Very good post, and several notes

Excellent post!

A few points in which I disagree with you, or would add to your arguments:

Further, even within the current system that glorifies and rewards greed and war-like behavior, we still have numerous decent, anti-war, honorable, and non-greedy people who aspire to improve the human race rather than simply work for their own personal enrichment.

Generally speaking, the predominant (but not universal) position among scientists is that alienation and aggression win out regarding people in other groups than your own. Cooperation and compassion win out with your own group.

In nature, this would have meant your family or your tribe versus everyone else. The genetic benefit is clear enough: kin selection.

In modern society, the in-group has usually expanded including things that are essentially cultural and completely unrelated to genetics: your country, your ethnicity, your religion. It has no explicit genetic advantage (*), but your cultural brain cheats your selfish genes and tells you to defend and care as in-group people who are biologically not.

It is not realist to only point out to the aggressive tendencies in humankind. It's easy to see that nobody (bar sociopaths) is universally aggressive towards everyone. As I have talked with you, Hitler was very fond of his dogs and of the kids of the high Nazi hierarchy. "Aggressivists" seem to forget that humankind has never been a war of all against all.

It is, however, not realist either to only point out to the charitable and compassionate tendencies either. Clearly there are factors that cause them to appear or predominate: environmental, economic or cultural as well as purely genetic.

(*) You could argue it has prospective genetic advantage because you expect that you, or your siblings, or your children, will reproduce in-group with others of the same country, ethnicity or religion. It doesn't really make sense in groups of millions, but it can be argued.

Lotteries are popular because they rely on the fact that humans are greedy. They want to live like kings and they want to do it now, without having to time time and energy into it.

Um, and the desire to strike it rich, the existence of lotteries, and rampant greed are all part and parcel of a capitalist system.

Just to correct you both, playing lotteries loses you money. If people were greedy, they wouldn't play.

Science is not on your side, because there is no scientifically verifiable evidence that humans' negative qualities being ascendant over their positive qualities are genetically pre-determined. That is all conservative ideology--not to mention Social Darwinism--used to justify the continuation of a system based on power and privilege for the few, and the need for powerful state intervention in our personal lives, not to mention an attempt to deter people from achieving a better society.

And it relies on cognitive dissonance.

Back to Lateralus:

Human beings, when left to their own devices, are self-centered and animalistic. It's just a natural fact; it's in our genes.

Wouldn't that be precisely why we should not let ourselves be governed by self-centered animalistic beings?

After all:

He said if we were capable of living in peace and brotherhood on our own, we would've been doing it already for thousands of years.

to misquote Goethe, haven't it always been commiefascist [self-centered, animalistic] busybodies who have prevented human beings from living on their own?

Anti-anarchists have always been the source for the best arguments for anarchism. Unwittingly.