Executive summary: This exploratory post argues that many social change advocates selectively invoke historical movements to justify their preferred strategies, cautioning that no single approach is universally “most effective” and urging a more open-minded, evidence-based, and context-sensitive mindset in advocacy work.
Key points:
Historical social movements can be used to support nearly any theory of change—civil resistance, technological innovation, organizing, insider advocacy, and democratic participation all have supporting case studies—making it easy to confirm pre-existing beliefs.
Advocates often cherry-pick examples that support their strategy while ignoring failures or contradictory evidence, creating a form of confirmation bias in how history is used.
The author emphasizes humility, warning against confidently declaring one’s strategy as “the most effective” and instead suggests acknowledging uncertainty and the importance of context.
Adopting a “scout mindset”—seeking truth over confirmation—is recommended, including tools like the “selective skeptic test” and “holding identity lightly” to reduce bias.
Engaging with people who hold different views is important for avoiding echo chambers and improving one’s understanding of societal attitudes, as illustrated by survey data showing Progressive Activists often misjudge public opinion.
While not dismissing historical learning or research, the author advocates for more rigorous, pre-registered methods (like literature reviews with inclusion criteria) to reduce motivated reasoning in movement strategy.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: This exploratory post argues that many social change advocates selectively invoke historical movements to justify their preferred strategies, cautioning that no single approach is universally “most effective” and urging a more open-minded, evidence-based, and context-sensitive mindset in advocacy work.
Key points:
Historical social movements can be used to support nearly any theory of change—civil resistance, technological innovation, organizing, insider advocacy, and democratic participation all have supporting case studies—making it easy to confirm pre-existing beliefs.
Advocates often cherry-pick examples that support their strategy while ignoring failures or contradictory evidence, creating a form of confirmation bias in how history is used.
The author emphasizes humility, warning against confidently declaring one’s strategy as “the most effective” and instead suggests acknowledging uncertainty and the importance of context.
Adopting a “scout mindset”—seeking truth over confirmation—is recommended, including tools like the “selective skeptic test” and “holding identity lightly” to reduce bias.
Engaging with people who hold different views is important for avoiding echo chambers and improving one’s understanding of societal attitudes, as illustrated by survey data showing Progressive Activists often misjudge public opinion.
While not dismissing historical learning or research, the author advocates for more rigorous, pre-registered methods (like literature reviews with inclusion criteria) to reduce motivated reasoning in movement strategy.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.