(I apologise in advance for my amateur and unsubstantiated psychology.)
Simplistically, I feel people in EVE tend to be either builders or breakers. I know there are variations, but most fall into having a long term preference towards either accumulation or destruction.
When you consider the activities and population spread of players, there are likely to be more builders (by a fair margin) in EVE than breakers.
Obviously the builders are more likely to be labelled Carebears or prey, while the breakers are more likely to be labelled PVP’ers or hunters.
These two groups tend to complain about each other.
Generally it takes longer to build something in EVE than it takes to break it. What that means is that when a builder suffers loss, it can seem to them that the effort of the breaker was disproportionately small in comparison to their own.
Meanwhile in many ways the game is easier for a smart builder than it is for a smart breaker. This leaves some breakers frustrated that their targets can avoid them and remain out of reach.
I think EVE works best when there is a balance between these two groups. Breakers challenge builders, making success more rewarding. Remove breakers, and you end up with a stale game. Builders give breakers something to, well, break. Remove builders –by allowing their sandcastles to be kicked over too easily and too frequently and you end up with a more hostile and dynamic game – but with I strongly suspect less than half the players.
I often smile to myself when I see people from each group wanting to eradicate the other, without any apparent comprehension of the synergy between themselves, and how it helps make EVE what it is.