I like the theory where (one of) the "great filter(s)" is just the likelihood of a technologically advanced civilization emerging from a greedy society is just way more likely than from a complacent society. So at some point some creature somewhere gets some critical mass of tech fueled by greed, this leads to global domination (humans over animals, as well as europeans over their colonies).

Without the greed, there would not have been the technological advantage, but due to this same greed we now have weapons of mass destruction strong enough to wipe any semblance of intelligent life from the planet.

Of course this theory is very black and white (not to mention capitalistic). Perhaps a curious society is also an option to reach technological advantage but not global domination, but would such a society manage to become a Kardashev type I civilization by sharing rather than conquest?

So to directly answer your question: I think it's likely that someone would have enslaved most of the earth somehow, (which absolutely does not excuse it). It's surprisingly good that humans on average dislike the idea of slavery and colonisation now, so maybe we can build on top of that a society of curiosity and progress instead of one of war and a (literal) dead end.