You certainly dont' get it.
You keep on referring on a balance in nature for survival. That
"balance" is what exactly Kirath was pointing to. A lion when hunting
prey, wouldn't dare go against a battle ready elephant alone. Why?
Because the elephant isn't weak, to his perception. He would go after an
entire herd of deer because he know he's stronger than them, but not a
single elephant. If the lion beats the elephant once, however, he will
hunt elephants for the rest of his life. You say it's in his instinct
for survival? Certainly. But how are we much different from these
animals, except that the Logos gave us our will. We all have our
instincts, too, similar to those from our animal brothers. You keep
saying that being human is with compassion, etc., etc. A baby will steal
the food from his brother when he's given the chance. I've done it, I've
seen it more often in other people than you would imagine. All that's
preventing us to do that is our upbringing. His parents will stop the
baby from doing that, teaching him that it's bad to do it, etc,
imprinting in the child never to do it again. Thus, I state that by all
manner of instinct humans are similar to animals. It's just the
misguided people who follow compassion, goodness, etc. who teach people
to sway from what they were originally intended to do.
But is that the right path to go? Should we be compassionate to all
living things? I ask you this: Is a bunch of weak people stronger than a
select strong few? It will all go down to theory. But the most glorious
battles have been won by the few. And I don't only mean the battles
involving weapons and tactics, but also those battles involving the
mind. Apply cruelty to remove the weak and feeble-minded. Leaving only
the strong and of iron will. Think. And try to counter this. You know
you're wrong.
In this I'm not saying that Nature is evil, but that Evil is the way
nature would go, if it were left to its course.

Penned by my hand on the 24th of Scarlatan, in the year 354 AF.