🔗 Share this article

Let's start with the core issue: Bill Gates is a politics denier. While he was slow to accept it, he now acknowledges climate change facts. But he exists in stark, awkward denial about political realities. His latest essay on climate, released recently, treats the issue as if it existed in a political vacuum. He writes as if there were no such thing as political power, and as if extreme wealth didn't exist.

Central Claim

His main contention is that financial resources are scarce, so the participants in the upcoming climate meeting in Brazil should redirect resources from "immediate carbon reduction objectives" towards climate "adaptation" and spending on poverty and disease.

Yes, the funds available for any good cause are scarce, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, an unchangeable fact of civilization. This results from wealthy interests attacking on benign state spending, resulting in the elimination of development assistance and severe reductions in assistance funding of other countries. Financial restraint stems from policy choices. The choice to implement it comes from governments bowing to the wishes of extremely wealthy individuals.

Available Resources

Substantial financial resources are present. Shortly following Gates' latest publication, research showed that the total wealth of the top ten US fortune holders expanded by hundreds of billions during the previous twelve months. These funds independently, the increase in a handful of billionaires' net worth, is nearly tenfold the money needed each year to stop deep deprivation worldwide. Through what means did they accumulate of global wealth into personal accounts? Why can't society reclaim it through effective taxation? The answer is their translation of economic power into political power. As their wealth increases, the stronger their capacity to shape the state and economic system to their will, ensuring that they become richer still. But the billionaire mentions nothing in his essay about how and where extra money for both climate action and poverty relief could be identified.

'His essay reads like nothing so much as a peace offering to Donald Trump.' Bill Gates, right, with the Trumps at a private dinner for business leaders in Washington DC.

The Poverty-Wealth Connection

There's a direct link between the deprivation Gates says concerns him 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 keeping pay low, racking up rents, undermining worker collectives and winning tax and spending cuts, billionaires prosper while others experience hardship.

Investigation Conclusions

A remarkable study in academic political journals, among the very few to have penetrated this secretive world, found that billionaires maintain completely separate political opinions from the great majority. The rich participants surveyed, sharply different from average people, viewed government debt as paramount of the issues it listed, and environmental collapse as unimportant. They were far more likely to insist that public retirement benefits and government medical care should be reduced, and far less likely to believe that unemployed people merit reasonable生活质量, or that there should be stricter rules for petroleum corporations, banking entities and medical coverage companies. They were fiercely opposed to redistribution.

Policy Impact

Which perspectives dominate? The tiny minority or the great majority? Although the research occurred during the Obama administration, it found that extremely wealthy individuals enjoyed greater political access than average citizens. What about currently? The current reality seems obvious.

Omissions and Assumptions

That's another telling absence in Bill Gates's essay: across extensive text, the former president receives no reference. Should the billionaire address this, he'd have to admit that another key premise is questionable: decreasing expenses for eco-friendly innovations automatically creates ecological advancement. Of course it helps that wind, solar and other green technologies are becoming radically cheaper than conventional power. But Trump and similar demagogues are employing every method to hinder the change.

To some degree because of this, oil and gas continue generating substantial profits. This could be why, even though Gates states his organization sold all direct fossil fuel investments in 2019, its investments in traditional energy securities have, truly expanded.

Psychological Factors

Regarding Gates, confronting extreme wealth power could appear inconceivable. I don't mean only that it clashes with his worldview. Based on his notable omissions regarding this topic, he might be literally incapable of thinking about it. Possibly this represents "extreme wealth mentality": a fundamental failure to comprehend alternative viewpoints. Even though billionaires present research challenges, drawing conclusions from studies about wealth's impact on thinking could suggest that acquiring huge amounts of money is like taking a blow to the head. Fortunes seem to disturb particular brain operations, particularly those related to empathy and perspective.

Political Calculations

But perhaps there's also calculation here: his writing appears primarily as reconciliation with the former president. 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. This required bravery, and we appreciate it. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has always been completely WRONG on the issue, though not for the reasons Trump imagines. He has consistently lagged behind the curve, reciting fossil fuel claims (renewable energy could lower carbon output only with massive expenses) well after their refutation. He has disseminated uncertainty and false information, like the baseless statement in his latest article that the intention behind Sri Lanka's failed prohibition on chemical fertilizers involved emission reduction.

Further Difficult Realities

Gates names his article Three Challenging Environmental Facts. Thus, here's another difficult reality he carefully avoids. Should, as appears probable, vital planetary systems reach critical thresholds and quickly deteriorate, the consequences for people, not to mention the existence of other species (a topic he fails, as usual, to mention), would eliminate the gradual advancement he predicts. Given that climate alteration may not happen incrementally and steadily, but through sudden changes of state, the conceivable consequences for people's quality of life are nearly impossible to anticipate. His position that all resources should follow existing data-driven assessments of human betterment, while it might sound rational, generates substantial unreasonableness when addressing fundamental change, {prompting us to ignore the greatest