live and let die

this seems to have become the motto in the "modern" world. on a closer look it is clearly apparant that if not sole, then altleast one of the most desirably prominent 'fuel' on which the human life is running nowadays is compition. compitition is what which when it began was termed as "survival of the fittest". but today, it has taken a form where it becomes, on the face of it, quiet difficult to distinguish 'compitition' from 'enimity'.
the purpose for today's compition is not to survive, but, NOT to let others survive.

the compitition which began with a simple want of finding food to live on, got on to become a yearning for reserving land (which basically was not supposed to be 'belonging' to specific beings) for oneself. as different proffessions came into the picture, this compitition became the heart and soul of every evolved stream of work. later on, this tendency to compete (necessarily or otherwise) started being carried on to the children from their elders, just like another gene. this time it was not for survival, but, for esteem. 'esteem' ofcourse not for that of the children but of those who made their children's 4th grade marks, or their selection as a sports team member an ego-issue for themselves.

these children now have grown-up and inculcating the same "compititive spirit" in their own offsprigs.
but ofcourse! the elders still have to be ahead of their children so that they, when they grow-up can look up to them and learn how to live in a compititive world.
so now the "grown-ups" have found novel arenas to compete in.
they now compete in betraying trust before other does that with them (taking things hypothetically).
they now compete in making a better fool of others.
they now compete in carrying more deceptive faces than their 'compititors'.
they now compete in making 'least likely to be caught' false promises.
they now compete in lying more believably than anyone else.

is it not so?

stay normal, not so happy!

i recently came accross a term referred to as " default emotion".

on thinking about it a bit i concluded that it must be what generally remains on the faces of people unless something special (that may be either good or bad) has happened with them at any given point of time.

on getting deeper into thinking about it, i noticed that the expression that can generally be seen on the faces of people around is either that of absolute indifference, or, that of unprovoked anger.

i am still wondering why carrying a pleasing (kind of smiling..) expression is considered to be abnormal or somehow, just strange?

is'nt it so that if you just walk into your school/college/workplace/marketplace, etc. with a simple relaxed and pleased look you are most likely to be asked by the people around that " hey! what's the matter, anything special?" you may even get a few surprised stares on flashing such an expression.

however, if you walk around with an expression where your mouth is closed with a very little bit of extra pressure on both the lips to make them remain joined together and taking due care (subconciously though) that they are not anyhow forming into a smile like curve, a look in the eyes as if they are continuously in search of a known "target" , and the firm straightness of the head (sometimes even a very minute backward tilt), in that case, nobody would least bother to ask you - hey! what's the matter, looking quiet indifferent?

i have heard and read that a number of human habits/instincts have been formed as a concequence of the experiences of the early humans in primitive ages.can this "default emotion" also be a part of such a development?or is that not "development" but "advancement"?