dunno munk, I suspect that there is only "risk" within the conditions of choice. There has been no chosing of evolutionary abberations, they (or we) are merely variations that succeeded in the circumstances in which we came into being. So, the concept of risk doesn't seem to apply, in my opinion, for there was no decision to evolve made.
You may or may not be accurate about group weltanschuung, the "hating of ourselves," but I don't agree with the concept. I think, if anything, there is a group lack of concern about the entirety of the planet, at least up until relatively recent years...the years of measurement and recording. I suspect primative peoples recorded "years when the deer were gone," or "year of the heavy snows," but neither of these were measurements inasmuch as they were records of events.
And the idea of "ruling the earth" is a very human (or self-aware) notion. Those species without an awareness of selves or consciousness have no concept of rule, just power and rights within their species or territories.
I agree that man will, in your idiom, attempt to put McDonald's on any planet we could colonize, but that is, if you will, the "nature" of our species, not the nature of Nature.
And I do not think of munk the killer, I think of munk, the complex man, who views and attempts to reconcile the world in all its behaviors, despite the pain it can cause, or the frustration as he works to integrate actions with concepts. Sensitivity and sensibility are pain-fraught attributes. Those who contend with them are heroic in the best sense of the concept.
Be well and safe.
DIJ, you only get water fer yer cacti if it is a funny post.
