• Bluewing@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      17 小时前

      Surveyor stakes are the equivalent to peeing on a tree these days.

      And at our core for millions of years we have been pack animals like the wolf or lion or sheep. Lemmy is filled with packs and tribes that will defend their “territory” by expulsion anyone that disagrees with the pack strongly enough. Just as humans have done for those same millions of years.

      • F_State@midwest.socialEnglish
        1·
        10 小时前

        I read a study that showed that behavior varies by sex. Women are more likely to exclude an individual from a group while men are more likely to accept almost anyone into the group but just force the ones they view as undesirable to the bottom of the social hierarchy

  • itsaphoque@moist.catsweat.com
    13114·
    3 天前

    “Sorry sir, we have to deport you back to your impoverished, war-torn country, because wolves pee on trees”.

    Very compelling.

  • too_high_for_this@lemmy.worldEnglish
    806·
    2 天前

    I know it’s just a shitpost but it’s so fucking stupid.

    It’s comparing a home to a country. Like arguing “If you’re so against borders, I’ll just come into your house at any time.” No, fuckface, there’s a difference between personal space and (what should be) public land.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      43·
      2 天前

      Walled towns/cities used to be common. In some contexts, it makes more sense than walled countries.

      People build structures to form their communities. Not everyone from outside the community can be trusted to respect the integrity those structures, especially when a rival community builds an army or if there are roaming bands of raiders or whatever. In those situations, a walled town becomes necessary for the common defense, provides a refuge for the surrounding villagers, and overall just makes it a lot easier for people to protect themselves.

      Not only that, it’s just much more practical materially. It’s easier to build and man a wall one mile in circumference than it is to build one 500 miles long with no closure.

      In the modern context, walled towns aren’t really as necessary as they were in say medieval times when basically any land outside a fiefdom was more or less unpatrolled and most places didn’t have a unified body-politic maintaining civic order.

      However, as society breaks down, communities polarize, extremists turn to political violence, and law enforcement agencies no longer feel obligated to protect people, a time may come again when building a wall around your town or neighborhood and controlling access points may become useful. Especially in say a post-apocalyptic scenario where there’s a complete breakdown of society and you can no longer trust that the people in the next town over or the trailer park beyond that aren’t gonna bring violence to your door.

      Of course now there’s aerial technology which can defeat the purpose of a wall, but it might at least keep Johnny Redneck with his extra big-ass truck and AR-15 out of your town. And nets and things might snare drones before they can detonate…

      • too_high_for_this@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        2 天前

        What are you even talking about? Geopolitical borders are not the same as walls, towns are not countries, and we’re not in medieval times or the apocalypse.

  • SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.mlEnglish
    9110·
    3 天前

    The modern notion of nation States, with clearly defined borders, and mechanisms of violence to enforce them, only arose around the 17th century.

    Wolves don’t build border walls, have customs checkpoints, or leave refugees to drown in the Mediterranean.

    This isn’t a “science meme”, it’s a falacious attempt to cloak reactionary rhetoric in the aesthetic garb of scientific rigor.

    • stickly@lemmy.worldEnglish
      142·
      2 天前

      Only a half truth. Borders may have been loosely defined but they were absolutely defended with violence. You couldn’t wander in and hunt in your neighbors woods, take their timber or set up a farm too close. Hell, sometimes they even had well defined natural borders or walls (see: Hadrian’s wall, the great wall of China)

      Moving through an area in large numbers might draw a violent response and you might be coerced to leave if you spoke the wrong language or dressed the wrong way. If you were an unknown group of strangers they may well let your boat sink or leave you to starve outside their walls. Modern states have simply codified these reactions into law.

      Proto-states and the associated mechanisms developed extremely quickly once sedentary agriculture became dominant. If your entire livelihood is tied to a field of grain you no longer get to run or hide from conflict; controlling who can and can’t get near it becomes imperative.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        16 小时前

        But you absolutely could just move in to some village in Africa or North America or even some city in Mesopotamia or India for a very long time. At least according to The Dawn of Everything

      • SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.mlEnglish
        55·
        2 天前

        Only a half truth. Borders may have been loosely defined but they were absolutely defended with violence.

        Yes, but the means by which that state violence was organized and carried out often looked very different. Obviously there was some sort of distinction between medieval lordships or what have you, but the organizational form of the modern nation state wasn’t codified until the Treaty of Westphalia, which ended the 30 years war. This was co-constitutive with the enclosure of common land, and the birth of modern capitalist property relations.

        But the nitty gritty details are besides the point. The main thing I’m stating in my comment is that OP is making a falacious appeal to nature. As though a dog pissing on a rock somewhere says anything at all about how humans should conduct border policy.

  • stray@pawb.socialEnglish
    495·
    2 天前

    They overlap significantly. In addition to what’s seen in the image, the wolves’ territories will move around due to various conditions. There are no fixed lines that could be likened to states’ borders, only vague areas that can be likened to respecting personal space. Compare the wolves’ ranges with the white line indicating the national park border also seen in the image, which does not move around based on vibes.

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.worldEnglish
    191·
    2 天前

    It really bothers me when people use “fear” and “respect” interchangeably. This borders on that.

  • Capable_Coping@piefed.socialEnglish
    422·
    3 天前

    The top quote is refering to borders as a state construction. Nobody denies the existence of boundaries between things in general

    • Draconic NEO@mander.xyzEnglish
      1·
      22 小时前

      I feel like OP is trying to use science to justify the current militarized borders and state appointed violence against the people who cross them. It’s a terrible comparison because natural territory boundaries are nothing like that. No creature in the animal kingdom has crap like I.C.E. and Border Patrol.

    • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.worldEnglish
      133·
      3 天前

      those wolves don’t cross borders those because they already have what they need, and avoid upsetting their neighbors. not because the other wolf built a fance and has an army that will kill him, and is forced to live in his territory and pay taxes so his territory can be protected ny an army that will kill any wolves that enter without permission.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      15 小时前

      Humans, seemingly uniquely among animals, reinvent and reimagine our political lives constantly. We see no evidence that chimpanzees have revolutions or that wolves will try a different model of organization or negotiation. What we observe from H. sapiens is just this. From the beginning of history both written and oral, we have been reevaluating and altering the ways in which we live.

      • dragnucs@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        2 天前

        The generally and predictably do not like borders and keep crossing them. You know, passwports in modern society.

  • fckreddit@lemmy.mlEnglish
    4·
    2 天前

    Maybe a different interpretation is that “We may belong to a land but the lands don’t belong to us.”