(Nor can you run a country for the benefit of “all humans”, because then you’re in an adversarial relationship with your own citizens, who rightly want their leaders to prioritize them.)
I think there’s a compromise, in which you run the country so as to benefit all humans but disproportionately benefit / prioritize your own citizens. This seems to be a decent aggregation of the preferences of US citizens for example, many of whom do donate abroad for example.
I think there’s a compromise, in which you run the country so as to benefit all humans but disproportionately benefit / prioritize your own citizens. This seems to be a decent aggregation of the preferences of US citizens for example, many of whom do donate abroad for example.