🔗 Share this article

LWe must address the central dilemma: Bill Gates denies political realities. Though he came to it late, he now acknowledges climate change facts. But he exists in stark, awkward denial about political realities. His latest essay on climate, shared days ago, discusses the topic as though politics didn't matter. He writes as if there were no such thing as political power, and pretending massive fortunes aren't relevant.

Central Claim

His primary argument suggests that financial resources are scarce, so the representatives at the environmental conference in Brazil should shift funding from "immediate carbon reduction objectives" towards environmental adjustment and investing in poverty reduction and healthcare.

Admittedly, resources for positive initiatives are insufficient, but that's not because of some natural law, some implacable truth about human society. It's because oligarchic power has waged 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 choice to implement it comes from governments bowing to the wishes of billionaire class.

Current Funds

Massive amounts of wealth exist. Soon after the billionaire released his essay, data indicated that the combined assets of the 10 richest US billionaires increased by nearly $700 billion during the previous twelve months. This amount by itself, the growth in ten individuals' fortunes, is approximately ten times the money needed each year to stop deep deprivation worldwide. How have they managed to channel so much of global wealth into personal accounts? What prevents redistribution through appropriate revenue collection? The explanation involves their transformation of financial influence into governmental control. The richer they become, the stronger their capacity to shape the state and economic system to their preferences, ensuring that they become richer still. But Bill Gates says nothing in his essay about ways and locations for more resources for both environmental measures and economic assistance could be identified.

'His writing appears primarily as reconciliation with Donald Trump.' Gates photographed with the former president for business leaders in Washington DC.

The Poverty-Wealth Connection

A clear connection exists between the deprivation Gates says concerns him and the riches he overlooks. In the US, homelessness is breaking records, and so is the portion of wealth controlled by the wealthiest fraction. Although this may not describe Gates' personal approach, by suppressing salaries, racking up rents, busting trade unions and achieving lower taxes and diminished public funding, billionaires prosper while others experience hardship.

Investigation Conclusions

A notable research in academic political journals, among the very few to have penetrated this secretive world, found that extremely wealthy individuals hold vastly distinct political perspectives from the general population. The multimillionaires it interviewed, completely unlike ordinary citizens, viewed government debt as paramount of the issues it listed, and ecological crisis as insignificant. They were much more inclined to demand that social welfare programs and national health services should be decreased, and much less inclined to think that the unemployed should have a "decent standard of living", or that there should be stricter rules for petroleum corporations, banking entities and medical coverage companies. They were strongly against wealth redistribution.

Policy Impact

So whose views prevail? The tiny minority or the great majority? Though the study was conducted in the Obama years, it found that the very rich had far more access to politicians and officials than ordinary people. How about today? I scarcely think I need to spell it out.

Missing Elements and Presumptions

Here's another crucial exclusion from the billionaire's article: throughout thousands of words, Trump goes unmentioned. Were Gates to do so, he'd have to recognize that an important foundation of his argument is unstable: lower prices for sustainable technology inevitably produces environmental improvement. Naturally, it's beneficial that renewable energy costs are dropping significantly than conventional power. But The former president and comparable figures are doing everything they can to impede the transition.

To some degree because of this, fossil fuels remain highly lucrative. This might explain, despite Gates's claim that his foundation had divested all its "direct holdings in oil and gas companies" in 2019, its oil and gas financial assets have, in fact, increased.

Cognitive Considerations

To Gates, overthrowing the power of the ultra-wealthy may be unthinkable. 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 profound incapacity to see the world from other people's point of view. Although extremely wealthy individuals are difficult to research, inferring from investigations about money's effect on mental processes could suggest that gaining massive wealth resembles experiencing brain trauma. Riches appear to disrupt specific mental processes, particularly those related to empathy and perspective.

Political Calculations

Yet, political maneuvering could be present: his article seems designed as appeasement toward Trump. Trump certainly took it that way: "We've defeated the climate change falsehood." Bill Gates has finally admitted that he was completely WRONG on the issue. This demonstrated nerve, and we're thankful. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has always been completely WRONG on this topic, though not for the reasons Trump imagines. He has consistently lagged behind the curve, reciting fossil fuel claims (green technologies could reduce global CO2 emissions only at a "beyond astronomical" cost) significantly following their debunking. He has disseminated uncertainty and false information, such as the groundless assertion in his new essay that the purpose of Sri Lanka's disastrous ban on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

Further Difficult Realities

The billionaire titles his piece Three Difficult Climate Realities. So here's another tough truth he studiously ignores. 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 subject he consistently omits), would destroy the smooth and steady progress he foresees. Because environmental change is likely to proceed not in gradual and linear ways, 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, introduces in the face of systemic change a profound irrationality, {prompting us to ignore the greatest