Collective interest sounds nicer
An article in the Economist on the geography of nuclear technology (http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=16007289) caught my eye on account of its concluding statement (well, the eye catching had probably already taken place, for me to have reached the conclusion).
> This is a time to put the collective interest first.
This sort of blanket statement is scary. By "collective" interest is obviously not meant the collective interest of all humans on the planet (for then there would be no question of an ordering). So let's put the interests of some before the others, oh, let's put our interests first, if someone's must take precedence. Fair enough, but let's not degrade ourselves and insult the others by calling it "collective interest".
Voltaire, a few hundred years ago, had the courage to describe the true price of sugar in Europe - surely, we can do the same.
ps: Why is it "scary"? Because it provides a clean chit in advance to anyone who wishes to use pointy missiles to clean up the mess down there, even if a couple of dozen bystanders are no longer able to stand by.