Perhaps embedded within the very composition of the human psyche itself, is an insatiable urge to 'be good.' However, in those of which have come to terms of enlightenment within themselves, they will have realized society cannot possibly exist in its current form if all were to be held true. Morals are simply guidelines upon which to build a character-however the truly great always disregard any rules completely. Any true winner plays by their own rules.
This is not to say there is no moral 'right' or 'wrong'-these terms are sometimes far from arbitrary, yet rarely distinct. It can be thought of as a guidepost-depending as of which perspective one attempts to analyze the situation from-a theoretical approach to the moral development of humans.
On the very point of the society, a society cannot function if all its subjects lack all morals; chaotic ruins would ensure-the components of such a society would only stay in line only on the grounds of fear. Perhaps it is interesting to view opposite ends of the moral spectrum; then an intermixed flavor, and finally a view on the individual.
To assume all people are born with an inherently evil nature would require an oppressive leader or a very fierce, not loved, ruler. Such a personnel, to rise up to power on their own, would require both cunning, intelligence, and an astute ability to observe and deduce. They would have to understand the fundamental workings of their subjects' minds-assuming all of their subjects were of less caliber than the ruler-less cunning, less intelligent, and much blinder to their surroundings-a virtual impossibility. Eventually, if people were truly lacking of such 'moral' behavior, ambition, over fear, would win out amongst at least one in a million, one in ten million, one in a billion. This is not to say a strong government could not function at all-keep in mind this is on the assumption that people are truly lacking of morals.
An overly powerful government has its definite advantages in order-there is little discrepancy on what to do, and decisions that are made are never wrong. Subjects are easily kept in line-all that is required is force and a little other incentives to go along. However, there is always the possibility an individual, with astounding resolution, intelligence, and overall brilliance, would be capable of taking down the entire government-like a boulder nearing the peak of a steep hill, all that would be required would be a simple initial push-the rest would be taken care of by other forces.
Thus, it would be safe to say that not all people lack any morals. Clearly, its is more than a small minority which possesses such values-no democracy would function for much more than a year or so if morals were absent from the general population. However, if everyone were to always do the 'moral' thing, the 'right' thing, the 'ethical' thing, a society would never truly advance. You can follow the paths that are proven to correctly lead you to your destination-or you could forge your own through your mind.
Now, the fundamental ideas behind this work-how and why what is 'good' and 'evil' is often more blatantly ambiguous than not. For the average subject, citizen, human, morals are a definite and proper method of finding their way through life-they are proven guardrails, to prevent the proverbial fall into the endless abyss. This is because the average person does not nearly have the perception, intelligence, nor comprehension of what a morality system is-merely a system.
It is a very fine tuned system-if left on its own while being obeyed, it will function very smoothly, like the typical 'well-oiled machine.' However, for the society to truly advance itself beyond its current state, there must be what could possibly be called 'evolutions,' or 'leaps' into the unknown. We cannot have a nation or country full of immoral citizens-the chaotic result would become catastrophic. Neither should we wish for a country where everyone is a soulless rule-worshipper.
The ideal composition is the combination of a majority of morally-bound citizens, with a small handful of individuals intelligent enough to comprehend the purpose of a moral system. Those individuals would eventually become responsible for the truly great accomplishments-not just the creation of a faster microchip, but the implementation of such a microchip into the head of every man, women and child. Similarly, any disaster would be caused by such a person-not just a simple budget loss of 88% or a few thousand militia lost on duty, but rather the beginning of a larger-scale devastation, of calamity. The truly intelligent would not need any guidance as to what they should accomplish-the world is like a board game to them-whether or not they wish to follow the rulebook is purely up to them-either way, they are the ones who redefine the way the figurative board game is played out. Morals are something that the truly great cannot afford to be bound by-if they wish to ever increase their prominence in their world. Rather, it is something of which that can be an advantage-one lacking of morals is one lacking constraints, lacking anything to hold you back. There is nothing between whatever those people want and the actual thing they desire.
However, in the case there is an individual clearly intelligent enough to figure this out on their own, they must be able to fully understand the importance and significance of remaining undetected and not being singled out negatively while still under the main influence of society. Whether this is the work place, at college, or still studying in secondary education, if an individual is detected to have literally 'outgrown' (mentally) the traditional meaning of morality, the surrounding society would do the best they could to simply wash it out, destroy it; avoid these circumstances at all costs, as it is best to appear as any other 'good' citizen.
Ironically, perhaps the fictional character 'Professor Quirrell,' servant to Lord Voldemort, created by author J.K. Rowling, the very epitome of evil and darkness, has partially summed it up the best: "...There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it." I believe it should be rephrased.
"...there exists good and evil, but only those too weak to seek power shall abide by it."