I agree. I don't think any amount of political donations or support would've made "We should give lots of taxpayer money to Africa" politically palatable in 2024. Enough voters were in an isolationist mood.

Not opposed to the idea as an intellectual excercise. Given the massive amount of money, lobbying, and attention paid to politics in mainstream US society, I'm skeptical that EA involvement would move the needle much. It's a pretty saturated field.

Hey another Wolverine!

I had no idea the school funded things like this. I totally would've taken advantage of that when I was an undergrad.

I like the idea!

"This bundle originated out of anti-Calvinist polemics..."

I was raised in a Calvinist tradition, and during my exploration of the denomination's history, it really seemed to me like there was a relationship between the rise of Calvinism (specifically Dutch Calvinism) and various proto-TESCREAL concepts like capitalism.

Late to seeing this, but it reminded me of the military debate over Effects Based Operations.

EBO holds that the effects of an action are more important than the action itself. This idea became prominent after the 1991 Gulf War, where the Air Force surgically destroyed Iraqi defenses by targeting key nodes and creating big second and third-order effects. 

EBO enjoyed a decade or two of prominence, before the reality that most follow-on effects are hard to predict set in. The Gulf War involved targeting a closed and well understood system, where input X reliably created outputs Y and Z. Most environments aren't like that...especially developing world chicken farms.

Today the military mostly relies on creating immediate first-order effects, rather than trying to predict the kind of amusing cascade you highlighted!

Thanks for writing this. It's very reflective of my experience as a former military officer.

I'll add (from an American perspective):

The military is a reliable means of upward socio-economic mobility, especially as an officer. To be reductive for a minute, EA often strikes me as a well-heeled Oxford/Boston/San Francisco club. As a son of a Midwestern UAW worker, I did not have the kind of background commonly associated with those places. I did well in my military career in a technical field, and had a few lucky breaks where I was invited into industry and academic circles in DC, Austin, and California. I doubt I could have made those connections without the institutional backing of the DoD.

I absolutely agree that the EA mindset is rare in the military (although we seem to be a minority in most contexts anyway). In my experience, you are more likely to encounter kindred spirits outside the combat arms career fields. In general, the more technical and education-laden a career field seemed to be, the more EA-ish people I encountered.

I love your points on the importance of developing leadership and organizational skills. One of the most common mistakes I see smart people (EA or not) make is the assumption that the most genius or technical person in the room is the best choice to lead. The best leaders I worked with were of generally above-average (but not genius) intelligence, with exceptional people skills and planning capacity. They surrounded themselves with smarter technical people, who acted as trusted advisors. The military follows a time-tested model that senior leaders are generalists, not specialists. Additionally, leadership is fundamentally about people. If you can't muster up an ounce of charisma, you will not be an effective leader. I think these finer points are often lost in highly intellectual circles.

Good analysis.

One of the reasons why I chose Prohibition is because it's a failed policy. A successful policy like the abolition of slavery introduces more potential for cognitive bias, like the tendency to view successful policies as inevitable or to support a position because of its success ("They like the strong horse.")

I like to think that I would've been pro-abolition. But you're right, I don't know whether 19thC me would've considered slavery a tractable issue. I also think there would've been a values call at some point, when it became clear the only path to abolition was via organized violence (war). Now I'm curious about how abolitionist pacifist groups like the Quakers addressed the topic. I'm going to squeeze that into my research this week.

If I can pull this thread...you previously wrote, "Maybe I have more faith in the market here than you do, but I do think that technical & scientific & economic advancement do in fact have a tendency to not only make everywhere better, but permanently so."

In your opinion, is this an argument in favor of prioritizing pushing both EA money and people into communities like SV that are high-impact in terms of technological advancement?

I didn't realize there was a resource out there to make these works more accessible. That's awesome!

I've been meaning to write a post about how Burke's "Reflections on the Revolution in France" should be required reading for anyone who wants to change the world. I wish I had read it before joining an (ultimately doomed) effort to promote human rights and democracy in a country where the average person can't read. In hindsight, investing in literacy would've been a better use of our time. 

Ouch that's rough. I honestly think every Westerner working in global poverty/health should have to spend a month living in a low-trust society. The corruption and nepotism/tribalism I saw every day were astonishing to my sheltered eyes. It makes me wonder how any overseas org can accurately assess their impact, given the challenges in tracking money and goods, and confirming if they actually make it to their intended recipients.