Yes, I would agree. But I have noticed people interpret that differently. There are many in the world, and this applies to certain cultures, such as Mediterranean, Middle East and all of Asia in general, where people assume responsibility for their family, but not beyond that. They have no cultural precedence for seeing they should assume responsibility for anything beyond their family.
Then there are many who can't see any necessity to assume responsibility for anything beyond the human species.
Assuming responsibility for our actions, implies we acknowledge the consequences of our action upon something. It starts with ourself, but that is mostly misused into selfishness. So we have to extend it to the consequences of those around us. It is the limitations of how far we extend that causes the problem.
Take Greece, in this latest financial upheaval. The Greeks would definitely see the importance of being responsible for their family. This approach has always led to corruption, because family comes before country. Thus to defraud the national collective, especially in small ways, is not seen as a moral issue, because the interest of family takes precedence, and the two are not easily seen as the same. I mean, very few would see that family prosperity lies in nation prosperity. This is especially obvious in India and China, as well as many other traditional cultures, mostly because they have never had strong national identities.
