While this is all correct philosophically - Singer's point is a good one, even if he overdid it himself and got just a bit heavily into eugenics as well - I think you're not reckoning enough with the fact that these assholes *are the EA movement in practice*. (I'm speaking here as someone who's closely followed these assholes for over a decade now.)

EA as it is is what happens if a neoreactionary gets a dictionary and looks up "altruism" - often literally. There was a front-paged post on the EA Forum just recently putting forward race science (and citing Richard Lynn) as effective altruism. It got heavily upvoted.

The answer to the observably terrible reality is not to proffer the brochures harder and say that's not *real* EA. Because it is, in the same way Creflo Dollar really is Christianity in observable real-world practice.

You can shout at people that they're looking at the clear facts on the ground wrong, but the bad Christians are not the observers' problem to fix, and the bad EAs aren't the observers' problem to fix.

edit: my own writeup on EA for centrist finance readers: davidgerard.co.uk/block…