Cate3.SV@Xerox.ARPA (07/27/85)
From: Cate3.SV@Xerox.ARPA
John f. Hardesty writes:
"As to a technologically advanced race subjugating
another race, technology is no indication of socio-political
advacements. As to wondering where this can be seen, just read your
history books... The Europeans over the native americans empires of
the 1400-1500`s . The Europeans were considered the most advanced of
the time and yet they enslaved the Aztecs and Incan people..."
Isn't the level of technology a race has limited by the ethics of
the people? For example if it were generaly accepted as being ok to
steal and rob, then the average man can not invest his time an energy in
inventing new technologies, or even maintain current technology once it
gets very advance. It being much easier to destroy items of high
technology.
The Europeans were technologically more advanced than the rest of
the world in the 1400's, but their attitudes had to change before they
could continue to develop. The type of conduct displayed in America
would not be condoned today.
The problems of today, for example racism, through bad, are an
improvment over a hundred years ago. The almost primitive attitudes of
judging a man by the color of his skin is a immaturity which a more
advanced race could not afford to carry. To maintain a high technology
you need to use the potential of each man.
I tend to think that any technologically advanced race with our
kind of individual mode of operation must have a fairly strong sense of
ethics. Now the good old hive-mind race might mistreat the natives, but
once communication is established it could be shown that trade was more
profitable than conquest.
Also there maybe criminal individuals, but these are the exceptions
in any society.
Henry III cate3.sv@Xerox.arpa