You're familiar with me-firsters right - those people who always want to go first and get the first, best items all for themselves? You probably revile these people and rightfully so. I don't advocate altruism in the sense that one's duty is first to sacrifice for others, but I do recognize that a man leads a better life if he loves and gives. Trampling on others without respect for their wants and needs deserves some reproach. But what I propose to you is that you revile, high above the me-firsters, the we-firsters. These are the apparently kind souls who, upon hearing of something they don't like or broadly disapprove of, claim that "we ought to do something." Whether that something is to invade country x, y or z (or all three), establish a federal schooling system, ban handguns, large capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons, or pass legislation aimed at keeping drugs off the streets and away from the children, these busy-bodies always want what is best. They just aren't willing to go it alone. They need the help of the royal "we".
Example: "Why don't we do something about Darfur, Afghanistan, and Libya?!"
To me this is like saying, "why don't we do a better job at the Olympics?" "We" isn't the correct word to use. What is meant is "the US Olympic team", just as above is meant the "US Government" or the" US military."
You want to contribute to the success of the Olympic team? Get off your duff and start training. Donate money or volunteer to drive struggling young gymnasts to training at the crack of dawn every day. You want to help the poor or protect the children? How about starting within your self? Champion a cause, donate money to a charity, volunteer your time or peacefully protest that which you see as evil. Stop invoking the long arm of the law to force "us" to help you. See something evil worth stopping? Think "me first!"