Not wrong but not helpful imo. (Past treatments of the theme: here, here, here.)
Main problem is you’re not considering the base rate for elitism / credentialism / privilege in the reference class “philanthropy / intellectual movements / technical fields / levers of power”. I’m first-generation college (and not elite college either), and I can tell you that my EA clients care the least about this among any class of clients (corporate, academic, government, non-EA philanthropy) by far.
Similarly: cmon, EA is 20% non-straight, as opposed to like 5% in the US.
It’s also just temporary founder effects plus previous lack of resources. One of the many boons of the funding influx is that we can start lifting unprivileged students. I’ve seen this happen ten times this year. There are lots of people trying to expand into Latin America and India. It’s hard!
Not wrong but not helpful imo. (Past treatments of the theme: here, here, here.)
Main problem is you’re not considering the base rate for elitism / credentialism / privilege in the reference class “philanthropy / intellectual movements / technical fields / levers of power”. I’m first-generation college (and not elite college either), and I can tell you that my EA clients care the least about this among any class of clients (corporate, academic, government, non-EA philanthropy) by far.
Similarly: cmon, EA is 20% non-straight, as opposed to like 5% in the US.
It’s also just temporary founder effects plus previous lack of resources. One of the many boons of the funding influx is that we can start lifting unprivileged students. I’ve seen this happen ten times this year. There are lots of people trying to expand into Latin America and India. It’s hard!