EA was never an objectively right way to do charity. That's the point. I will elaborate. The Gates foundations is perhaps the most famous EA oriented charity to ever to exist. It is largely independent of the global EA movement. After several years doing research, Melinda Gates wrote a book about how she had discovered that most of their projects were directly tied to gender equality. To do their work effectively, they needed to overcome female disempowerment in particular . I read the book and smiled while half-rolling my eyes along with most of EU, where each of her discoveries has been known for at least 50 years. UN, universites and the world bank already published such findings, but in USA it was news somehow. (Politics). You would think this example would sway at least big chunks of EA worldwide. It did not, afaik. That means EA didn't really look beyond the probability space of EA solutions that were already in line with the local culture. If anyone did, it was not supported by 'the tribe'.  Sic semper erat et sic semper erit. This is not a big critique of EA. All such groups are shaped by their originating culture(s). But it at least shows that leaning on utilitarianism isn't enough to have a rational charity that's self improving.