Social Justice, broadly speaking, aims to correct the lack of physical and psychological safety for those populations that are marginalized in some way. It accepts as a starting point that certain groups of people have been intentionally harmed and excluded from the opportunities and capital that have been available to privileged individuals throughout history. This inequity is then baked into the very systems that we operate within and take for granted.
We are then very clearly talking about large numbers of people, both in the U.S., and around the world. Rates of poverty, global wealth gaps, rates of incarceration, and mortality statistics all make this clear. The all-too frequent publicly violent deaths give painful color to this truth. Thus, it would stand to reason that we would want to do the most we could with the resources we have to alleviate the greatest amount of suffering. Everyone can generally agree on this fact. However, our actions often don't line up with that idea.
This is where the idea of effective altruism may offer us an interesting roadmap for change. The idea, developed in part by famed philosopher Peter Singer, involves looking for the best solutions to solve the world's most pressing problems, and ensuring those solutions positively impact the greatest number of people. For example, consider two similarly motivated charities. They champion the same cause, but one operates in a remote, rural community, and the other has a global presence. Effective altruism would insist we dedicate our resources to the global charity (assuming they are working effectively) because the impact would be greater and ultimately help more people. Resources are directed to where they can have the greatest impact.
The obvious foil to this idea is the nature of our emotions. We tend to gravitate towards causes that have personal meaning for us. There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach, but it does mean that we often commit our resources to causes of relatively less significance or impact. Far more money is donated to animal shelters to save cats and dogs, even though many times more farm animals are harmed every day. I get it. Cats and dogs are cute and cuddly, and most folks aren't inviting chickens and pigs into their bed at night (no judgment if you do!).
To some degree, then, effective altruism asks us to separate our emotions from our giving, whether that be of time, money, or other resources. If we took this approach to social justice work, where would we direct our energy and resources? Would police reform be more important? Would we commit to tackling fair housing? Would we advocate for a working wage? Clearly many folks are already committed to these causes, but how much more energy could we redirect?
Where are you committing your resources?
