I don't think your comment is naive. Given some basic life necessities and niceties such as food, shelter, personal freedom, financial security and access to so

I don't think your comment is naive. Given some basic life necessities and niceties such as food, shelter, personal freedom, financial security and access to social services, most people would rather do the "correct" thing and think of a global benefit rather then a state benefit. But when the state is the entity providing those necessities in the first place, on the condition that you switch around those two priorities, then the number of people willing to do the "correct" thing drops off significantly. Now if those people can be assured of anonymity in their actions and safety from persecution by the state while still receiving the benefits of the state, the number goes up again by some percentage.