If animals fight then so should we?

[gardenofdreams]

Hey guys :)

This is my first thread on the forum so i hope its interesting enough :)

A guy i know who is friends with one of my friends is very pro war (hes even going into the navy next year and has been breed this way by his family).

I have argued with him over war as i'm a pacificst, and I've always had an answer to everything he has said :D but one of the arguments that he had that underlined his whole theory of why man should go to war was the fact that animals fight so that means man should fight and that warfare should not be abolished because of this. His argument was basically a biological argument for war.

Its made me think over the argument for a while and i'm just interested to hear what everyone else might think on this? It seems to be a common argument in the military apart from the more obvious arguments. I know that some animals are in fact peaceful, and i guess every animal fights in its own way just like we do (the biological computer). I guess the guy that i know has just been indoctrinated into that military way of thinking and reasoning.

[duckingdafta]

there is a difference... animals fight for survival not control unless with the sect ... a lion may walk right past you if he's not hungry..
creatures fight when they are in danger of losing something that is detrimental to their lives, humans don't have a need to do this through having a thought process and can evaluate future eventualities.... humans fight for nothing more than power and control, they're one of the sickest species on this planet.

[coshh]

there is a difference... animals fight for survival not control unless with the sect ... a lion may walk right past you if he's not hungry..
creatures fight when they are in danger of losing something that is detrimental to their lives, humans don't have a need to do this through having a thought process and can evaluate future eventualities.... humans fight for nothing more than power and control, they're one of the sickest species on this planet.
Eh? Animals fight for social dominance all the time. Among social animals that is probably the most frequent cause of aggressive behavior.

[loderlive]

Hey guys :)

This is my first thread on the forum so i hope its interesting enough :)

A guy i know who is friends with one of my friends is very pro war (hes even going into the navy next year and has been breed this way by his family).

I have argued with him over war as i'm a pacificst, and I've always had an answer to everything he has said :D but one of the arguments that he had that underlined his whole theory of why man should go to war was the fact that animals fight so that means man should fight and that warfare should not be abolished because of this. His argument was basically a biological argument for war.

Its made me think over the argument for a while and i'm just interested to hear what everyone else might think on this? It seems to be a common argument in the military apart from the more obvious arguments. I know that some animals are in fact peaceful, and i guess every animal fights in its own way just like we do (the biological computer). I guess the guy that i know has just been indoctrinated into that military way of thinking and reasoning.

War is not an instinct to the human race but a result of conditioning. Do you see armies of animals going to war on each other? The question you raise is fundamental to the understanding of why we do so.

[duckingdafta]

Eh? Animals fight for social dominance all the time. Among social animals that is probably the most frequent cause of aggressive behavior.

that's what I meant by within the sect.. for leadership within social animals and also when their space is being invaded by another... they don't as a rule [as far as my understanding goes] go looking to fight.

[coshh]

that's what I meant by within the sect.. for leadership within social animals and also when their space is being invaded by another... they don't as a rule [as far as my understanding goes] go looking to fight.

Eh well people don't fight without a reason. Wanting power is the same as wanting social dominance. Wanting control of resources again same phenomenon. Wanting to look macho - generally a sex thing. Wanting revenge, again asserting oneself in the social group.

What do humans do in terms of aggression that animals don't do except for using more hi tech weapons?

[informationx]

Hey guys :)

This is my first thread on the forum so i hope its interesting enough :)

A guy i know who is friends with one of my friends is very pro war (hes even going into the navy next year and has been breed this way by his family).

I have argued with him over war as i'm a pacificst, and I've always had an answer to everything he has said :D but one of the arguments that he had that underlined his whole theory of why man should go to war was the fact that animals fight so that means man should fight and that warfare should not be abolished because of this. His argument was basically a biological argument for war.

Its made me think over the argument for a while and i'm just interested to hear what everyone else might think on this? It seems to be a common argument in the military apart from the more obvious arguments. I know that some animals are in fact peaceful, and i guess every animal fights in its own way just like we do (the biological computer). I guess the guy that i know has just been indoctrinated into that military way of thinking and reasoning.

Hi, and welcome to the forum :D

I watch squirrels fighting over food I give them, but I dont think thats a good argument for humans to fight wars.

Animals tend to just kill what they need to survive. Humans seem to cause disproportionate amounts of pain and suffering (usually it seems to innocent people) in the name of wars.

Essentially your friend is saying that he is a slave of nature, and unable to escape its design.

Also I'm sure animals develop altruistic & co-operative characteristics so I dont think its as black and white as your friend seems to think.

Its probably more to do with his psychology, and he's using nature as an excuse.

Cheers.

[loderlive]

Hey guys :)

This is my first thread on the forum so i hope its interesting enough :)

A guy i know who is friends with one of my friends is very pro war (hes even going into the navy next year and has been breed this way by his family).

I have argued with him over war as i'm a pacificst, and I've always had an answer to everything he has said :D but one of the arguments that he had that underlined his whole theory of why man should go to war was the fact that animals fight so that means man should fight and that warfare should not be abolished because of this. His argument was basically a biological argument for war.

Its made me think over the argument for a while and i'm just interested to hear what everyone else might think on this? It seems to be a common argument in the military apart from the more obvious arguments. I know that some animals are in fact peaceful, and i guess every animal fights in its own way just like we do (the biological computer). I guess the guy that i know has just been indoctrinated into that military way of thinking and reasoning.

Man goes to war through conditioning not survival.

[beldazar]

What a crap excuse for going to war! Its a bit like saying 'well HE killed someone, why cant I?
Spiders paralyse their prey then suck the juices out of them, think its ok for people to do it then? :rolleyes:

[gardenofdreams]

Thanks for the response so far guys, i really appreciate it! :)

I couldn't agree more with the posts so far and fortunately i don't speak to the guy that much anymore. His mother and father were both in the military so before he was even born it was going to be an indoctrination and a breeding for him to accept war from the start.

His reasons for war are what the system wants him to believe and he is not aware of the real reasons why we go to war, as if he were he wouldn't be doing what he is doing. This goes for others in the military who believe in the propaganda and the reasons for going to war, when war is really about power, greed and the dominance of finance, not survival. Although, the Illuminati make the capitalist financial system an act of 'survival' for us.

I guess there is also the argument that we are more spiritually evolved than animals, though i don't agree this makes us 'superior' to animals like religion tells us, as we are all apart of the 'one' but rather as we have this spiritual knowledge and guidance that as a species through this knowledge we can use it for a better world for all species, rather than backward thinking of the Illuminati with the 'everyman for himself survival' type of thinking.

There isn't even an exact number of all the animals that actually exist on this earth either, and to say that war for humans is accepted because animals fight implies that all animals fight when actually this is probably only a few and that these are for survival reasons only.

Some dogs are bred in certain ways to be aggressive and fight, and this can be the same of people that go into the military, they are breed to fight without any questions asked. Thats probably what I'll say to him if i see him again and it comes up lol :p

I keep brainstorming this, so i may have some more ideas later :D

[orbandsceptre27]

there is a difference... animals fight for survival not control unless with the sect ... a lion may walk right past you if he's not hungry..
creatures fight when they are in danger of losing something that is detrimental to their lives, humans don't have a need to do this through having a thought process and can evaluate future eventualities.... humans fight for nothing more than power and control, they're one of the sickest species on this planet.


I agree, animals fight for food or to protect their young/territory. The only known species, besides our own, to wage war are ants!
Animals, unlike ourselves, are not known to try exterminate other whole species (genocide), rather to use them for food etc when necessary.
It has been said that children who are trained in martial arts, or some form of combat, are far less likely to be externally agressive to others, only resorting to combat when it is completely necessary (i.e in defence off others).
An agressor ALWAYS attacks out of fear. If you note, the most frequent excuse given by one side for starting a war is in defence of ones beliefs/lands/way of life. The aggressor will usually be "defending" some preconceived mind pattern. The US has made up fancy terms for getting in the first blow/beginning the war i.e "pre-emptive strike" - which basically means "hitting them first before they hit you!"

[coshh]

I agree, animals fight for food or to protect their young/territory. The only known species, besides our own, to wage war are ants!

Just not true. I know for a fact that chimps do.

[pepsirat]

Lemings (dont know how to spell) commit suicide should we? Of course not so why should we go to war just because some animals do.

[marpat]

Although we posses some animal traits the human soul is not of the animal kingdom. Because we can make conscious decisions that are against our animal nature then we do not have the same excuse for acting out of blind instinct. An animal acts out of instinct whereas we have instincts but also the power of free will, which gives us a choice of whether we act on instinct or not.

[deathcultreject]

Hey guys :)

This is my first thread on the forum so i hope its interesting enough :)

A guy i know who is friends with one of my friends is very pro war (hes even going into the navy next year and has been breed this way by his family).

I have argued with him over war as i'm a pacificst, and I've always had an answer to everything he has said :D but one of the arguments that he had that underlined his whole theory of why man should go to war was the fact that animals fight so that means man should fight and that warfare should not be abolished because of this. His argument was basically a biological argument for war.

Its made me think over the argument for a while and i'm just interested to hear what everyone else might think on this? It seems to be a common argument in the military apart from the more obvious arguments. I know that some animals are in fact peaceful, and i guess every animal fights in its own way just like we do (the biological computer). I guess the guy that i know has just been indoctrinated into that military way of thinking and reasoning.

Our species is violent for the same reasons the birds sing.

When you say some one has to fight, you say they are an animal.

I'm OK with that.

I fight when I have to.

What I don't like is the unnatural opression and terror and constant violation against what we feel like doing.

Our minds weren't made to be pushed that way.

That's why it works.

So every time you dance in the street, or quote Bill Hicks at a bible preacher . . .

. . . you're claiming something back which was yours all along.

Enjoy yourself.

[loderlive]

Just not true. I know for a fact that chimps do.

Chimps go to war?

[lizzy]

Eh well people don't fight without a reason. Wanting power is the same as wanting social dominance. Wanting control of resources again same phenomenon. Wanting to look macho - generally a sex thing. Wanting revenge, again asserting oneself in the social group.

What do humans do in terms of aggression that animals don't do except for using more hi tech weapons?

total crap......go date marprat.....and fight yourself..if that's too cyrptic, too f'ing bad.

[duckingdafta]

Just not true. I know for a fact that chimps do.

I saw it planet of the apes.. but actually going out of their way to attack another species for no reason other than some ideology.. I don't see it...
I see Whales throwing seal around for fun.. but not genocidal intent.. so I suppose puppies off a cliff is OK?

[lizzy]

What a crap excuse for going to war! Its a bit like saying 'well HE killed someone, why cant I?
Spiders paralyse their prey then suck the juices out of them, think its ok for people to do it then? :rolleyes:

yes, the REAL truth emerges.:mad:...they treat us like animals, so finally many act as such , noe with 'open' reason for doing so......they also think that we are already THEIR cattle to do with as they wish.....the perversity is beyond belief.

the elite have no morals and wish to instill the same in the rest of humanity.

the true fight is to save our goodness as decent human beings............

[pepsirat]

Were not much better for the way we treat animals. We inslave them hurt them the list goes on. Last night i saw a program when pets go bad. And it was animals that had enough with the way they were treated and retaliated.

One cercus elephant whent mad after years of abuse and what do we do shoot it.

[coshh]

Although we posses some animal traits the human soul is not of the animal kingdom. Because we can make conscious decisions that are against our animal nature then we do not have the same excuse for acting out of blind instinct. An animal acts out of instinct whereas we have instincts but also the power of free will, which gives us a choice of whether we act on instinct or not.
Absolutely, but to say animals are somehow better, more peaceful or whatever - is just wrong. The natural state is brutal.

[coshh]

I saw it planet of the apes.. but actually going out of their way to attack another species for no reason other than some ideology.. I don't see it...
I see Whales throwing seal around for fun.. but not genocidal intent.. so I suppose puppies off a cliff is OK?
People don't fight over ideology. They fight over status and power and resources. When they fight in the name of an ideology they are almost universally fighting for the sake of status, power or resources (inc. sexual resources).

[coshh]

Chimps go to war?

They attack other groups of chimps over control of territory and occasionally in order to capture females even.

[graflok]

http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/209/chimpgunli5.jpg
OK, hand over the babes!

[gardenofdreams]

I found this through searching on the web:

Animals in war (How they've been used by the military)

Horses - Eight million killed in WWI alone, carrying men, arms and supplies into battle
Pigeons - 200,000 used as messengers in WWII. Of 17,000 parachuted into enemy territory, fewer than one in eight returned.
Dogs - used to hunt mines and search for the wounded. Still routinely used today
Mules - used as transport in the Burmese jungle, with their vocal chords slashed to keep them quiet
Camels, oxen and elephants - used for similar purposes elsewhere
Dolphins and sea lions - used today to find underwater mines and protect ships
Glow worms - used in WWI as an aid for map reading



Original source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4037873.stm

[lizzy]

Just not true. I know for a fact that chimps do.

only when food is short and then rarely........but we intentionally starve our fellow man....

[coshh]

only when food is short and then rarely........but we intentionally starve our fellow man....

No, actually it has happened when they were given food by researchers in abundance too. The chimps became overly controlling of the food giving area, different "clans" tried to take full control of that important territory.

In what way do we "starve" our fellow man except by claiming resources for ourselves we don't need that they do. Animals do exactly the same, they try and control more than they need even if that means depriving others (because both humans and animals feel more secure when they have control over more than they actually need because it increases their chance of passing on their genes if they are greedy and want to take charge of resources. Its simple evolutionary biology.), they're not bothered about it (unless they have a relationship with the others). We at least have the wider awareness to be able to realise what we are doing and make an informed choice about it.

This whole "noble savage cum noble animal kingdom" thing is the result of your alienation from nature, because you are divorced from the realities of day to day life in wild nature you have this romanticised view of it. Its a product of modernity and modern mans detachment from the natural world.

[duckingdafta]

They attack other groups of chimps over control of territory and occasionally in order to capture females even.

dodgy analogy when you think about it, remember we are talking about reasoning for fighting as humans... in this example rape as a weapon of war is justified!....

[coshh]

dodgy analogy when you think about it, remember we are talking about reasoning for fighting as humans... in this example rape as a weapon of war is justified!....
No because "its natural" or "animals do it" is not a justification for anything.
My point is animals are not some bastion of moral behavior that we can idolise.

[duckingdafta]

People don't fight over ideology. They fight over status and power and resources. When they fight in the name of an ideology they are almost universally fighting for the sake of status, power or resources (inc. sexual resources).

Status, Power and Resources for someone else not themselves... that someone's Ideology.

[coshh]

Status, Power and Resources for someone else not themselves... that someone's Ideology.

No, if you for instance join the army (or become a Knight in the olden days) society gives you status, the opportunity for power over others (if you rise the ranks), resources in the form of money. Fighting for someone else is another strategy to achieve those goals.

[duckingdafta]

No because "its natural" or "animals do it" is not a justification for anything.
My point is animals are not some bastion of moral behavior that we can idolise.

I agree with that... animals do also get benefits that we humans don't get that people forget.. do you charge a whale rent for swimming in your waters?
conflict in humans is based on greed... to me animals differ as it is survival or evolving. I just don't see the decision we humans make to fight as evolving ones..more panic like we're running out of air.

[coshh]

I agree with that... animals do also get benefits that we humans don't get that people forget.. do you charge a whale rent for swimming in your waters?
conflict in humans is based on greed... to me animals differ as it is survival or evolving. I just don't see the decision we humans make to fight as evolving ones..more panic like we're running out of air.
You think animals don't feel panic about stuff? Animals don't think "I am trying to evolve" they just react to immediate stimuli, emotions, and perhaps some degree of planning (though not on the same scale as human planning) similar to us. Evolution is not a planned or conscious process for anything, its just the result of certain things being more successful at reproduction than others.

[duckingdafta]

No, if you for instance join the army (or become a Knight in the olden days) society gives you status, the opportunity for power over others (if you rise the ranks), resources in the form of money. Fighting for someone else is another strategy to achieve those goals.

now I get your direction of thought.. it's a shame you can't be passive and yet still get the same amount of notoriety or status... it's this society making decisions to give power over other I was finding hard to take in. {suppose cause I've never had it}.. not that I'm an animal

[pilgrim]

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24342

[coshh]

now I get your direction of thought.. it's a shame you can't be passive and yet still get the same amount of notoriety or status... it's this society making decisions to give power over other I was finding hard to take in. {suppose cause I've never had it}.. not that I'm an animal

Well society is not a thing in itself, its everyone together, some with more power, some with less. It's not like there is a guy or a committee deciding what society is going to reward and punish (well actually NOW it is - but originally) it just sort of developed due to many different interests in society making decisions and things organically developing to how they ended up being.

[thunda]

To say that animals don't fight each other is nonesense .. of course they do .. Dominance is one of the main factors in many animal social groups ...

An Alpha Male Wolf doesn't become such because all the other wolves sat around, discussed contenders and then took a vote. That wolf became Alpha because he showed his strength and fighting prowess against the previous Alpha Male and beat him in a fight (or got the previous Alpha to submit by aggression) - and he'll remain Alpha until another wolf comes along, challenges him and beats him in a fight too.

And one wolf pack will fight against another wolf pack for dominance over territory or food. Fight others for land and resources .. sounds pretty much the same as us.

However .......

Where we are different - is that we have conscious thought and reasoning. We *can* sit down, debate and take a vote if necessary. We don't *need* to fight amongst each other ... we just choose too .. whether due to conditioning or a desire for bloodlust - we choose to do it and that does seperate us out.

[coshh]

Where we are different - is that we have conscious thought and reasoning. We *can* sit down, debate and take a vote if necessary. We don't *need* to fight amongst each other ... we just choose too .. whether due to conditioning or a desire for bloodlust - we choose to do it and that does seperate us out.

Well mostly because just because we have the ability to choose, doesn't mean all those animal instincts from our past just disappear.

[duckingdafta]

Well mostly because just because we have the ability to choose, doesn't mean all those animal instincts from our past just disappear.

So is it right to say some humans just follow their animal instincts without human thought before acting?..
can you tell I've lost, ive gone from debate to asking Q's!

[coshh]

So is it right to say some humans just follow their animal instincts without human thought before acting?..
can you tell I've lost, ive gone from debate to asking Q's!

Oh yes. I would say so. Perhaps not constantly, but more often than not.

[gardenofdreams]

Some quotes that i found :)

"If it's natural to kill, why do men have to go into training to learn to do it?"
—Joan Baez

"The militarists say that 'fighting is instinctive' and that 'you cannot change the real character of men by any intellectual process.' If this is true, the case is still not hopeless, as some think, for there are animals and men without this 'fighting instinct,' that do not kill each other; there is a possibility that those with the 'fighting instinct' will succeed in exterminating each other, and permit those without to breed a better race."
—Charles T. Sprading

[coshh]

Some quotes that i found :)

"If it's natural to kill, why do men have to go into training to learn to do it?"
—Joan BaezSo that you become better at it than the other guy?

"The militarists say that 'fighting is instinctive' and that 'you cannot change the real character of men by any intellectual process.' If this is true, the case is still not hopeless, as some think, for there are animals and men without this 'fighting instinct,' that do not kill each other; there is a possibility that those with the 'fighting instinct' will succeed in exterminating each other, and permit those without to breed a better race."
—Charles T. SpradingMmm, except that the ones without the "fighting instinct" are easy prey for the ones with it... so if anything the ones with it are more likely to survive to breed.

[fromthatshow]

You wanna fight?
I've never been in a fight I'd love to though.

[fromthatshow]

So that you become better at it than the other guy?

Mmm, except that the ones without the "fighting instinct" are easy prey for the ones with it... so if anything the ones with it are more likely to survive to breed.

That's why we should all just get as many guns so when anarchy breaks loose we can kill all our neighbors so they'll be more for us.

[coshh]

You wanna fight?
I've never been in a fight I'd love to though.
I've never been in a real fight and don't want to be (but if someone was attacking my mother or something I'd defend her...)

[coshh]

That's why we should all just get as many guns so when anarchy breaks loose we can kill all our neighbors so they'll be more for us.

What a good argument for law.

[orbandsceptre27]

Just not true. I know for a fact that chimps do.



WHO... WHO.... WHO...WHOO told you that? ;)

I think you`re alluding to guerrilla warfare.....! :D

[coshh]

WHO... WHO.... WHO...WHOO told you that? ;)

I think you`re alluding to guerrilla warfare.....! :DWell apart from the media, a friend of mine who is an evolutionary biologist.

[orbandsceptre27]

re Coshh

Animals can teach you more about what`s natural than you could possibly imagine, if you would only observe them. One of the greatest zen teachers I ever head was an old cat. He did`nt over eat, never got depressed, slept when he needed to - was completely "in the now," something many human beings can`t even conceive of.
I viewed a documentary about chimps some time ago and remember some of what you`re talking about. These warlike chimps were in close proximity to humans. Now and again one would go nuts and attack the locals often killing children. Animals also become completely lifeless and depressed in zoo`s, completely unnatural enclosures.
The thinking that life is "nasty, brutish and short" was widely circulated by 19th century Darwinists and other pseudo-intellectuals whos days have long since passed. Just because you come across evil in the world does`nt mean you have to project it yourself.
Ever see a mother with her newborn baby, the love and protection she affords it. That`s natural whether in the city or in the wild, human or animal, it is common to both. Ever watch kids playing, they don`t get beaten down or depressed by life - they are vibrant full of joy.
If you learn to meditate you can reach that natural state of love every day. This plain of existence we live in has become so abused, manipulated and overcomplicated, it has left many thinking that life is "naturally brutal." As Edward de Bono would say - keep things simple, and he is renowned as a genius of geniuses.

[friendsinthesky]

War is not an instinct to the human race but a result of conditioning. Do you see armies of animals going to war on each other? The question you raise is fundamental to the understanding of why we do so.

Ant colonies go to war against each other over land. Look closer and you'll see the human race mimic the ants behaviour, sad really.

[coshh]

I observe animals a lot, I live in the countryside.

Yes, both good and bad things are natural. There is no need to romanticise things. Nature is both tender and brutal.

[mikeproteau]

I would argue that there is no SHOULD or SHOULDN'T because human beings are different than animals in the sence that we can CHOOSE, that IS what is natural, for example if someone punches you, you can choose to run away or choose to fight, there is no natural or not natural because the human ability to choose IS what is natural and I would argue that defence should be up to the individual and not the state or society. People are always saying what should be done to protect the natural enviroment but I would argue that the fact that humans are the domanant species IS what is natural.

[fromthatshow]

I LOVE your avatar, beldazar! :D

*edit woops nothing came through there

[drael]

Some animals jump off cliffs en mass. Some animals eat their mate after sex. I dont get the argument at all.

[thunda]

Well mostly because just because we have the ability to choose, doesn't mean all those animal instincts from our past just disappear.

Of course we have those animal instincts - hence the first part of my post - but we've evolved to the point where we can choose to fight or to work out our differences. We, however, tend to choose the former and bomb ten-tonnes out of each other.

[duckingdafta]

about five mins into this clip you'll hear that a Judge stated that we cannot fight like animals and hate is used.
{my hidden agenda for awareness coming out showing this clip}
Sophie Lancaster - The Killers' Appeal and campaign update - YouTube

[marpat]

Absolutely, but to say animals are somehow better, more peaceful or whatever - is just wrong. The natural state is brutal.


I don't think animals are more peaceful as nature is red in tooth and claw. They just act according to their instinct.

[marpat]

You wanna fight?
I've never been in a fight I'd love to though.

Really, you are quite lucky then. It's never a nice experience even when you win. I guess you get some who enjoy it though.

[orbandsceptre27]

I observe animals a lot, I live in the countryside.

Yes, both good and bad things are natural. There is no need to romanticise things. Nature is both tender and brutal.



Well observe more, romanticism has nothing to do with it! The "natural state" of any species is love unconditional, as between mother and offspring otherwise any species could not continue. Yes you will always get examples to the contrary - when pigs have little or no food they will eat their young, female spiders often eat their mate - this is not to the detriment of the species though as the male has fulfilled his role. These cases are very rare. And yes whales and dolphins are known to beach themselves, many scientists are coming to the view that this has much to do with human sonar usage and sending test signals under water.
Do not forget human beings, as well as having a divine nature, are essentially animals. What separates us is our ability to reason, our intellect. This doesn`t make us any better off or any worse. If some people think it makes us superior then think, we are the only species capable of entirely obliterating the planet through nuclear arms and causing massive ecological damage from the waste produced by our society. What other species is capable of such madness?

[romas]

Wemen want "real men" well lets look what real men are, real men are those who go out and kill other men and take their recourses to make woman and her offspring safe, survival of the fittest etc. While not everyone is like that, majority of people work by these basis unconsciously. Military uniforms are even considered "sexy" by some.
Essentially these uncoscious hypocrites live to fight. War is ultimate fight.

Animalistic behaviour can be seen in kids and/or young adults in a form of physical competition(most sports) and brute rivalry(fighting etc), many females find that sexy as well. Sex is a strong drive perpetuating competition.

Difference between us and animals is we can be aware of this. Tptb love the animal-men as they are easy to control and use to fight each other, they also love "easy" woman who will provide sex for economical safety.
Continuous dumbification is the proof that they hate conscious and self aware population.

Lets quote our favorite TPTB think-tank Henry Kissinger:

"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."
Woodward and Bernstein The Final Days in chapter 14