It has been noted that sharing and reciprocity [1] not only fosters equality (and the socialisation that comes from eating together) but also has implications for our understanding of how relationships work.
It is not easy for us in the 21st Century to visualise ourselves owning nothing, but your average hunter-gatherer would not have a problem with the line ‘imagine no possessions’, as John Lennon challenged us to do in his song ‘Imagine‘.
A major aspect of sharing is reciprocity. When I think of it I think of the modern term social capital.
Reciprocity among many hunter-gatherer tribes is not totally altruistic, and it is important to view its widespread existence in proper perspective. Indeed, it is broadly similar to insurance that we know in our modern world. While generosity is certainly motivation for giving, there is also the understanding and expectation that if I give when someone is in need, someone will give to me when I am in need [2]. This is expected in the sharing of resources.
The culture of some tribes, rather than sharing, involves borrowing which probably serves the same function as sharing. Once again there is expectation built into the exchange.
But the exchange/sharing/borrowing culture has more than economic advantages!
It has a significant social function too, and can be viewed as active promotion of harmony in the tribe. When behaviours have both economic and social purposes, they are very powerful in respect of engendering enduring relationships. These behaviours might be looking after resources that they have, and of the land, (that they occupy but don’t own) etc., and are more common among those who are in extended families than they are between strangers.
When I was reading about reciprocity in such contexts I was reminded of neuroscientist Dan Siegel’s term, mwe, which promotes the notion that humans are not me or we, but mwe! (Click on the link to find out more).
It is not all sweetness and light however.
There is also negative reciprocity, where someone tries to get something without giving anything back. Many observers have suggested that this happens more with strangers than with relatives or members of the tribe.
Contrast how different sharing is to accumulating, storing and then transporting food and items necessary to live. Firstly there is the necessary social interaction not to mention the responsibility of doing your bit properly. And of course, there is a lot less work in it too!
I find it fascinating how sharing and reciprocity has evolved over many hundreds of generations to boss and paid labourer – wage giver and wage earner. While reciprocity exists (I give my time and expertise to make profit for you and you give me money); sharing is not exactly high on the agenda – in most for-profit employments anyway.
[1]. Reciprocity is a cultural norm where it is expected that we give back what we receive.
[2]. Many contemplative orders of nuns, brothers and priests are self-sufficient but if they have a bad year, crops failing etc. they ring a bell so that the townspeople will come to their aid – bringing food.