(Status: unsure) Preserving democracy in the United States is more valuable insofar as the world perceives the U.S. as the “leader” or “guarantor” of the liberal world order, particularly global democracy. But I don’t think this outweighs the importance of democracy in the rest of the world, especially large democracies like India.
I think EAs’ comparative advantages in promoting democracy in our own countries is the more important factor here.
Luke Muehlhauser mentions another argument that we didn’t mention yet: who would replace the US in its global leadership roles? China seems most likely to me, given economic and military growth, and also seemingly much worse in terms of human rights standards.
One of my least controversial views is that both the US in particular and humanity in general will probably be better off if the US (despite its many deep flaws) remains the world’s leading power, given the available alternatives for global leadership.
(Status: unsure) Preserving democracy in the United States is more valuable insofar as the world perceives the U.S. as the “leader” or “guarantor” of the liberal world order, particularly global democracy. But I don’t think this outweighs the importance of democracy in the rest of the world, especially large democracies like India.
I think EAs’ comparative advantages in promoting democracy in our own countries is the more important factor here.
Luke Muehlhauser mentions another argument that we didn’t mention yet: who would replace the US in its global leadership roles? China seems most likely to me, given economic and military growth, and also seemingly much worse in terms of human rights standards.
http://lukemuehlhauser.com/one-billion-americans/