Comparing small closely related groups with a modern nation is preposterous.
Nor were these societies diverse. They were largely homogeneous and or closely related. They also had low capital requirements, since they weren't conducting research, inventing technology, building centers of learning, etc. etc.
Singing Kumbaya around a campfire in a primitive hunter/gatherer/light agriculture society is one thing. Building a modern nation is quite different.
Tweezing out a few sparse examples of primitive people or other small societies behavior (which is open to interpretation and bias of the observer), and then extrapolating that it must be the default setting for all humans is nuts, when the overwhelming evidence of recorded history points to different conclusion.
Comparing small closely related groups with a modern nation is preposterous.
Nor were these societies diverse. They were largely homogeneous and or closely related. They also had low capital requirements, since they weren't conducting research, inventing technology, building centers of learning, etc. etc.
Singing Kumbaya around a campfire in a primitive hunter/gatherer/light agriculture society is one thing. Building a modern nation is quite different.
Tweezing out a few sparse examples of primitive people or other small societies behavior (which is open to interpretation and bias of the observer), and then extrapolating that it must be the default setting for all humans is nuts, when the overwhelming evidence of recorded history points to different conclusion.
We have warehouses full of human bones and skulls going back thousands of years around the world in various universities, etc.
The wounds and cuts on the bones and skulls speak to quite a differing view of the true nature of humanity.