civilization collapse

intuitively the conclusion i get from: "consider military industrial complex users - are they better able to reproduce than non military industrial complex users?" or "evolution has selected for weaponizers, exploiters, polluters" or "consider fossil fuel users - are they better able to reproduce than non-fossil fuel users?" is that this is true of the competition between males for females that is the males that have the most reproductive success are the weaponizers, exploiters, and polluters - and so those characteristics are propagated further when i consider this i am struck by other existing civilized high density populations in the ecosystem - ants and bees. they build complex structures, they alter their environment, they have complex communications - and they use males for reproductive purposes only because males are too expensive

facts: - indigenous people's fight civilization -- the celts fought the romans -- the gauls fought the romans -- the amazonian peoples fight the canadian mining companies - why fight? -- because the civilized people act brain damaged -- they pollute rivers -- they destroy forests -- they dig huge holes in the groud -- that is the behaviour of someone with brain damage - consider rapa nui aka easter island -- the civilized people that built the moai -- did moai users have better reproductive success? -- did competitive moai (ie. building bigger) have better reproductive success? -- they chopped down the last tree -- they lived on an island -- no trees = no boats = no food - consider the farmers of the central valley in california or farmers in ancient sumer -- the water table falling -- salt increasing -- increased production leads to decreasing yields -- http://www.cvsalinity.org/ -- http://related.springerprotocols.com/lp/de-gruyter/salt-seed-and-yields-in-sumerian-agriculture-a-c...