If nature wasnt so competitive and humans had an abundance of resources, would there even be war or racism?

If nature wasnt so competitive and humans had an abundance of resources, would there even be war or racism?

Other urls found in this thread:

jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html
atlasobscura.com/articles/the-doomed-mouse-utopia-that-inspired-the-rats-of-nimh
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Yeah

What is Chicago

What a stupid question.

If nature wasn't the way it is then everything about the world would be completely different to the point of being near impossible to imagine.

>resources are "abundant"
>population increases
>resources are not abundant anymore

You never read Sci Fi? Its called planet harvesting. All we need to do is find a way to easilly travel to a resource abundant Earth with relatively low fuel used for the expeditions and we could feed everyone with relatively no cost.

what is the entirety of sub-saharan africa

A land more fertile you will not find.

Maybe.
Chimpanzees do form groups and attack other groups en masse.

But if we had the resources and the technical prowess of things like google translate we might get along.

But religion and other cutural kinks add a bit of a wild card.
This has been the safest and most productive century in the history of the west.
Nuclear weapons and global organizations have rendered the old days of war obsolete.
Yet we still want to "win". Win against our allies by destroying trade and win against or enemies that don't have nukes by bombing them to smithereens. I think we just get bored, forget the horror of war, and strive to be heros when we done know what else to stand for.

No one going hungry isn't going to stop the mudslimes from trying to conquer the "infidels"

Yes, ethnocentrism is an evolutionary beneficial tool in a tribal context, necessary to secure scarce resources to strenghten the in-group, even when an out-group suffers from your actions.

The opposite is seen today in the West, where thanks to wealth the people have become complacent and apathetic. There is no need for fighting. The racism/ethnocentrism that still exists usually comes in form of instinctual drifts (among plebs) or, on an intellectual level, from predictions of the future and reflections on the past (the realisation that our current standards of living are not sustainable over the generations).
You could argue that, if resource scarcity stopped existing for thousands of generations, even instinctual ethnocentric thinking would disappear.

The point however is that we don't live in a world of abundance. We live in a limited space, with limited resources, with infinite wants and needs in a finite environment. And thus, if you care for your loved ones, racist thinking is necessary.

See this study on human cooperation strategies.
jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

There wouldn't be any humans if not for the nature being competitive. We out competed other suckers and now after we won, we can't seem to figure out what to do with it.

Yes. Absolutely yes. Definitely yes. Bet your last dollar on it yes.

>All we need to

My genetically engineered strain of citizens>your genetically engineered strain of citizens
Also muh god>your god
Now gib that planet or we have another interstellar war

You will always find a reason we will bash our heads in, but I believe it can be reduced to a really tiny amount if we dont have as many reasons for strive anymore as all basic necessities are quenched.

Humans are not competitive. One group farms the rest. All hard work gets you is a bad back.

yes

to add, I think it's an interesting paradox:
Ethnocentrism exists to obtain resources for your group and secure its survival, but once you obtain too much 'treasure' you become careless, lazy and altruistic to those who don't care for you.

Yes, people still have an innate urge to congregate around people with similar features.

No, but we would be a bunch of apemen that enever evolved.

Perharps we would still be unicellular organisms.

The resources wouldn't last forever, and some smart humans would start thinking about the future where the resources aren't abundant

...

atlasobscura.com/articles/the-doomed-mouse-utopia-that-inspired-the-rats-of-nimh

Is someone else bias to animals too?
Literally fell nothing when the slot died but pity when the bird died

Slow death by dozens of Lovecraftian horrors seems a lot worse than a big cat going for the throat. Makes sense to me

>If nature wasnt so competitive and humans had an abundance of resources
Humans would breed to larger numbers, until resources got scarce, leading to competition.
Ecology 101

You would still get more whites if you breed them white. Even if race mixing made black people come out Nordic, people would still stare at mixed couples.

When you can have mates with divine colors like yellow, blue, and white, and mating with such people creates children with the same colors but mixing with others creates brown, brown, black, choosing anything else just looks trashy.