Survival of the Fittest?

Play a game of Survival.
Suppose there are two strategies to play by: Altruism and Greed.
Assume that Altruism played as a sole strategy yields good outcomes, and can be played in extended games. However, Altruism played in conjunction with Greed yields outcomes wherein Altruism invariably loses.

Is Greed somehow fitter than Altruism as a survival strategy?

Furthermore, assume that after extended play, Greed leads to appalling disaster and global extinction?

Is Greed somehow fitter than Altruism still?

Greed "beats" Altruism, but Greed leads to eventual disaster. We would have to enlarge our view and create a meta-objective: survival for a long, extended period, survival for eons rather than a generation or so.

I suppose this business of "leads to disaster" is what we mean by spending our kids and grandkids inheritance by our foolishness.
--