Question

According to the text, compared with larger societies-particularly modern societies, such as the United States-most hunting and gathering groups were: egalitarian brutish nasty authoritarian

Answer 1

Most of the hunting and gathering groups were egalitarian when compared with larger societies-particularly modern societies,such as the United States.Hunting groups didn't have any kind of system ruling.They all were in the opinion that every human being has a right to live with freedom and not with restrictions or ruling.

• Egalitarian:This is the correct option as hunting and gathering groups were egalitarian when compared to modern societies.As hunting and gathering groups had no commanding administration appointed among themselves.They all had cooperation and coordination in protecting their rights and freedom.They dint require any ruling system or government inorder to protect their rights as there was equal distribution of rights and freedom among the groups.There was no dissimilarity between hunting people as everyone were given equal right to enjoy their freedom.In hunting and gathering groups,no person was given power to control activities of the group.Therefore,hunting and gathering groups were egalitarian as they managed on their own to enjoy all the rights and freedom to maintain equality among them.
• Brutish:This is not a correct option as hunting and gathering groups were not brutish.Brutish is a quality were people tend to behave cruelly and cause harm to other creatures.But hunting and gathering groups weren't brutish as they won't cause any harm to other creatures for no reason.Even if they killed animals,it was for the purpose of not starving.It was only for the purpose of solving hunger problems.They only kill a person if they feel that the person is dangerous.Hunting and gathering groups never followed or encouraged violence.Unlike modern societies they never practised wars,etc.Therefore,brutish is incorrect option and hunting-gathering groups were not brutish.
• Nasty:Hunting and gathering groups were not nasty.Usually,nasty people irritate and disturb other people.But hunting groups were never nasty as they never ever disturbed other groups. In spite of being part of United States,hunting groups lived in forests and never disturbed by entering into the modern societies or localities of US.These groups lived their own life and never behaved nastily by messing up lives of other groups.Therefore,hunting and gathering groups weren't nasty and this is not the correct option.
• Authoritarian:Even this is not the correct option,as hunting groups never supported authoritarian society.A society is said to be authoritarian when all the people encourage and assign power to few members so that they will make sure that all the rights and rules are delivered equally to the people.This authority even restricts few activities of people.Hunting and gathering groups is not an authoritarian society as they have no administration or ruling party which orders and controls their activities.These groups have enough understanding among themselves and never needed an authority.All the people of hunting-gathering groups have freedom to the fullest and no other person restricts or controls them.Therefore,hunting and gathering groups weren't authoritarian and is not the correct option.

Hence.hunting and gathering groups were mostly egalitarian as they managed to utilise and enjoy their rights and freedom on their own.Even equality among those people prevailed.So,these groups are more of egalitarian when compared to large and modern societies such as United States.