Were hunter gatherers just constantly hungry and starving? How did they not go insane?

Were hunter gatherers just constantly hungry and starving? How did they not go insane?

If I don't have 3 meals a day I'm a wreck

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What makes you think that they were?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Graincels can only cope.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    psy op to make u accept your current living conditions?

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they had metabolic flexibility and their fat stores weren't full of toxic shit

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You're just a pussy

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's more famine in Agricultural societies than Hunter-Gatherer societies.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    before civilization, the population of wild animals was much higher. Every forest looked like nature reserves now, with endless hordes of animals. There was plenty of meat and people did keep some reserves.

    In a sense, people lived on easy mode.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >In a sense, people lived on easy mode
      So why did people make civilizations then?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It was more stable

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >It was more stable
          ??? That doesn't make sense at all. Easier life would mean a more stable system.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Typically easy is not always easy.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        for 100 000 years they didn't, until a critical mass/threshold was reached (quite recently) where farming was actually worth the upfront cost

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Beer

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Because they had to as the population increased/

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >It was more stable
        ??? That doesn't make sense at all. Easier life would mean a more stable system.

        for 100 000 years they didn't, until a critical mass/threshold was reached (quite recently) where farming was actually worth the upfront cost

        They killed all the animals
        The reason Australia is a desert is because the ancestral Abbos showed up and burned everything down with fires as part of their hunting methods

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          The notion that Australia is a desert primarily due to fires set by Indigenous Australians is a misconception. Australia's arid and semi-arid conditions are largely due to its geographical location, climate, and natural weather patterns. The continent has vast desert regions primarily because of its position under the subtropical high-pressure belt, which results in low rainfall.

          However, Indigenous Australians have practiced fire management, known as "fire-stick farming" or cultural burning, for tens of thousands of years. These controlled burns were used to manage the landscape, encourage the growth of certain plants, and reduce the risk of larger, uncontrolled wildfires. While these practices have influenced the vegetation and ecosystems in various ways, they did not turn Australia into a desert. Instead, they played a role in shaping the biodiversity and ecological health of the landscape.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Because the fallen angels wanted to mate with human women, so they deviced a plan to share the knowledge of civilization to degrade people into accepting their leadership, and the leadership of their Nephilim offspring.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >people lived on easy mode.
      Lol
      Lmao
      Yeah I guess that's why so millions of White settlers abandon civilization and went full Dances With Wolves.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ben Franklin used to complain that the settlers are notoriously running away to live with the natives but the natives aren't willingly joining the civilization.
        Mind you that this "civilization" didn't have running water yet.
        anyway, we had to settle down and start farming/husbandry only when we killed majority of wild animals in specific regions.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        They did. A LOT.

        In America, Africa, and even Australia. Hunting & Gathering is legit. You’re poor, but it’s not a bad thing per se.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Hunter gatherers that were starving would not be able to hunt effectively or withstand exposure and fatigue during the long migrations. Hunter gatherers were taller because they had more protein in their diet and because their children would simply die rather than grow up stunted, if they were stricken with famine.

      Populations grew to fit the resources available, there would be more mouths to feed and overhunting.

      >In a sense, people lived on easy mode
      So why did people make civilizations then?

      Beer

      Because grain provided an enormous amount of calories, populations grew and soon there were full time farmers living in one place, they could support specialized artisans and also it became apparent if they cooperated on projects like irrigation canals they'd all benefit, and systems developed to arrange this.

      Further, a hierarchy developed when populations exploded. It is one thing to be the elder of a village of about 100, it is another when there are 1000 such villages and towns with populations in the 1000s. Groups will form and raise militias to defend their right to land, their commanders in turn will negotiate with each other and select a figurehead. In the towns will be armies of potters, basket weavers and so on and the temple with all its stored jars of pig fat and meticulous records of whomst owns what and whomst made a deal with whomst to secure cooperation in economic activities. Then you have civilization.

      It was great if you were middle class or up.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >before civilization, the population of wild animals was much higher.

      Yes and no. In the U.S. today there are FAR more deer then when Columbus arrived, as the predators have been eliminated and farm country is the perfect habitat for deer.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >before civilization, the population of wild animals was much higher. Every forest looked like nature reserves now, with endless hordes of animals. There was plenty of meat and people did keep some reserves.
      Elephants used to outnumber Sub-Saharan's

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there are still tribes in africa and other places that live like this im sure you can find a documentary if you are actually interested in how they lived but i doubt you are, you just want to shitpost and shit up the board. kys

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They weren't b***hmade like you

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You know, you got your foods that last a while in storage: nuts, berries, roots etc. that covers most of your day to day, and every now and then throw in some meat.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      What did they eat during winter?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Were hunter gatherers just constantly hungry and starving?

        No, they were pretty decently fed.
        The Pleistocene Ice Age Caveman world held abundance we're unfamiliar with: despite the cold climate temperatures and weather were more stable with less seasonal extremes so wild vegetation grew in abundance, large herds of herbivores (antelope, caribou, etc) and shellfish existed in seemingly inexhaustible quantity, and competition was relatively non-existent (with a few exceptions).

        >What did they eat during winter?

        Caribou. During fall Caribou would, very predictably, (and still do) migrate in the literal millions. Caveman would account for this and set up ambushes by lakes, cliffs, rivers, etc.. So they could drive hundreds and thousands of the animals into falls or bodies of water before pelting them with spears and stones - there's lake beds across Germany and Quebec where the bottom is just nothing but Caribou bones. These large en masse kills would hold them over for the winter and spring.

        >In a sense, people lived on easy mode
        So why did people make civilizations then?

        >So why did people make civilizations then?

        See:

        It was more stable

        for 100 000 years they didn't, until a critical mass/threshold was reached (quite recently) where farming was actually worth the upfront cost

        https://i.imgur.com/2NPWqDq.jpeg

        Hunter gatherers that were starving would not be able to hunt effectively or withstand exposure and fatigue during the long migrations. Hunter gatherers were taller because they had more protein in their diet and because their children would simply die rather than grow up stunted, if they were stricken with famine.

        Populations grew to fit the resources available, there would be more mouths to feed and overhunting.

        [...]
        [...]
        Because grain provided an enormous amount of calories, populations grew and soon there were full time farmers living in one place, they could support specialized artisans and also it became apparent if they cooperated on projects like irrigation canals they'd all benefit, and systems developed to arrange this.

        Further, a hierarchy developed when populations exploded. It is one thing to be the elder of a village of about 100, it is another when there are 1000 such villages and towns with populations in the 1000s. Groups will form and raise militias to defend their right to land, their commanders in turn will negotiate with each other and select a figurehead. In the towns will be armies of potters, basket weavers and so on and the temple with all its stored jars of pig fat and meticulous records of whomst owns what and whomst made a deal with whomst to secure cooperation in economic activities. Then you have civilization.

        It was great if you were middle class or up.

        Beer

        It was a combination of population reaching a certain density, the unique sedentary stability provided by agriculture was appealing, and agricultural communities would quickly become centers of caveman wealth (dried grains & flour could be exchanged for pelts, coral, seashells, etc).
        Keep in mind it also didn't happen overnight: cavemen were 'casually' growing seasonal gardens they would plant and forget about of beans/legumes, squash, edible weeds & grasses, for at least 35,000 years.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm those days, food gathering took up the vast majority of one's time.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >If I don't have 3 meals a day I'm a wreck
    Fat c**t

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Hunter Gather life is feast-famine. When it’s good, it’s paradise. When it’s bad, it’s a fricking nightmare.

    Farmers eat shittier food and less in general, but it’s more stable than hunting & gathering.

    Farming also feeds more people (albeit shitty quality). So the few who aren’t farmers can devote themselves to a craft.

  13. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Basically, I learned this from zeitgeist 3 zeitgest harder

    Your body works optimally when hungry

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It varied across the world and across time but hunter gatherers lived great during times of plenty but often went hungry and struggled when times were lean. Some tribes throughout the world would expect to go mostly hungry for weeks on end each year during particularly harsh seasons like late winter. these patterns were typically seasonal but random climatic shifts could make the ecological systems these people relied on unstable, a light winter could lead to little snowmelt which could choke rivers they relied on for fish, a short summer could impact the health of an entire cohort of ungulate offspring so the next few years would see less animals for the people to hunt, stuff like that. agriculture was MORE predictable than the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, even if not entirely reliable itself, and more importantly it let human populations grow far in excess of the regional carrying capacity, this basically guaranteed agriculturalists outcompeted the hunter-gatherers.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *