxists say that it doesn't, it's merely a consequence of material conditions, and that changing material conditions would change what people call human nature

      • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, we do have some nature. It just isn't as pronounced as people like to talk about. And it specifically isn't what capitalism calls it.

      • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, that wasn't invented till like the 1600s. There were signs of extensive and complicated trade networks as far back into prehistory as we can look. They simply didn't form the moral basis of society like we see in capitalism

        • duderium [he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          And if capitalism had a beginning, that would mean that it could also have an end?