Thanks for writing this. I think there are actually some pretty compelling examples of people/movements being quite successful at helping future generations (while partly trying to do so):
Some sources suggest that Lincoln had long-term motivations for permanently abolishing slavery, saying, “The abolition of slavery by constitutional provision settles the fate, for all coming time, not only of the millions now in bondage, but of unborn millions to come—a measure of such importance that these two votes must be procured.” Looking back now, abolition still looks like a great move for future generations.
I don’t know how accurate those sources are, but at least a U.S. constitutional amendment is structured to have very long-lasting impacts, given the extreme difficulty of undoing it.
The U.S. constitution appears to have been partly aiming to create a long-lasting democracy, citing “our posterity” in its preamble. It seems to have largely worked.
Proponents of measures to avoid nuclear war and reduce nuclear weapons testing often cited future generations as one motivation. (For example, in a famous speech he gave before launching U.S.-Soviet cooperation on limiting nuclear testing and nonproliferation, Kennedy appealed to the importance of “not merely peace in our time but peace for all time” and to “the right of future generations to a healthy existence.”) These efforts have been quite successful; we’ve had about 77 years with no wartime use of nuclear weapons, nuclear testing has plummeted, and far few states than once feared now have nuclear weapons.
[Edited to add] All this looks to me like a mixed (and maybe fairly good overall) track record, not a terrible one. (Though a deeper problem is that we can’t justifiably draw almost any conclusions about base rates from these or the post’s examples, since we’ve made no serious efforts to find a representative sample of historical longtermist efforts.)
I’m trying to think of a way to get a fair example: Coding party manifestos by attention to long-term future and trying to rate their success in office? I’m really unsure.
Thanks for writing this. I think there are actually some pretty compelling examples of people/movements being quite successful at helping future generations (while partly trying to do so):
Some sources suggest that Lincoln had long-term motivations for permanently abolishing slavery, saying, “The abolition of slavery by constitutional provision settles the fate, for all coming time, not only of the millions now in bondage, but of unborn millions to come—a measure of such importance that these two votes must be procured.” Looking back now, abolition still looks like a great move for future generations.
I don’t know how accurate those sources are, but at least a U.S. constitutional amendment is structured to have very long-lasting impacts, given the extreme difficulty of undoing it.
The U.S. constitution appears to have been partly aiming to create a long-lasting democracy, citing “our posterity” in its preamble. It seems to have largely worked.
Proponents of measures to avoid nuclear war and reduce nuclear weapons testing often cited future generations as one motivation. (For example, in a famous speech he gave before launching U.S.-Soviet cooperation on limiting nuclear testing and nonproliferation, Kennedy appealed to the importance of “not merely peace in our time but peace for all time” and to “the right of future generations to a healthy existence.”) These efforts have been quite successful; we’ve had about 77 years with no wartime use of nuclear weapons, nuclear testing has plummeted, and far few states than once feared now have nuclear weapons.
[Edited to add] All this looks to me like a mixed (and maybe fairly good overall) track record, not a terrible one. (Though a deeper problem is that we can’t justifiably draw almost any conclusions about base rates from these or the post’s examples, since we’ve made no serious efforts to find a representative sample of historical longtermist efforts.)
Thanks for the counterexamples!
I’m trying to think of a way to get a fair example: Coding party manifestos by attention to long-term future and trying to rate their success in office? I’m really unsure.
And worth noting that Ben Franklin was involved in the constitution, so at least some of his longtermist time seems to have been well spent.