It’s complicated, but first things first you need to differentiate between the philosophy and the EA “movement”, led by Giving What We Can and others. The latter is shill bullshit and rich people power plays.
The former, set out mostly by Will MacAskill, is an application of future conscious utilitarianism within a capitalist system.
Or in a less wanky way, given you as a poor schmuck can only afford to give a few quid to charities each month, how can you “help the most”.
At the simplest level, giving £5/m to a local soup kitchen ran by volunteers who spend all of that money on food is probably more effective than giving the same amount to a major charity with hundreds of employees.
I hope that example also suggests how it itself is not actually straight forward. The local charity with volunteers may just objectively be shit at what they are trying to do, and all the money is wasted.
Point being, you, nor EA, know that unless you do the work to find out. While the principal of harm reduction is absolutely valid, it does not replace advocating for changes to the underlying system.
It’s complicated, but first things first you need to differentiate between the philosophy and the EA “movement”, led by Giving What We Can and others. The latter is shill bullshit and rich people power plays.
The former, set out mostly by Will MacAskill, is an application of future conscious utilitarianism within a capitalist system.
Or in a less wanky way, given you as a poor schmuck can only afford to give a few quid to charities each month, how can you “help the most”.
At the simplest level, giving £5/m to a local soup kitchen ran by volunteers who spend all of that money on food is probably more effective than giving the same amount to a major charity with hundreds of employees.
I hope that example also suggests how it itself is not actually straight forward. The local charity with volunteers may just objectively be shit at what they are trying to do, and all the money is wasted.
Point being, you, nor EA, know that unless you do the work to find out. While the principal of harm reduction is absolutely valid, it does not replace advocating for changes to the underlying system.