Would the world be better or worse off if...?

Question

everyone continued to live tribally. Much like the native americans (north and south), africans and parts of asia before they were occupied and technology started to flourish. That's not to say all technology would be gone (native americans did have irrigation systems etc.)

I see many pros and cons.

Pros - Less war. Respect for nature. No more overpopulation (due to lack of modern medicine, but as a bonus over several thousands of years the human race becomes stronger on whole as only the strongest survive). Ignorance is bliss, simple things in life would bring happiness. Very little greed, and rules were decided by elder councils (usually).

Cons - Isolation. No common languages. Early death. Lack of control of our environment in a lot of cases so less security.

Errr I think you guys are assuming that I would enjoy living like this. It's just a question. What do you think about it. I didn't once say I would prefer a world like this, was just trying to gather an opinion.

Answer 1

your question is interesting to ponder ---
if the world were to regress to a tribal state of being I don't think we would be better off... populations would reduce to a sustainable level with the technologies available ---
ignorant, illiterate people would be manipulated by appeals to the strains of intolerance and fanaticism that are part and parcel of every insular society ---
greed and injustice would still proliferate ---
just examine the past --- the only difference is today we are more efficient

Answer 2

Better off. If we had continued to live tribally, we would still have developed technology, but it would have been more respectful of our environment. The native Americans developed a way to communicate with other tribes through sign language. Women were treated as equals in many tribal systems. They had herbal remedies which didn't have all the side effects that modern medicine has. Modern medicine was created through the greed of men who wanted to control others. Native Americans traveled, communicated with other cultures. The insanity of our weather today proves that we can't, or won't control the weather for the benefit of all.

Answer 3

You have some of your pros and cons mixed up.

Pros

Actually there would be more war. In most tribal societies, the tribes are always at war with their neighbors over territory and resources.

All societies had natural medicines and they developed over time. Overpopulation would actually be controlled by wars and the ability of the tribe to support the children. It is true though that only the strong would survive. There would be less diseases because many have been caused or spread through anti-social behavior.

Cons

Early death may actually be people living longer because there would be less disease.

Environment would be better controlled because everyone would be dependent on the environment for survival. Most tribal societies believed the land was their lifesource (mother) and protected it as such.

I agree people and the world were better off in those times.

Answer 4

You're confusing technological advancement with social structure.

We have no common language now -- there are still thousands of languages spoken around the world.

As for early death and other medical issues, that's independent of social structure -- it's based on lifestyle and known medical science.

Tribal social structure means small communities, leadership truly with consent of the governed (and no having to wait until someone's term is over) and a collective agreement to work for the good of the community. It's actually a form of communism, where most resources are owned by and shared by the community.

Technology itself isn't the problem. It's the fact that people have abdicated responsibility for their own lives.

Answer 5

And how about medical services? By the way, who told you, that tribes had less wars? On the contrary - they had more. In the modern world it'll be impossible for this type of society to survive. Remaining tribes in Africa, South America, Northern parts of Russia and Canada don't live, they barely survive. Hunger, almost no education, health problems, in some cases tribal wars and much more. Doesn't look to me, that this's a good living, imho.

Answer 6

Your Utopia is flawed.
The Native Americans where not peace loving hippies enjoying the wilderness. They where usually in some form of conflict or another. Even today certain tribes won't talk to each other. So no. I am not ready to give up AC, computers, cars, processed food, and everything else we take for granted so we can be happy

Answer 7

Less War? I don't think so. It is in the nature of people and animals to fight. Tribes would fight other tribes. There is no end to war for any means.

Respect for nature? not necessaily, there would be some tribe trying to kill out plants and animals in other tribes territory.

No more overpopulation that is questionalbe (they would have 15 kids or more each)

I could go on and on, you need to read more about natives.

Answer 8

How do you figure there would be no more overpopulation? There would be no protection to prevent this. Also 1/4 of people would have Sexually transmitted diseases or aids. Do you think they were happy sitting in their tents smelling like rotten eggs? I think we take for granted technology but we should appreciate the fact that we dont live like that. If we lived like that you definatly wouldnt be on Yahoo Answers. Think about it.

Answer 9

I like your idea but I don't think it would work unless the population was much less.

Answer 10

There is not enough self control in this world to live that way anymore. Some countries, maybe... but in America, you would hear way too much bickering at the idea. I like your thinking though...