Understanding power and dominance, the importance of biodiversity niches, and the birth of competition are all bound up in the history of evolution. It is natural to compete. All animals do it. Or so we say and draw conclusion for our social behavior, mirroring the outer natural world. If we zoom to the foundation texts of the evolutionary research, we see how some of the patterns discovered in the then constructed natural world in fact are inspired by Malthus or the economic milieu of the 18th century. Competition is natural, insofar as our model of nature is built upon ideas of competing units.

Evolutionary sciences have come far, and we learn about the evolutionary trees that are not gradual competitions, but combinations of fast adaptation, search for equilibria and direct cooperation of multi-level species.

Competition driven souls, we take a break and project the new evolutionary discoveries back to economy. How could an economy work if indeed it was not in a circular argument modelled after itself? How would and equilibristic economic model look like? If sexual display of the animals were not mere yearning for attention, perpetrating the selfish gene, but surplus value, performance, art for the other species to look at. Biodiversity not as effectivity but precisely the opposite: as opulent ineffectivity. Just look at what these animals say.