Our instincts on the primal level are just that primal. We are a warlike, greedy, manipulative species who tends to choose to destroy over nuture, take over share, and fight instead of befriend.
and here lies the bone of contention. i accept what you say to be true. it has long been the opinion i have held. but what evidence do we have for this? seriously, what evidence do we have of this?
in the natural world
, there is certainly intra-specific competition, but never to the extent of all enveloping, self-destructive, genocidal warfare. and so what allows us to be so confident that the species Homo sapien
truly is intrinsically inclined to 'destroy over nurture'?
we are told it is true. but then we are told that capitalism is the only way. for a species so hell bent on conquest, how did Ugg and Crunk ever form a tribe in the first place?
Almost everything we do has a direct correlation to what we want, bigger car, bigger house, bigger job, better snowboard, than our neighbors. That may be an offshoot of capitalistic ambition but if you take away the monetary you are still left with the basic of human needs, the need to feed.
and the one single, most basic aspect of this desire to have more than such and such, or the simple reliance upon the ability to feed, is dictated and exascerbated by scarcity
ultimately, in a civilisation without the monetary system, everything is free. if everything is free, nobody needs to want for anything.
no class system exists, no one world governance, no elitism, no third world countries. there would only be an equal sharing of all the world's finite resources, in a manner that is mutually beneficial to all and sustainable for all time.