Can totally see how some people who think everything is fair game from nature and people who cultivated land and raised livestock would end up in conflict.

Yeah, I think one of the major conflicts that humanity has gone through is the conflict between the hunter-gatherers and the farmers. Obviously the farmers won, and now we have the concept of land ownership and everything that comes from that, but it was a conflict I wasn't very aware of and that I don't see discussed much.

Instead we invented the concept of owning nature from the farmers, and now that the world has been claimed, everyone born after T0 is just a renter.

Not sure which side I should be rooting for, but at least hunter-gatherers didn't try to own the land.

Also if anyone wants to say "if it wasn't for the farmers, you wouldn't be here right now," to me, that's not quite the boon you might be imagining. I'm actually perfectly fine with not having existed if it meant that nature wasn't ravaged.

To be fair, from what we see hunter gatherers also made continual "war" on each other through raiding and battles. North American tribes on the whole had a mix of trading and ritualized warfare for centuries before Europeans were involved. And they burned often huge tracts of forest to manage grazing lands. And overhunted and overfished and then moved on to new areas.

Its just that population densities were on the whole lower. And there was a lot of land and resources to live from. So the impact was lessened.

But even then, there were in fact tribal groupings that effectively wiped out other tribal groupings.

Also it's becoming clearer and clearer that the line between settled agrarian and hunter gatherer was a lot less clear than we initially imagined. There were all sorts of grain and maize growing societies that continued to rely on deer and fish for their protein sources and trade in skins etc for hundreds of years after they started tending crops.