> Animals are nearly always at war among their own for territory,
This is not true. Quite a lot of animals are neither territorial nor at war constantly.
> will often attack other kinds animals that compete for their food sources
You should know that non aggressive animals exist. They are not some kind of exception at all. That being said, people have literal wars over important resources. They are no strangers of systematically abusing half the population or more ... or even enslaving them. There are people who believe empathy is weakness and they won election, because huge amounts of electorate agrees.
> , unless there is mutual benefit (e.g. deers and monkeys sharing alarm calls for tigers).
Nice example of cooperation. It is no different then humans cooperating with each other.
> Not their competitors, friend.
What kind of new standard you are putting on in there? How do you define competitor and is it really that different then social behavior of people? Like right now, you see half of America cheering on harm done to other Americans. You see them attacking other countries and people over percieved competition ... that completely their own construction.
> What kind of new standard you are putting on in there?
We act like animals -- mammals, specifically -- when we do not seek to become more humane, a better humanitarian.
> half of America cheering on harm done to other Americans
"They are like the animals, only worse."
We are the only creatures that can consciously self-evolve ourselves toward complete compassion. That doesn't mean that 90% of us care enough about others to do it, as they obviously don't.
That is the reason this world is in the mess it's in. We could choose to compassionately care for our fellow human beings, but most people are too self-absorbed and too self-righteous to take the necessary steps.
As to what you say about animals, you're just plain wrong, but you're obviously committed to your worldview, so I wish you good luck with that.
This is not true. Quite a lot of animals are neither territorial nor at war constantly.
> will often attack other kinds animals that compete for their food sources
You should know that non aggressive animals exist. They are not some kind of exception at all. That being said, people have literal wars over important resources. They are no strangers of systematically abusing half the population or more ... or even enslaving them. There are people who believe empathy is weakness and they won election, because huge amounts of electorate agrees.
> , unless there is mutual benefit (e.g. deers and monkeys sharing alarm calls for tigers).
Nice example of cooperation. It is no different then humans cooperating with each other.
> Not their competitors, friend.
What kind of new standard you are putting on in there? How do you define competitor and is it really that different then social behavior of people? Like right now, you see half of America cheering on harm done to other Americans. You see them attacking other countries and people over percieved competition ... that completely their own construction.