So what is my argument in effect?

So what is my argument in effect?
I'm a root of the problem type.
Others are a trim the tree type, because they swallowed the blue pill.

So what is the "Root" IMHO?

Aggression is a socially destructive force.
Competition is the basic form of aggression.
The greatest strength of our species is Cooperation, not Competition.
Civilization, Society, Culture, Community, are all cooperative ventures.
Cooperation and Competition are conflicting forces. (see: opposites)

As much as we like to doll it up and make it presentable, the raw truth of our Society is that we compete against one another for our very survival.
Exceptions to the rule are just that. Our true nature trying to find root in the in-hospitable earth of an aggressive society.

Many people accept this with some magically obvious deduction, that can never be proved.
"Its in our nature," cry the masses.
"Its not our fault," they say,
"plus we've already been forgiven, so there." =^P

Well here's the side of the fence you probably didn't know you stood on one side of:

Are we decent enough by nature to at least justify the search for a more Utopian system?

Or do we accept our fate like good lil' sinners, and go about our games?

This is not some issue that the best minds on earth have debated, and come up with the best answer for everyone.
There not even trying!
Why do you think that is?
To be fair, some great minds have investigated it,
and suffice to say they did not conclude the status quo was the best of all possible systems.
Still orbiting the party line?

Let me spell it out for ya all:
If you think the debate is about Blue or Red,
you are deceived.
(remember who "The Red" used to be BTW?)

The Luciferian Gambit is the reference to "Playing The Devils Game,"
where there is no way to win,
because Lucifer's gaping maw is behind BOTH DOORS!

You loose because you were deceived into thinking the answer HAD to be one of the choices given to you BY LUCIFER!
As if that wasn't obvious enough.

Groucho Marks made use of this concept in his act, by asking a question that made an unflattering implication which a direct answer could not address. Leaving the unwitting audience member to studder out what sounded at that point like a bad denial.
Classic. =^)

Well its being done to you right now. It is like the Matrix.
It is everything you touch, taste, and see.
For example:
Are you for freedom or socialism?
Are you for regulation, or lower prices?
Do you support the war, or are you supporting the terrorists?

Are you voting Red or Blue?

See, the political and ideological world is a battlefield too.

So what is the first rule of combat? (Sun Szu: The Art of War)

Choose a battlefield that gives your side the advantage.
Set the Topic, and define your opponents as well. (ie: Stack the Deck)
Starting to sound familiar?
Like the SOP of politics today?

The answer does not lie in the options being given to us!

Feudalism did not pass away because the landowners said,
"OK, your right, this isn't working, anybody got any new ideas?"
It took the Hundred Year's War!

Personally I think we can do without the war part, but it's looking like I may be too late.

So people chase their tail off trimming branches to get that just right look, but remember...
It's just a look,
and you know what they say about looks?

There is, another, way.

=^)