On the centenary of the Bolshevik coup, a writer published a first book titled People of Red Darkness, intended as a textbook on leftist ideologies. The author later admitted the hope was naive, realizing that six years of evolving social projections would require pages of new views every couple of weeks. The author notes how food norms shifted drastically, with meat considered a crime, a world where a mix of wheat and insects is modern, and where owning a dog or cat can qualify someone as a parent.
The scene here remains calm. In Poland, discussions about gender, sexuality, and power play out in culture and theater, with figures pushing controversial images and provocative performances. Movements within the left hue toward new forms of expression, but the core tensions show signs of conservatism rather than radical change.
It’s getting worse on the left
In the global left, the mainstream has moved so far that people living far from metropolitan centers struggle to relate. Some thinkers challenge agriculture itself as a human misstep, suggesting the pursuit of crops and animal husbandry may have been a mistake of history. They argue that cities and centralized authority were not inevitable products of progress and that human communities can subsist without them. The long work of scholars questions the traditional view of farming as a necessary stage of civilization and offers a critique of the patterns that farming created, including social hierarchies and elite dominance.
Let’s collect acorns, let’s hunt crickets!
These debates mix archaeological discoveries with skeptical conclusions about farming. Some scholars show that settlements from five to ten thousand years ago reveal that early societies sometimes rejected farming because it introduced new social hierarchies and the accumulation of power by bureaucrats, priests, and rulers. Drawing from those analyses, farming and the so‑called Neolithic Revolution are presented as one possible path among others, not humanity’s exclusive destiny. Proponents describe hunter gatherer life as potentially more balanced, with more time for rest and leisure once basic needs are met.
This is terrible farming!
The critique extends beyond humans to the land itself. The new leftist currents argue that agriculture reforms landscapes, concentrates populations, and increases carbon emissions while encouraging an exploitation of natural resources. Agriculture is said to feed property regimes and empower states, creating fragile grain‑based economies that suffer under pressure from population growth and inevitable ecological stress.
Within this frame, the rise of grain kingdoms is seen as inherently fragile, constantly on the edge of collapse when many humans, domestic animals, and parasites gather. Other voices in different histories argue that agricultural societies once existed but were abandoned out of fear of despotism, suggesting that early communities sometimes chose nonagricultural paths to avoid concentrated power.
When will this get into politics?
The condemnation of agriculture has yet to yield a concrete political program aimed at ending farming altogether. While vegetarian substitutes gain traction, opponents of grain have not fully translated their visions into policy. Yet there are signs of experimentation, including the exploration of alternative protein sources such as insect-based products. The question remains whether future ideologies will retreat to a more primitive lifestyle or pursue new forms of sustenance that blend tradition with innovation. In any case, the potential shift underscores how quickly environmental and ethical concerns can reshape everyday life, from diet to how communities organize themselves. The possibility of a new Stone Age or a reimagined way of living lingers in the imagination of many, suggesting that preparedness and practical skills may once again come into play.