this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2025
25 points (100.0% liked)

World News

895 readers
357 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person, don't post hate.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

People with close to zero techology about to die out.

No? Really?

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

They've been a healthy part of their ecosystem for probably centuries, if not waaay longer. Now it's their fault that other peoples use their "technology" to destroy that ecosystem?

[–] lath@piefed.social 4 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Sadly, the reason our ancestors thrived is because they spread out and took over their environments instead of being in peaceful cohabitation with it. Adaptation is survival, in most cases.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The mere existence of these peoples is a counterexample to your claim. Hunter-gatherer tribes are part of a well functioning eco-system. It depends on your definition of "thriving", but those peoples survived without "modern technology". That means they must have done something right. They did adapt to their environments very well. Now, an outside agitator (so-called "civilization") is destroying their home ecosystem.

The whole notion of "stages of development" and hunter-gatherer peoples being less "advanced" is a racist story, Europe-ns told themselves to jpstify exploiting and enslaving indigenous peoples.

[–] lath@piefed.social 1 points 20 minutes ago (1 children)

Disagree. Mass extinctions have always been a part of history and always due to an environmental disaster. Humanity itself was at risk a couple of times, but technology and a whole lot of luck are what saved it.

Living in balance with nature isn't what determines your survival, but the ability and luck to overcome a calamity completely disrupting that balance.

It has little to do with racism and a lot to do with progress. Self-sufficiency even in the darkest of times.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 1 points 7 minutes ago

You seem to ignore the fact that this current calamity is completely due to the "civilized" part of society.

Living in balance with nature isn't what determines your survival

That's literally what "survival of the fittest" means. You're contradicting Charles Darwin now.

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 4 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

It's almost as if industrial activities are causing environmental stresses which are happening so fast that many species are struggling to adapt, and that those who are most responsible are the most shielded from the effects... Weird huh.

I really hate this "survival of the fittest" lens people are so quickly to jump to in their ignorance; it's so divorced from reality that it's cruel and absurd.

The "WE DOMINATED NATURE BECAUSE WE'RE BIG BAD ~~ALPHA MALES~~ APEX PREDATORS WHO WIN!" mentality is pathetically misinformed to a nearly pathological point.

[–] lath@piefed.social 1 points 15 minutes ago

That's not what this is. Survival isn't at all about that. It's about clawing your way out of disaster in any way possible. This is a complete disaster, for them and for us. We're not shielded at all, but our progress has allowed us to delay feeling the effects, for better and worse. It will also give us better chances to survive it, if possible.

Make no mistake, a collapse is coming to all of us. And survivors will do anything to live beyond it.