worldly ambitious intelligent people seem to be among the most conspicuously amoral

That's true and important, but stereotypical worldly intelligent people rarely "grave new values on new tables", and so might be much less intelligent than your Rousseaus and Hammurabis in the sense that they affect the cosmos less overall. Even worldly big shots like Stalin and Genghis rarely establish any significant ideological foothold. The memes use them like empty vessels.

But even so, the omnipresent you-claim-might-makes-right counterarguments remain uncontested. Hard to contest them.

Humans are friendlier than chimpanzees but less friendly than bonobos, and across the tree of life niceness and nastiness don't seem to have any relationship to computational power.

It's hard to tell how relevant this is; there's much discontinuity between chimps and humans and much variance among humans. (Although it's not that important, I'm skeptical of claims about bonobos; there were some premature sensationalist claims and then some counter-claims, and it all seemed annoyingly politicized.)