As someone who is left-of-center, I agree that EA sometimes feels like it’s absorbing some bad ideas from the American centre-left (but I’m not 100% sure if I could find evidence for this).
I think a lot of it is because of Trumpism taking over the Republican Party, which has made having the Democrats in power important to many EA cause areas.
But I do think that a commitment to impartiality in EA has always implied fierce anti-nationalism, and I do think EA has always practically been a globalist movement.
But I agree that spending resources on partisan political issues is not going to be very cost-effective.
I do worry that it exemplifies a certain strand of EA thinking that often assumes (without much epistemic humility) that Trump-style populism is obviously worse for EA cause areas, or for total expected sentient utility, than Biden-style woke Leftism is. For those of us who have been subject to censorship and cancellation by irrational woke activists, or who have seen how woke activism has undermined the values of reason, evidence, impartiality, and free speech in American academia, media, government, and corporations, that conclusion is far from obvious.
In my opinion, neither American political party is at all aligned with EA thinking, priorities, cause areas, or ethics, so we should be very wary of assuming that either party is a natural or reliable supporter of EA ideals and practices, or it necessarily better than the other party.
With regard to nationalism, that’s a more complex and nuanced debate that deserves a longer discussion. I think that many conservative nationalists (e.g. Yoram Hazony) view nationalism (for every nation) as the most effective and most stable way to promote overall global well-being, and to avoid exploitation by exploitative global institutions that don’t actually promote global well-being, and that often reflect the geopolitical interests of just a few powerful nations.
As someone who is left-of-center, I agree that EA sometimes feels like it’s absorbing some bad ideas from the American centre-left (but I’m not 100% sure if I could find evidence for this).
I think a lot of it is because of Trumpism taking over the Republican Party, which has made having the Democrats in power important to many EA cause areas.
But I do think that a commitment to impartiality in EA has always implied fierce anti-nationalism, and I do think EA has always practically been a globalist movement.
But I agree that spending resources on partisan political issues is not going to be very cost-effective.
Hi, thanks for your comment.
I do worry that it exemplifies a certain strand of EA thinking that often assumes (without much epistemic humility) that Trump-style populism is obviously worse for EA cause areas, or for total expected sentient utility, than Biden-style woke Leftism is. For those of us who have been subject to censorship and cancellation by irrational woke activists, or who have seen how woke activism has undermined the values of reason, evidence, impartiality, and free speech in American academia, media, government, and corporations, that conclusion is far from obvious.
In my opinion, neither American political party is at all aligned with EA thinking, priorities, cause areas, or ethics, so we should be very wary of assuming that either party is a natural or reliable supporter of EA ideals and practices, or it necessarily better than the other party.
With regard to nationalism, that’s a more complex and nuanced debate that deserves a longer discussion. I think that many conservative nationalists (e.g. Yoram Hazony) view nationalism (for every nation) as the most effective and most stable way to promote overall global well-being, and to avoid exploitation by exploitative global institutions that don’t actually promote global well-being, and that often reflect the geopolitical interests of just a few powerful nations.