"Do it my way or die" is what it's all about. However nobody likes it when it's applied to them.
"No ray of sunshine is ever lost, but the green which it awakes into existence needs time to sprout, and it is not always granted to the sower to see the harvest. All work that is worth anything is done in faith." - Albert Schweitzer
All people want the same thing, at a basic level - to survive, thrive, be fulfilled and happy. Every culture will have somewhat different ways to go about this. If a certain group wants to maintain the 'old ways' (and I do understand there are serious reasons to want this), and if they find themselves unable to do so, I don't know why anyone else should be responsible for subsidizing that activity. The Alaskan wilderness is still what it was - it would still be possible to live in the old style, the question is is it worth it or not, and that can only be answered by the people considering it.
Sometimes there's a reason; say that those Alaskan wilderness parks are a mecca of tourism during the summer, but are left alone during the winter due to the harshness of the climate. Then it makes sense to subside the activity of the residents in order to be able to keep some anthropic presence in there. Often people's time preference are skewed towards the present, especially when survival is at stake, that's when the government can help.
Here in Italy, we give subsides to some of the most remote - but most beautiful - alpine valleys. Without people caring for those places, they would quickly become inaccessible. On a conceptual level, they can be thought about as cultural preservation, just like museums.
not all cultures should be afforded the same value. some, indeed, are meant to be left by the wayside of history. just because they existed doesn't mean they were good, useful or worked well. also, just because they might have worked well 1000 years ago doesn't give them the right to stop improving and then ask for a free pass from the rest of the world that has been improving.
This is somewhat related (I think) to what Anja has said above, but this is OK as long as one realizes that, eventually, one's own culture is going to be on that 'fallen by the wayside' list.
It's everyone's own personal decision how they live. I would never want to live in a culture that rejected modern technology, but I understand that different people, especially those with different backgrounds, will feel differently, and that emotion plays a big and legitimate role in the choices one makes. It is a natural process that things, including cultures, die, but that doesn't take away from the sadness of it.
"Only an irrational dumbass, would burn Jews." - Jaguar
"please give concise answers in plain English" - request from Provoker