🔗 Share this article

Let's begin with the fundamental problem: The Microsoft founder is a politics denier. While he was slow to accept it, he now recognizes environmental science. But he lives in flat, embarrassing denial about the realities of power. His recent article on climate, published last week, treats the issue as if it existed in a political vacuum. He pens words that disregard governmental authority, and as if extreme wealth didn't exist.

Primary Argument

His key position states that funds are very limited, so the delegates at this month's climate summit in Brazil should direct money away from "short-term pollution targets" towards environmental adjustment and spending on poverty and disease.

Yes, the funds available for any good cause are scarce, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, some implacable truth about human society. The reason is elite influence has declared war on government social programs, resulting in the elimination of development assistance and severe reductions in assistance funding of various states. Financial restraint stems from policy choices. The selection to enforce it originates with leaders submitting to the preferences of the ultra-rich.

Existing Wealth

There are truckloads of money available. Shortly following Gates' latest publication, data indicated that the combined assets of America's wealthiest ten individuals grew by $698bn during the previous twelve months. These funds independently, the increase in a handful of billionaires' net worth, is approximately ten times the money needed each year to stop deep deprivation worldwide. How have they managed to channel so much of economic resources into private hands? What prevents redistribution through appropriate revenue collection? The explanation involves their transformation of economic power into political power. As their wealth increases, the stronger their capacity to shape the state and economic system to their desires, securing ongoing financial growth. But the philanthropist discusses nothing in his essay about methods and sources for additional funds for both climate solutions and hardship alleviation could be found.

'His writing appears primarily as reconciliation with Donald Trump.' The billionaire alongside Trump at an exclusive meal for corporate executives in the capital.

The Poverty-Wealth Connection

An obvious relationship appears between the poverty Gates claims to care so much about and the riches he overlooks. In the US, housing insecurity is achieving unprecedented levels, and so is the share of assets owned by the top 0.1%. Although this may not describe Gates' personal approach, by suppressing salaries, racking up rents, undermining worker collectives and securing tax reductions and budget decreases, extremely wealthy individuals benefit from others' economic struggles.

Investigation Conclusions

A notable research in academic political journals, one of the rare examinations of this private sphere, found that extremely wealthy individuals hold vastly distinct political perspectives from most people. The rich participants surveyed, completely unlike ordinary citizens, considered fiscal shortfalls as critical of the issues it listed, and ecological crisis as insignificant. They were far more likely to insist that social welfare programs and national health services should be decreased, and much less inclined to think that jobless individuals deserve adequate living conditions, or that there should be increased oversight of energy firms, financial institutions and insurance providers. They were fiercely opposed to redistribution.

Political Influence

Which perspectives dominate? The tiny minority or the great majority? Though the study was conducted in the Obama years, it found that billionaires maintained closer relationships with government figures than average citizens. What about currently? The situation hardly requires explanation.

Missing Elements and Presumptions

Here's another crucial exclusion from the billionaire's article: throughout thousands of words, Trump goes unmentioned. Should the billionaire address this, he'd have to admit that another key premise is questionable: lower prices for sustainable technology inevitably produces environmental improvement. Naturally, it's beneficial that renewable energy costs are dropping significantly than traditional energy sources. But Trump and like-minded politicians are doing everything they can to impede the transition.

In part due to these factors, traditional energy sources stay very profitable. This potentially clarifies why, even though Gates states his organization sold all direct fossil fuel investments in 2019, its fossil fuel stock and bond holdings have, actually grown.

Psychological Factors

To Gates, overthrowing the power of the ultra-wealthy may be unthinkable. This isn't just about conflicting with his perspective. Considering his significant avoidance of this subject, he may actually be unable to conceptualize it. Perhaps this is a symptom of "billionaire brain": a fundamental failure to comprehend alternative viewpoints. Although extremely wealthy individuals are difficult to research, extrapolating from research into how gaining wealth and status affects cognition could suggest that gaining massive wealth resembles experiencing brain trauma. Fortunes seem to disturb particular brain operations, especially those involving compassion and viewpoint.

Strategic Considerations

However, strategic thinking might also be involved: his article seems designed as appeasement toward Trump. Trump certainly took it that way: "I (WE!) just won the War on the Climate Change Hoax. Bill Gates has finally admitted that he was completely WRONG on the issue. It took courage to do so, and for that we are all grateful. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has always been completely WRONG on climate matters, though not for the reasons Trump imagines. He has consistently lagged behind the curve, repeating traditional energy arguments (renewable energy could lower carbon output only with massive expenses) significantly following their debunking. He has propagated misunderstanding and inaccuracies, including the unsupported claim in his recent writing that the intention behind Sri Lanka's failed prohibition on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

Additional Tough Truths

The billionaire titles his piece Three Difficult Climate Realities. Thus, here's another difficult reality he carefully avoids. If, as currently expected, essential environmental mechanisms pass turning points and quickly deteriorate, the impact on humanity, not to mention the existence of other species (a subject he consistently omits), would destroy the smooth and steady progress he foresees. Since ecological transformation probably won't occur slowly and predictably, but through sudden changes of state, the conceivable consequences for people's quality of life are nearly impossible to anticipate. His argument that we should align all funding to current "data-based analysis" of improvements in human welfare, although it may appear reasonable, creates significant illogic when confronting systemic transformation, {prompting us to ignore the greatest