I recently ran into this book review by Scott Alexander. While reading the book review I kept being struck by passages that could just as well have been describing the EA movement.
The Fabian movement was an influential British socialist movement. They managed to get their members into various important positions in society to lobby for their, at the time, radical socialist agenda demanding free public education, women's suffrage, eight hour work days and more.
Even its critics sounded familiar, arguing that the Fabian society was nothing more than a talking-club the privileged!
A few highlights from the review:
Whatever the Fabians’ other advantages, they arose at a really good time to be a socialist thinker. There was a sort of feeling in the air that socialism was the wave of the future, that there were literally no good arguments whatsoever against it, that you were either an intellectual (in which case it was obvious that socialism was better) or you were just so thoughtless that you had never even considered the matter at all
He didn’t expect forceful action – recruitment campaigns, branch organizations, or the like – to have any effect. Instead, he favored a soft touch. Have the sort of intellectual atmosphere that talented people would be attracted to. Gradually draw them in with interesting social and intellectual activities. Once they’re attached, get them in on the first rung of some ladder or other – local politics, informal debate, small-time pamphlet writing. Have a few geniuses around who can recognize other geniuses. Then have positions to put people in once they’re worthy of it – whether it’s the lecture circuit, the propaganda business, or a university for them to teach at.
The Society’s members tended to be strange people, mercurial and hard to keep on task. Occasionally they would get distracted and forget about communism entirely, running off to worry about art or philosophy or ghost-hunting or something.
Pease was generally unimpressed with how these worked out. He felt experience had proven most of the people based outside London to be intellectually second-rate and without much to contribute.
It seems to me there is a ton to learn from the history of the Fabian society. Both from its successes and shortcomings. I'm curious to hear what you think.
The Fabian Society even went ahead with one of the megaprojects currently being discussed in EA: founding a new university.
In 1894, Fabian Society members Beatrice and Sidney Webb, Graham Walls, and George Bernard Shaw established the London School of Economics and Political Science to improve social science education and address what they saw as the world's most pressing problems of the time.
You might be interested in this list of social-change movements by Mark Lutter (former head of Charter Cities Institute). Excerpting the first third of the page:
See Mark Lutter's site for a bunch more!
Thanks for posting this! I think it is often really useful to look at previous historical movements to learn lessons and contextualise modern concerns.
I really enjoyed that review, and found two potential further similarities between the Fabians and EA. Firstly, the Fabians had a number of strategies to have an impact. Those mentioned in the review include pamphleting, running political campaigns and even setting up universities. Secondly, the Fabians are said to have been a politically diverse group, or a 'big tent'. I think that at its best, EA can learn from a variety of different traditions to try to find the most effective ways to do good.
I think the Mont Pellerin Society were pretty similar in approach too (https://www.effectivealtruism.org/articles/ea-neoliberal)