In an echo of what X used to be, back when it was called Twitter and we had things like main characters and discourse about stuff other than Elon Musk's contentious changes to the site, the platform this weekend was consumed with an argument about whether "hiking is bad."

The "main character" of this latest round of hot take debate is a poster from Quebec, who argued the following:

Émilie's argument draws on a robust body of scholarship about the history of capitalism. Some scholars connect the development of National Parks to the development of urban and industrial spaces: By preserving nature in one place, people gave themselves permission to destroy it in other places.

However, centering ideas of labor and time use, Émilie goes a step further and argues that the distinction between "leisure" and "work" is essential to capitalism, and so the idea of "leisure" itself is toxic.

This idea is backed up by history, according to some, including influential historian William Cronon. In societies before capitalist modernity, the line between work and play was more blurred than it is today.

People didn't even have precise ways of measuring and dividing up their time (no watches, no clocks) so the idea of "working" some hours and being "off the clock" at other hours would have made no sense. The modern categories of "personal" and "professional" life were invented in the 18th and 19th centuries as industrial capitalism developed.

Of course, this is an active and nuanced debate in various historical fields. It can't be summarized in 280 characters and turned into a series of pithy slogans, but that didn't stop people online from trying. Many clapped back at Émilie, arguing that they (as indigenous people) loved to hike and that they needed to go touch grass.

Some also argued that the tweet couldn't be serious, and had to be some kind of trollish engagement bait.

Of course, touching grass itself could be adding to capitalism's conceptual arsenal.