If a malaria charity fails to achieve anything, people with malaria can try to complain. But if a longterm-oriented charity fails to achieve anything, the only people who could complain would be time travelers!
I appreciate this concern, but as I explained in this comment here, I think this is not a very strong argument against longtermism. To briefly summarize the ideas I explain in more detail there:
Many people are already not held very accountable in the near term, despite what we might hope.
Near-term interventions can also prove to be relatively unimportant from a long-term lens.
You can definitely be held accountable or feel guilty if it becomes apparent in the near-term that your arguments/proposals will actually be bad in the long-term.
Due to the massive expected value, Long-termism can probably still just bite the bullet here even if you mostly dismiss the previous points.
I appreciate this concern, but as I explained in this comment here, I think this is not a very strong argument against longtermism. To briefly summarize the ideas I explain in more detail there:
Many people are already not held very accountable in the near term, despite what we might hope.
Near-term interventions can also prove to be relatively unimportant from a long-term lens.
You can definitely be held accountable or feel guilty if it becomes apparent in the near-term that your arguments/proposals will actually be bad in the long-term.
Due to the massive expected value, Long-termism can probably still just bite the bullet here even if you mostly dismiss the previous points.