Summary

This opinion-based post deals with the possibility for EA to engage more directly in politics. With the latter, I refer to outspokenly sponsoring EA values for them to be applied by bipartisan political actors, such as parties and elected representatives. After listing the reasons why I believe EA could benefit from a broader involvement in politics, I’ll explain some theoretical key points that I consider important for pursuing this goal. Then, I’ll assess some challenges and strengths of the argument. To conclude, the post will end with a far-from-exhaustive list of examples of more practical actions that could be undertaken to put my words into practice.

Assumptions

I disclaim here some of the possible flaws in my reasoning:

Different countries and regions have distinct political dynamics. Therefore, in practical terms, a one-fit-all solution might be very hard to achieve due to the profoundly different institutional frameworks, political actors, and social norms. My background is European/Italian, so my assumptions are, willingly or not, based on this unavoidably limited perspective.
I consider this post mainly as a tool to share my opinion about the topic of EA in politics, and I would appreciate receiving feedback and constructive criticism. To shift from words to practice, much more tangible effort in planning, engaging more people, and realizing concrete steps is needed. If anybody is interested in taking further action in that direction, reach out: I would be glad to talk and cooperate!

Why Politics?

As a rule of thumb, precluding a route a priori is not effective: nothing should be left untried. Of course, irrational attempts are not effective. That’s why I list here some – hopefully rational – reasons why direct involvement in politics should be considered by EAs:

Direct involvement in politics is a long-term process. The efforts made now, or in the near future, in that direction aim to achieve greater goals in the long run. This basic line of reasoning underlies the approach to most EA causes and complies with the widespread focus on the long term.
Although challenging the status quo is a slow process, this initial step is needed to create the right framework where EA cause-specific solutions can be implemented. Opposition from the policymakers hampers cause prioritization in political agenda. It hence makes implementing effective policies almost impossible (e.g.: if AI safety is not a topic of parliamentary discussion because MPs don’t deem it important, no AI safety policy will be debated or adopted even if suggested by external entities).
Only direct involvement in the political institutions of a country or a transnational organization allows one to have the last say on policies. Having good, effective solutions – but just in theory – is not enough: they must be implemented, and a legislative/bureaucratic framework that promotes – or at least does not hinder or is hostile to – them is required. For example, if an EA-aligned research team comes up with a revolutionary solution that reduces animal suffering by producing cheap and healthy alternative proteins but the existing governments strongly oppose implementing polices that legalize these products, the effective solution cannot reach the market and have any impact on society.

In Theory: How Can We Do That?

A few, Simple Values

The EA movement is highly diversified, and members focus on many different cause areas, which do not necessarily have much in common with each other (e.g.: animal welfare and AI safety pertain to completely different fields of research). However, EAs share a common ground of values and goals that unites them all. Doing the most good, rationalizing scarce resources for the best outcome, and contributing to the well-being of society and future generations are only some examples.

How does that relate to political involvement? Voters are people with jobs, families, and busy schedules. EA will never achieve widespread diffusion if hours of reading, discussion, and research are needed to get at least a general understanding of what it means. In politics, candidates with the most emotionally appealing stories often win. Why? Because they can quickly reach the heart of their audience. Having the impression of knowing those candidates, people trust and vote for them. EA does not rely on emotions. All the opposite, it is often mostly a matter of numbers. Nevertheless, the shared values across the EA community can be transformed into a quick, simple, effective list of principles that underly EA philosophy. This approach can be applied to the issues usually handled by governments and institutions. If a short list of bullet points with EA’s core values reached a wide audience, many people could have a taste of what EA is. Despite limited or no knowledge at all about the various EA cause areas, they could develop a general understanding of the movement, which is the bedrock for trusting it. In turn, if a higher number of people entered the “loop” of EA debate, more contributions could be gathered and more brains would work on doing good for society, or at least support who dedicates their career to this goal.

Getting Rid of Labels

I don’t like labels. From an external perspective, the label “EA-affiliated” in a political campaign might trigger the reduction of the public perception of EA as an exclusively political entity – which is not. Instead, the point is: to spread the substance of the EA mindset. That is to say, making more people consider to be “common sense” principles such as rationally evaluating choices (e.g.: asking oneself questions like: Perhaps I can save part of my income maintaining the same lifestyle. Since investing is usually better than putting money aside, where can I invest it to do something positive for society – not just for my individual profit?), having a positive social impact through one’s career, bearing in mind the long-term consequences of one’s actions, etc.

The name printed on the external surface doesn’t matter much as long as the core values are supported. Moreover, attention must be paid to differentiating between the choices of single individuals and the general values of the EA community. Otherwise, the political arena might become a dangerous trap for negatively labeling the entire movement as a consequence of the misconduct of one affiliated member. All in all, I would argue that to pursue a wider political involvement, utmost care must be dedicated to highlighting that “Effective Altruism” in politics is a set of principles, not a fixed list of solutions and behaviors.

From an internal perspective, I have the impression that many EAs perceive EA’s direct involvement in politics as a sort of taboo. However, the phenomenon of grassroots civil rights and environmental movements that have started from civil society and ended up in politics is not new (e.g.: Green parties in the EU). Perhaps, entering governments and parliaments is not the only way to provoke a significant change, but it might be a path worth pursuing. Specifically, if some EAs wanted to pursue an effective policy-related career, limiting it to lobbying and think tanks might preclude opportunities to have a broader impact.

Bipartisanship

The EA values deal with lively debates for prioritizing the most pressing issues and working together to achieve the most effective solutions. It’s more about trying to ask the best questions to work on, rather than finding one arbitrary answer to apply everywhere. EA in politics could represent a model applicable to multiple contexts. This framework could thus be adopted by various actors in different countries and sides of the political spectrum. I’m not necessarily arguing for the creation of an “EA party:” EAs often disagree on the answers – and this constant debate is a valuable source of growth. Ideally, EAs with different political orientations could collaborate with government and opposition forces thanks to the presence of a common ground of shared values and reciprocal respect. The EA approach of searching for solutions to existential issues can represent a bipartisan standard. Regardless of which party rules a country, if this model was applied, governance could generally become more aligned with EA and more effective. As I argued for the “EA label,” the matter lies again in the substance, not in the surface. The aim is to enhance national and transnational governance’s response to existential problems by working inside the institutions. Whether the adopted policies resonate more with the left or the right wing doesn’t matter, as long as they effectively tackle the most pressing issues for the global society (These are often in conflict with domestic priorities. To make them coincide, a radical mindset shift should take place. For instance, the wealthiest people living in the most developed countries world – we – could accept to compromise part of their interests for the sake of a more even global well-being. I sadly have to admit that enormous efforts and a long time will be required to achieve that kind of reading among the electorate, which would in turn prompt different elect. In the meanwhile, there’s no option other than finding the least detrimental compromise between local and global interests.).

A Long-term View: Change Doesn’t Happen Quickly

Ideally, EA core values will eventually become universally agreed common sense. Sadly, the reality is currently far from that. Provided that many politicians act based on their personal – geopolitical, financial, etc. – interests, it is difficult to imagine the shift to an approach that considers the whole society, future generations, and even animals as crucial stakeholders. However, from a long-term perspective, starting to raise grassroots awareness now is the first step to achieve institutional systemic change in the future (i.e.: a mindset shift in the electorate will be mirrored by a future change in their choices for their elected representatives). The introduction of EA values in the political arena is crucial to spreading them to the broader electoral community. Significative public campaigns should be used to inform more people about the presence of a bipartisan community that strives to do good for society.

Personally, the last time I voted in my country’s general elections (Italy), I couldn’t find an option that resonated with my values. A strategy to fill this gap could be pushing the existing parties to integrate EA ideals. In case of their excessive hostility towards change, alternative voices to the establishment should try to reach the voters, allowing them to have a choice that differs from the status quo. The latter is clearly not working most effectively – often all the opposite. Therefore, EAs’ active political engagement as a politically heterogeneous group of people who set forth EA principles across all sides of the political spectrum could initiate the process of modifying how political debates – do not – work. An institutional systemic change can begin thanks to the spread of an approach based on constant debate, mutual improvement, reciprocal respect, and the shared goal of doing the most good for society.

Not Only Lobbying

Lobbying is generally more supported than direct political involvement. However, the one does not exclude the other. Lobbying can have an impact on the short-medium term. Lobbying specific politicians is effective for the implementation of a policy about a currently pressing issue. Notwithstanding, once new elections prompt changes in the elected representatives, the operations of networking and lobbying need to start anew. Whereas, building career capital, direct experience, and rooted networks within the institutions can constitute an asset in the long term. If through democratic elections EA-aligned candidates substituted former public officials, there would be no need for external lobbying to push EA causes into political agendas – since the EA representatives would already have them listed at the top of their campaign programs

Challenges

The Risk of Oversimplification

Simple concepts spread faster. However, conciseness must not forego the meaning of the broader picture. Although challenging, I think that the shared values that unite EAs’ general mindset can be synthesized without diving into specific cause areas and focusing on ideals, excluding numerical formulas.

Long-term Aims and Short-term Consensus

Not only politicians but also voters are usually driven by short-term personal interests. How can long-termism become appealing? First and foremost, humanity does not have many chances of surviving unless it adopts a more forward-looking approach to resource exploitation and development. Secondly, long-termism has already been introduced into public debate thanks to institutional initiatives such as the UN 2030 Agenda, which proposes sustainability not only for the present but also for the next generations. Long-term thinking has begun to be included even in private corporations’ policies through requirements such as sustainability reporting. In general, I would say that, willingly or not, long-termism is doomed to become the widespread mindset in the coming years for reasons that deal with the mere survival of humankind. Having already internalized this principle, EA is a step ahead in this cultural shift.

Being Corrupted by the System

Politics corrupts even the most well-intentioned person. One starts with great ideals and ends up prey to the system of greed and thirst for power. At the end of the day, loyalty to one’s values is up to one’s integrity. Although the final choice is only yours, being part of a community that reminds you of the importance of your principles can partially prevent you from going astray. That’s why the presence of a strong network within EA can represent a powerful positive factor that could counter the tendency of being corrupted by the existing, self-reinforcing system of power that oftentimes dominates politics.

Strengths

The Youth

Both the EA community and the electorate that feels underrepresented in politics include mostly young people. If EA managed to achieve more widespread support and active political involvement, it could represent one of the tools for the young generations to promote radical change of the status quo. Generally, younger generations are more open to progress, and that can be an advantage in favor of a mostly youth-composed movement such as EA.

The Power of the Network

EA is a decentralized network, which exists thanks to links between its members. Similarly, connections between people are key in politics. Building an influential network within established institutions and governments requires time. But, since the very structure of EA is based on links and cooperation between its components, this already existing structure can easily be applied in the political environment.

Need for Systemic Change

Most notably, climate change and the growing global socioeconomic inequalities are issues that show the pressing need for systemic change in how the world is governed. The existing actors in domestic and global governance have not yet managed to solve this dilemma. At the same time, the main question that drives EA’s philosophy is how to optimize the available resources to help others most effectively. I would argue that the answer to the latter could also solve the former. The involvement of EA in global and local governance would hence be highly positive for the overall society.

In Practice: What’s Next?

I list here some practical steps that could be taken to translate the words written in this post into actions:

Spreading awareness about the basic principles shared by EAs through social media, in a quick, easy-to-understand way (e.g.: podcast episodes no longer than 10 minutes; a main EA social media profile that regularly publishes informative content, for example on Instagram and TikTok; public conferences and events that are open to non-EA audience, etc.).
Debunk the taboo of direct political involvement among EAs and encourage more EAs to pursue careers within the institutions if they are a fit for them. Ideological barriers play a huge role in determining the outcome of our actions. Politics should be promoted as an arena where EAs can freely participate without fear of repercussions and controversies over the rest of the community.
Building closer links and active networks among EAs that pursue political involvement, especially across different countries and opposing sides of the political spectrum (e.g.: monthly or quarterly regional or global governance-focused conferences or informal events that allow EAs to meet and talk to each other; newsletters with list of open opportunities and developing projects in the field; initiatives that allow EAs interested in direct political involvement to meet EAs already active in this area, and possibly advertising those events publicly to reach other people working in the field but outside of EA).
Promoting EA not only as a community of like-minded people but also as a value-based approach (model based on more abstract ideals, without the technical knowledge related to specific cause areas), that could appeal even to individuals who don’t want to be linked to a specific label/don’t have the time or the interest to complete a fellowship.
Trying to initiate politically active social movements (that with time could evolve into proper political parties), especially youth-driven ones, would fill the representative gaps in areas where no mainstream party resonates with EA values. The “EA label” can be set aside to prevent political controversies from causing negative consequences on the movement as a whole, as long as substantially the same core values are adopted.

All in all, complex problems cannot have simple solutions. But, that’s not a valid reason for not trying to solve them.

EA in Politics: Let’s Debunk a Taboo