I think Amber’s answer is excellent. I’ll add some more thoughts. As Amber pointed out, within the EA community, there is a fair amount of focus on anti-discrimination/diversity work focused on the community itself, similar to how many organizations (academic departments / businesses / social groups) increasingly focus on such issues as an aspect required to form a healthy community.
Outside of EA’s own community, as Amber points out, these issues are not focused on as much. One additional reason for why such work is rarely endorsed is that it is typically focused on communities that are not the most marginalized. For example, a lot of work on discrimination focuses on race/gender issues in the US or Europe. These are important issues to address, but they will naturally directly benefit individuals in the US or Europe most. But they rarely interact with e.g. the global extreme poor, i.e. individuals living with an income of less than $1.90 a day, a group that many consider to be the most marginalized group.
These extremely poor individuals seem to be among the worst of individuals globally, and may be in direst need of help. The problem of their continuing neglect by the global community seems more pressing than most problems in developed countries to many EAs. Hence, many EAs will believe that benefiting them takes priority over helping individuals that face unjust treatment in the US or Europe, so long as our resources to rectify injustice and suffering are limited (and we thus have to make choices on who to help).
This does not mean that all EAs share this view, or that no projects on the issues you mention are pursued. Some examples of US-focused initiatives that come to mind are the support of many EAs for Bailfund projects or the Openphil (a large EA funder) work on criminal justice reform. An example of an area where discrimination outside of OECD countries is addressed would be Trans Rescue operations in Uganda.
However, most EAs continue to believe that the most efficient ways of helping individuals is focusing on the global poor and disadvantaged. Given that most EAs believe each individual is equally deserving of our help, they will then focus on interventions that efficiently promote the well-being of those individuals over other interventions.
I personally agree with EA’s current approach to direct work on these topics, which I take to be roughly “Try to look at the areas, identify high-value opportunities for impact, selectively discuss and fund such opportunities”—an approach EA strives to take to most issues. I am very happy about the increased attention diversity is getting within the community, and I believe it has and will continue to increase the health and quality of the EA community.
On another note, I am happy that you are engaging with EA and feel comfortable asking these questions. I hope you continue to raise any questions that come up as you continue to engage with EA. EA is an umbrella for a lot of different organizations and individuals with very different views, so it is absolutely natural to have many questions as one starts to look into it!
I think Amber’s answer is excellent. I’ll add some more thoughts.
As Amber pointed out, within the EA community, there is a fair amount of focus on anti-discrimination/diversity work focused on the community itself, similar to how many organizations (academic departments / businesses / social groups) increasingly focus on such issues as an aspect required to form a healthy community.
Outside of EA’s own community, as Amber points out, these issues are not focused on as much. One additional reason for why such work is rarely endorsed is that it is typically focused on communities that are not the most marginalized. For example, a lot of work on discrimination focuses on race/gender issues in the US or Europe. These are important issues to address, but they will naturally directly benefit individuals in the US or Europe most. But they rarely interact with e.g. the global extreme poor, i.e. individuals living with an income of less than $1.90 a day, a group that many consider to be the most marginalized group.
These extremely poor individuals seem to be among the worst of individuals globally, and may be in direst need of help. The problem of their continuing neglect by the global community seems more pressing than most problems in developed countries to many EAs. Hence, many EAs will believe that benefiting them takes priority over helping individuals that face unjust treatment in the US or Europe, so long as our resources to rectify injustice and suffering are limited (and we thus have to make choices on who to help).
This does not mean that all EAs share this view, or that no projects on the issues you mention are pursued. Some examples of US-focused initiatives that come to mind are the support of many EAs for Bailfund projects or the Openphil (a large EA funder) work on criminal justice reform. An example of an area where discrimination outside of OECD countries is addressed would be Trans Rescue operations in Uganda.
However, most EAs continue to believe that the most efficient ways of helping individuals is focusing on the global poor and disadvantaged. Given that most EAs believe each individual is equally deserving of our help, they will then focus on interventions that efficiently promote the well-being of those individuals over other interventions.
I personally agree with EA’s current approach to direct work on these topics, which I take to be roughly “Try to look at the areas, identify high-value opportunities for impact, selectively discuss and fund such opportunities”—an approach EA strives to take to most issues. I am very happy about the increased attention diversity is getting within the community, and I believe it has and will continue to increase the health and quality of the EA community.
On another note, I am happy that you are engaging with EA and feel comfortable asking these questions. I hope you continue to raise any questions that come up as you continue to engage with EA. EA is an umbrella for a lot of different organizations and individuals with very different views, so it is absolutely natural to have many questions as one starts to look into it!
Notably OpenPhil have now stopped supporting crime work—for a good overview of some of the issues involved see this article by Nuno.