According to Paul Shepard, unfreedom began much earlier, in the period when sedentarisation in the form of land cultivation replaced hunter-gatherer societies. Much like forcing peasants into industrial production, land owners forced free hunter-gatherer cultures into agriculture. Therefore, I think, workers could not become free either, as their labour had already itself been born out of non-freedom.

Not only an abstract Mother Earth is the victim of this psychic deformation, but all wild things. It is significant that farmers and city dwellers do not study and speculate about wild animals and "think" them in their poetic mysteries and complex behaviours. With civilisation, usually less than twenty species of plants and animals were cared for, tended, protected, planted, cultivated, fertilised, harvested, cured, stored and distributed in a village. Sacrifices and other ceremonial activities were restricted accordingly. Even the gradual expansion of agriculture to include many more kinds of organisms was nowhere near the rich cosmos of the hunter.

The farmer and his village brethren took on a leadership task in the production, storage and distribution of food, which weighed heavily on them for the same reason that all leaders strain their nerves and glands: Responsibility in a situation of certain failure - if not this year, then next year or the year after. Being held responsible for things beyond their control is especially crushing for children, for whom the world can become hopelessly chaotic. In caring for goats or doing other chores, they, like the adults who managed the domesticated community, were at the mercy of the weather, scavengers, pests and the demons of the earth and air. Pest infestations and withering were inevitable, bringing not only food shortages but emotional attacks as well. The sentence is guilt, and the punishment is lack.

Agriculture can be seen as an early form of accounting within which harvests had to be weighed, measured, counted and stored for distribution and therefore conditioned land ownership - i.e. sedentarism.
Every form of wealth and poverty arose from land cultivation, which in turn enabled the construction and establishment of cities. City life is a direct descendant effect of agriculture. Politics is also, in my understanding.
The social product is the result of this lifestyle.
People who grow up within sedentary civilisations, and especially in cities, are deprived of the possibility of maturity and remain in childlike mentalities. The complete separation of human nature from animal nature - that is, the rejection of the contradictions of natural existence - has produced a humanity obsessed with world-saving and doomsday scenarios.

For ten millennia there were organised aggressions against hunters who themselves had no tradition of war or organised armies. The psychology of such attacks probably arose from the inherent territoriality of agriculture and the exclusionary attitude of peasants towards outsiders, the land hunger that resulted from the decline in the fertility of fields and the increase in human density, and, with the rise of "archaic advanced civilisations", "the social pathologies related to group stress and insecurity in an economy of monocultures (e.g. cereals, goats), and the loss of autonomy in the pyramidisation of power". The hunter-gatherers were the victims of these pressures exerted on farmers and pastoralists and reinforced bureaucratically at the levels of government.

The old idea that agriculture favours more security, longer life and higher productivity is not always true. For example, Marek Zvelebjt writes in the 1986 Scjentific American: "Hunting and gathering is often seen as a precursor to agriculture. A reassessment suggests that it was a parallel development, as productive in some areas as early agriculture. As for modern agriculture, C. Dean Freudenberger says: "Agriculture, which is closely linked to global deforestation by making room for expanding cropping systems, is the most environmentally damaging activity perpetuated by the human species."

Although I find such books recommendable, it is probably again something that can be misconstrued to want to save the world or destroy it (the two being close together and hard to separate). One encounters paradoxes and ambiguities everywhere and this is reflected in the current cacophony of human thought in "social media".

The privileged young adult demands veganism and a stop to all harmful industry, a stop to mass land management, a stop to poisoning the environment, a stop to overpopulation and the like. He wants no cars and roads, no mass air transport, he wants "nature reserves" to remain protected, so no access for himself. Which is probably his biggest mistake, because isolation from the natural habitat, with wild plants and animals endangering his life, would at the same time be his liberation from the fear of becoming a victim of the wild. Man is meant to be a victim of the wild, to be eaten just as he also eats and feeds on the organism of the great whole.

Of course, I am only saying this from a theoretical point of view, since I myself am a child of civilisation and later of the big city. The loneliness you also talked about and sense of loss is something I think many people share and I felt something deep when I read in Shepard about where that might come from.

Here is the book:
https://ia803207.us.archive.org/4/items/ShepardNatureAndMadness/Shepard%20-%20Nature%20and%20Madness.pdf

I re-translated the above citations after I translated them into German. So you may find some discrepancies if you bother to read.

Lately you did not react to my comments, .... you still talking to me?