It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by BombDefined
I would say that it has always been survival of the ruthless. More over, I might offer the idea that ruthlessness, in many situations, is what makes someone fit enough to succeed and thrive. Lets say we are in a survival situation, we have enough rations to last us and our party through the winter, then we find a few other survivors who have no rations. Should we be "good" and share our rations even though it might mean the death of us and our party or should we be ruthless and leave them and ensure our own survival and the survival of those we are caring for? Sometimes the ruthless are the fittest
I feel that this is a major part of the conspiracy that I've mentioned, there are no absolutes in this world and one can not say that the rich are definitely unhappy and the poor or middle class are. It is true that you will find more happiness in loved ones and true friends than you will in material things alone but why is it that we, as a society, feel that we can not have both?