Simply a question, even if it is only accepted as a reductio ad absurdum. There is an error in the mere consideration of "altruism" as a quantitative contribution of goods (which is the error of all "consequentialism"). The effective work for altruism must be that which has to do with developing alternative psychosocial strategies. Cultural changes do not have to occur massively, like political changes. Cultural evolution does not work like that. Alternative cultural systems based on prosocial values ​​must be built. What traditional religions did in the past in the process of cultural evolution must be put into practice today by making use of alternative cultural resources. If astrology and alchemy evolved into astronomy and chemistry, religion can evolve as well.

Let us explain it by first putting the consequences, so that we can deduce the causes from them... Unequivocal altruism, and therefore the most effective.
https://unequivocal21.blogspot.com/

Civilization is the control of aggression. Altruism is a consequence of it, but altruism is also an unequivocal manifestation of it.