OK - this will probably be a controversial idea, but it seems pretty logical.
Unfortunately, I suspect that there may be an evolutionary advantage in any species having to struggle against both the elements and against their own conspecifics. It is very common in many species for males (and occasionally females) to combat each other for better feeding areas, nesting areas, access to mates, etc. If earth was truly a stress free paradise, there would be no selective pressure for the "survival of the fittest". The least physically and mentally able animals or humans could pass on their genes as easily as those best able to use available resources to provide for the strongest offspring to survive.
Although some do not believe in evolution over the long term, I think most will agree that animals able to survive in difficult climates or scarce resource areas are the most likely to pass on genes that will also enhance survival rates under those same conditions.
I know we are different than deer and other animals because we tend to think and plan more. And I am certainly NOT advocating for war, disease, and competing for scarce resources as a way to better the human race. BUT - if you think about it logically, we may be hard wired for competitiveness, aggressiveness, and a certain amount of greed for that very reason, whether we like it or not. If that is true, we can only manage those traits, not eliminate them.
