Pseudo-politics prevailing in scientific community

One of the main reasons of me being into science is that I found every other line available for a science student, are directly or indirectly associated with politics. And somehow doing politics too express yourself, get paid for it or getting recognized was something I found not my cup of tea. Moreover, I somehow couldn’t figure out the hidden politics prevailing in the scientific community. I would like to give a small example of how it is in the current scenario, around me. The politics begin with someone working on something to get it published. The major fear he/she has is that no one else should publish it before he/she himself. This shows that if your work is not getting published, it of no purpose, and once someone publishes the work, the same work will face difficulty in getting accepted by any journal, may get rejected or may have less impact.
People tend to hide their actual work from others, even with best friends of theirs working under the same roof. In fact, most distrust they develop is against their best friends only. This can go so to such a shameful condition that, people donot share name of protein or even name of organism they are working on, even in conferences where we meet to know the development of science around us (don’t know much about physics and mathematics conferences, as I havn’t attended any, but this is typical example of biology conference). And many more such instances made me feel that equal amount of politcs and criticism, may be more than that is prevailing in science.
The way I see to it is, the tendency of people to copy and somehow get a paper or two published in an academic year. Well beyond that developing of tactics to save your work from being copied is also showing its great face. Even in our own presentation “Plagiarism and copyright” we have talked some of this issues. Is there any solution to it? don’t know, may be doesn’t exist, because, if ethics is personal and contextual then it can’t be questioned ethically that “is copying wrong?” And if copying is not wrong then geting your work saved from being copying is also a justified move. Isn’t it? How does this tom-and-jerry fight define standards of scientist and making politics a crucial part for your existence in science.