Being self-interested is an important trait of humanity. There's an evil in altruism if it is used as a weapon against people who you think "aren't altruistic enough." It's a common argument against people who are simply stating facts and explaining reality.
We should be more concerned about those close to us than those who aren't - if no other reason because we can only be equitable to the people we interact with if we limit that scope. If we assume it is our responsibility to "care" or "be more empathetic to everyone in the world," we end up strangling ourselves by trying to go out and find every tragedy at which to cry every day of our life. There's enough evil in the world to keep us occupied forever.
It's far wiser to find a close group of friends and family and do what you can within that scope. Human beings are far more effective at being "empathetic" to their close associations than they are to everyone else around the world, and rightly so - should I sacrifice my family to go "be empathetic" about someone 10,000 miles away? Sure, I care about that person as a human being, but my efforts, emotion, and passion must be directed closeby, where it actually has potency.
How can I call someone else a shallow human being simply because I am not within their scope of intimate fellowship? That doesn't mean I can't be charitable or friendly with them. It just means I do not deal as closely with them as I would, say, a friend i've known and closely interacted with for 10+ years, and rightly so. Just a fact of human relationship.
|