Civilisations by definition plunder and exploit their natural habitat and are careless toward sustainability of the very environment their longterm survival depends upon.
On the other hand, "savages" (latin: people of the woods) live in harmony and balance as integral part of their worlds, making them ideal candidates for eon long existences and survival.
So, a more intriguing question is, would any of these "savagations" want anything at all to do with us? And would we not be morally obligated to respect their equilibrium ... including the idea that there are others beside them.
Since I posted that earlier article on the #StarTrek’s #PrimeDirective, my mind is turned toward how half-assed the idea really was.
Consider: Prime Directive exists because “we” don’t have the wisdom not to interfere with natural development of lesser cultures. Humble, but…
Assignment: Earth EXPLICTLY tells us that pre-warp humanity would be dead if more advanced aliens hadn’t come along and saved us.
Isn’t it good other races didn’t have the Prime Directive.
Shouldn’t we “pay it forward?”
Captain Picard did a wonderful job on #Arrakis at supporting a lawful coup while observing the #PrimeDirective, I must say.
Do you think sandstorms prevent him from being beamed up ?
🧵 ..personally, i celebrate an #Epicurean kind of #hedonist #PrimeDirective! 🖖
Y'all are welcome, in my #GardenOfJoy, as long as you're not carrying your burdens.
There's some terrifying sith going on, on this planet - you're not allowed to act upon it, in my Garden Of Joy!
I hesitate to compare my GoJ to Switzerland, because WE're more neutral then them! 😅 (there's no banks in my GoJ 🤣 everyone contributes, to their best ability) …¡BELTALOWDA! ✊