Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
marklutter6
0
0

Thanks, I edited it to read succeeded and failed. There are lots of examples that I left out as the list of social movements in very large. I will likely slowly add to the list over the coming years. 

The goal is mostly to get tech folks thinking about the mechanisms for social change. I think the EA folks do that ok now, but tech hasn't really done so, and developing good mental models will be useful for them. 

Reply
See in context
by Aaron Gertler 🔸
1 min read4 answers 3

31

Social and intellectual movements
Frontpage

Mark Lutter of the Charter Cities Institute has compiled a list of examples of social change. 

The list is wide-ranging, and there's no requirement that changes be positive — merely that a group of people tried to change a system and succeeded. 

I'll post the current entries here for easy skimming:

  • The Fabian Society
  • The repeal of the Corn Laws
  • The YIMBYs
  • The Mont Pelerin Society
  • The Meiji Restoration
  • Prohibition in the United States
  • Progressivism in the United States
  • Abolitionism
  • African decolonization
  • The creation of the Soviet Union
  • The transition from Roman Republic to Roman Empire
  • The Bretton Woods conference
  • The Tiananmen Square uprising
  • The French Revolution
  • The modern environmental movement
  • The Federalist Society

What are some examples Mark should add? 

Personally, I'm most interested in examples that:

  1. Involve movements on the approximate scale of EA, and/or 
  2. Involved changes being made carefully and with attention to detail, to the overall benefit of those affected.

31

0
0

Reactions

0
0
New Answer
New Comment


6 Answers sorted by
Top

JamesÖz 🔸

19
0
0

Otpor! - A group in Serbia who overthrew their dictator, Sloban Milosevic, in 2000 using mass nonviolent civil disobedience.

Indian Independence from British colonisation.

OutRage! - LGBT campaign group who used protests to win marriage equality for homosexual couples in the UK (and generally change opinion on gay rights)

ACT UP - Another civil disobedience group in the US who used nonviolent protests to get better access to AIDS treatment for gay people.

Civil Rights Movement in the US that won equal voting rights and desegregation (amongst other things) for black people.

Some of these might be smaller than the intended scale of EA but all planned quite meticulously with much more attention to detail than most people give them credit for! Having researched some of the above quite extensively, usually years of preparation and trial and error took place beforehand.

Linch

14
0
0

I'm not sure that all of these things are examples of 

a group of people tried to change a system and succeeded

For example, what concretely did:

The Tiananmen Square uprising

succeed in changing? 

Habryka [Deactivated]11
0
0

Similarly: 

The modern environmental movement

It seems pretty plausible that due to opposition to nuclear power and polarization and politicization of the whole space, the environmental movement has been overall harmful to the goals of that movement. 

I think it's a somewhat hard call to make, and don't think it's obvious whether the environmental movement was harmful by its own lights or not, but I definitely wouldn't count it as an obvious success.

Reply
8
Habryka [Deactivated]
Also:  My sense is overall the goals of the prohibition movement became harder to achieve after it took off, and it overall reinforced the role of alcohol in society, and made future efforts to reduce alcohol consumption harder. Again, not obviously harmful for its own goals, but also not obviously a success.
4
Aaron Gertler 🔸
(Not defending any particular example on Lutter's list, which is clearly an early-stage project and needs some filtering.) The modern environmental movement seems to have changed the course of history, using policies and positions supported by a majority of the movement's supporters.  Whether the net effect of all this change was actually good, by the movement's own lights, may be in doubt, but it seems to have done much of what it set out to do, to a greater extent than many similar movements. (Similarly, the French Revolution could be called "successful" even if many of its own leaders died in the process and the average French person was harmed more than helped.)
2
Habryka [Deactivated]
Well, no. Whether that change was actually good, by its own lights, is the whole point. Change that looks big but doesn't actually help is not something that you should meaningfully count as a success. Magnitude of effect is not in itself good. I have no interest in emulating social movements that cause big effects in the world, in ways that don't actually help, or maybe even actively harm, my goals. I don't see at all why I should classify something that just had a big effect, without that effect actually being useful, as a "success".  This is a really important distinction because in my model of the world it is much much easier to have some big effect on the world, than it is to have a specifically targeted big effect on the world. So measuring social movements by just "the size of their effect" is almost purely sampling from movements that took a path of lowest resistance of just doing things that are big, which is a path that doesn't seem like it generalizes at all to helping with things that we care about.
4
Aaron Gertler 🔸
While you could call the French Revolution "successful", in the dictionary sense of "accomplishing an aim or purpose", you certainly don't have to. That's a reasonable distinction to draw. As I said, I wouldn't have put the list together the same way, and I'd also much prefer to learn from movements and groups that actually achieved things I value. ***** That said, I've seen a lot of people in rationalist spaces discuss the rise of certain religions as interesting phenomena worthy of study, at least in piecemeal ways. Even if religious rituals are used to bond small social groups together, around shared belief in something false, one can still consider whether it's possible to copy the bonding elements without getting false beliefs at the same time. On a larger scale, can we learn from people who successfully lobbied for bad policies if we want to lobby for good policies? (Another spin on this is to find examples of groups that started with worthy goals, then lost sight of the goals as they grew more capable of changing the world. What happens to groups like that, and what makes them different from groups that keep hold of their goals? How can we keep our own groups in the second category rather than the first?)
Aaron Gertler 🔸2
0
0

Trying to imagine Lutter's reply, I'd say the uprising "brought many people together to fight for the same thing,  to an unusual degree," even if it didn't succeed.

Personally, I wouldn't include it on a list like this, and I think better examples for the list will involve more concrete change. (Though perhaps the longer-term history of China would have looked somewhat different without the uprising?) 

Reply
marklutter6
0
0

Thanks, I edited it to read succeeded and failed. There are lots of examples that I left out as the list of social movements in very large. I will likely slowly add to the list over the coming years. 

The goal is mostly to get tech folks thinking about the mechanisms for social change. I think the EA folks do that ok now, but tech hasn't really done so, and developing good mental models will be useful for them. 

Reply

BrianTan

4
0
0

I'll give two Philippine examples:

  1. The EDSA People Power Revolution in the Philippines in 1986, notable for being nonviolent. From Wikipedia:

It "was a series of popular demonstrations in the Philippines, mostly in Metro Manila, from February 22–25, 1986. There was a sustained campaign of civil resistance against regime violence and electoral fraud. The nonviolent revolution led to the departure of Ferdinand Marcos, the end of his 20-year presidential term and the restoration of democracy in the Philippines."

...The People Power Revolution has inspired a call for a change of government through peaceful protests rather than bloodshed. Many similar revolutions have followed since then, taking the Philippine example of nonviolent regime change, such as that in East Germany and many other former Soviet Bloc countries.[66] It also helped inspire the Arab Spring in 2011.[67]

2. Jose Rizal (the Philippines' national hero) and his books "Noli Me Tangere" and "El Filibusterismo":

After publication, Noli me Tangere was considered to be one of the instruments that initiated Filipino nationalism leading to the 1896 Philippine Revolution. The novel did not only awaken sleeping Filipino awareness, but also established the grounds for aspiring to independence. Noli was originally written in Spanish, so the likelihood that Spanish authorities would read it first was very high; which is what Rizal wanted to happen. Copies of books were redirected to churches, many were destroyed, many anti-Noli writers came into the picture. Catholic leaders in the Philippines at the time regarded the book as heretical, while Spanish colonial authorities declared it as subversive and against the government. Underground copies were distributed, so Rizal decided to increase the price, the demand was so high.

The impact also included the expulsion of Rizal's clan in Calamba, Laguna. Extradition cases were filed against him. This led to his decision to write the sequel of Noli Me Tangere, the El filibusterismo. Unlike El Fili or Fili, as they called it, Noli Me Tangere was more delicate and did not invoke rebellion. as El Fili does. So to ensure revolutionary ideas and patriotic reaction, Rizal redefined his careful concepts in Noli to aggression in El Fili.

I'm not sure if people can attribute the 1896 Philippine Revolution as primarily caused by Rizal, but I think he did play a key role. I'm also unsure if we should label the revolution a success (since the revolution merely transferred rule of the Philippines from the Spanish to Americans, and it's not clear to me if the Philippines played a large role in that happening), but I think these 2 books show the capability of fiction/books to inspire revolutions.

Neither of these examples involve movements on the approximate scale of EA. Both seem quite beneficial though and had some attention to detail (i.e. focused on being nonviolent). 

I'm not sure if there are any strong Philippine examples that involve movements on the scale of EA, but maybe the work of various local advocacy groups to have the Philippine Mental Health Act passed in 2018 could be one. Though those groups combined could be smaller than the current scale of EA.

freedomandutility

3
0
0

The 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement used non-partisan, non-violent civil disobedience to get an anti-corruption bill passed in Parliament

Comments3
Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Larks4
0
0

This is a very broad category; Belisarius reconquered Italy with a carefully planned campaign and an army on the approximate scale of the EA movement!

Reply
MaxRa1
0
0

According to my memory of the Cuba Libre Netflix documentary, Fidel Castro conquered Cuba with fewer than 100 men. At least that was the size of the initial group on his small ship with which he started his guerilla invasion.

Reply
MichaelA🔸1
0
0

#2022EAgoals

Reply
More from Aaron Gertler 🔸
244
Technical Report on Mirror Bacteria: Feasibility and Risks
Aaron Gertler 🔸
· · 1m read
18
18
181
We can protect millions of kids from a global killer — without billions of dollars (Washington Post)
Aaron Gertler 🔸
· · 1m read
3
3
333
No Silver Bullet Solutions for the Werewolf Crisis
Aaron Gertler 🔸
· · 8m read
10
10
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 20m read
 · 
Advanced AI could unlock an era of enlightened and competent government action. But without smart, active investment, we’ll squander that opportunity and barrel blindly into danger. Executive summary See also a summary on Twitter / X. The US federal government is falling behind the private sector on AI adoption. As AI improves, a growing gap would leave the government unable to effectively respond to AI-driven existential challenges and threaten the legitimacy of its democratic institutions. A dual imperative → Government adoption of AI can’t wait. Making steady progress is critical to: * Boost the government’s capacity to effectively respond to AI-driven existential challenges * Help democratic oversight keep up with the technological power of other groups * Defuse the risk of rushed AI adoption in a crisis → But hasty AI adoption could backfire. Without care, integration of AI could: * Be exploited, subverting independent government action * Lead to unsafe deployment of AI systems * Accelerate arms races or compress safety research timelines Summary of the recommendations 1. Work with the US federal government to help it effectively adopt AI Simplistic “pro-security” or “pro-speed” attitudes miss the point. Both are important — and many interventions would help with both. We should: * Invest in win-win measures that both facilitate adoption and reduce the risks involved, e.g.: * Build technical expertise within government (invest in AI and technical talent, ensure NIST is well resourced) * Streamline procurement processes for AI products and related tech (like cloud services) * Modernize the government’s digital infrastructure and data management practices * Prioritize high-leverage interventions that have strong adoption-boosting benefits with minor security costs or vice versa, e.g.: * On the security side: investing in cyber security, pre-deployment testing of AI in high-stakes areas, and advancing research on mitigating the ris
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
In our recent strategy retreat, the GWWC Leadership Team recognised that by spreading our limited resources across too many projects, we are unable to deliver the level of excellence and impact that our mission demands. True to our value of being mission accountable, we've therefore made the difficult but necessary decision to discontinue a total of 10 initiatives. By focusing our energy on fewer, more strategically aligned initiatives, we think we’ll be more likely to ultimately achieve our Big Hairy Audacious Goal of 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually. (See our 2025 strategy.) We’d like to be transparent about the choices we made, both to hold ourselves accountable and so other organisations can take the gaps we leave into account when planning their work. As such, this post aims to: * Inform the broader EA community about changes to projects & highlight opportunities to carry these projects forward * Provide timelines for project transitions * Explain our rationale for discontinuing certain initiatives What’s changing  We've identified 10 initiatives[1] to wind down or transition. These are: * GWWC Canada * Effective Altruism Australia funding partnership * GWWC Groups * Giving Games * Charity Elections * Effective Giving Meta evaluation and grantmaking * The Donor Lottery * Translations * Hosted Funds * New licensing of the GWWC brand  Each of these is detailed in the sections below, with timelines and transition plans where applicable. How this is relevant to you  We still believe in the impact potential of many of these projects. Our decision doesn’t necessarily reflect their lack of value, but rather our need to focus at this juncture of GWWC's development.  Thus, we are actively looking for organisations and individuals interested in taking on some of these projects. If that’s you, please do reach out: see each project's section for specific contact details. Thank you for your continued support as we
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
We are excited to share a summary of our 2025 strategy, which builds on our work in 2024 and provides a vision through 2027 and beyond! Background Giving What We Can (GWWC) is working towards a world without preventable suffering or existential risk, where everyone is able to flourish. We do this by making giving effectively and significantly a cultural norm. Focus on pledges Based on our last impact evaluation[1], we have made our pledges –  and in particular the 🔸10% Pledge – the core focus of GWWC’s work.[2] We know the 🔸10% Pledge is a powerful institution, as we’ve seen almost 10,000 people take it and give nearly $50M USD to high-impact charities annually. We believe it could become a norm among at least the richest 1% — and likely a much wider segment of the population — which would cumulatively direct an enormous quantity of financial resources towards tackling the world’s most pressing problems.  We initiated this focus on pledges in early 2024, and are doubling down on it in 2025. In line with this, we are retiring various other initiatives we were previously running and which are not consistent with our new strategy. Introducing our BHAG We are setting ourselves a long-term Big Hairy Audacious Goal (BHAG) of 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually, which we will start working towards in 2025. 1 million pledgers donating $3B USD to high-impact charities annually would be roughly equivalent to ~100x GWWC’s current scale, and could be achieved by 1% of the world’s richest 1% pledging and giving effectively. Achieving this would imply the equivalent of nearly 1 million lives being saved[3] every year. See the BHAG FAQ for more info. Working towards our BHAG Over the coming years, we expect to test various growth pathways and interventions that could get us to our BHAG, including digital marketing, partnerships with aligned organisations, community advocacy, media/PR, and direct outreach to potential pledgers. We thin
Relevant opportunities
49
$100 million dollar grant funding opportunity for EA
Jack Kelly
· · 3m read
1
1
14
MATS is hiring!
Ryan Kidd
·
1
1
20
PauseAI US is looking for local group leaders – apply today!
Felix De Simone
· · 1m read
0
0
View more