🔗 Share this article

Let's begin with the fundamental problem: The Microsoft founder denies political realities. While he was slow to accept it, he now recognizes environmental science. But he lives in flat, embarrassing denial about political realities. His new piece on climate, shared days ago, approaches climate change without political context. He writes as if there were no such thing as political power, and as if extreme wealth didn't exist.

The Main Contention

His main contention is that financial resources are scarce, so the representatives at the environmental conference in Brazil should shift funding from "near-term emissions goals" towards climate resilience and investing in poverty reduction and healthcare.

Admittedly, resources for positive initiatives are insufficient, but this isn't due to universal principles, an unavoidable reality of communities. It's because oligarchic power has waged war on benign state spending, resulting in the elimination of development assistance and drastic cuts to the aid budgets of other countries. Budget cuts represent political decisions. The selection to enforce it originates with governments bowing to the wishes of billionaire class.

Available Resources

Substantial financial resources are present. Shortly following Gates' latest publication, Oxfam revealed that the net worth of the 10 richest US billionaires increased by nearly $700 billion during the previous twelve months. These funds independently, the increase in a handful of billionaires' net worth, is approximately ten times the yearly funding needed to eliminate severe poverty worldwide. What methods enabled such concentration of the world's money into their pockets? Why can't society reclaim it through effective taxation? The answer is their translation of financial influence into governmental control. As their wealth increases, the more they can bend the state and economic system to their preferences, ensuring that they become richer still. But the philanthropist discusses nothing in his essay about ways and locations for more resources for both environmental measures and economic assistance 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 industry figures in Washington.

The Poverty-Wealth Connection

There's a direct link between the economic hardship Gates professes to address and the riches he overlooks. In the US, unhoused populations are reaching new highs, and so is the portion of wealth controlled by the wealthiest fraction. Even if this doesn't characterize Gates' specific methods, by suppressing salaries, racking up rents, busting trade unions and winning tax and spending cuts, the ultra-rich thrive on impoverishing other people.

Study Results

A significant investigation in political science publications, among the very few to have penetrated this secretive world, found that extremely wealthy individuals hold vastly distinct political perspectives from most people. The wealthy respondents in the study, completely unlike ordinary citizens, considered fiscal shortfalls as critical of the issues it listed, and climate breakdown as the least. They were far more likely to insist that social welfare programs and national health services should be decreased, and significantly less prone to accept that the unemployed should have a "decent standard of living", or that there should be increased oversight of energy firms, financial institutions and insurance providers. They were fiercely opposed to redistribution.

Political Influence

What opinions win out? The few wealthy or the many citizens? Even though the investigation happened under Obama, it found that extremely wealthy individuals enjoyed greater political access than regular individuals. What about currently? The current reality seems obvious.

Missing Elements and Presumptions

This represents another significant omission in Gates' writing: throughout thousands of words, Trump goes unmentioned. Should the billionaire address this, 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 traditional energy sources. But The former president and comparable figures are taking all possible actions to block the shift.

Partly as a result, fossil fuels remain highly lucrative. This potentially clarifies why, 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.

Mental Aspects

For Gates, challenging billionaire influence might seem impossible. 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. This might indicate "wealth-induced cognitive distortion": a deep inability to understand others' perspectives. Even though billionaires present research challenges, extrapolating from research into how gaining wealth and status affects cognition could suggest that acquiring huge amounts of money is like taking a blow to the head. Fortunes seem to disturb particular brain operations, notably those concerning understanding and outlook.

Strategic Considerations

However, strategic thinking might also be involved: his writing appears primarily as reconciliation with the former president. The former president clearly interpreted it this way: "I (WE!) just won the War on the Climate Change Hoax. The billionaire has acknowledged his complete error. This required bravery, and we appreciate it. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has always been completely WRONG on climate matters, although not for Trump's stated reasons. He has consistently lagged behind the curve, echoing petroleum industry talking points (green technologies could reduce global CO2 emissions only at a "beyond astronomical" cost) well after their refutation. He has spread confusion and misinformation, such as the groundless assertion in his new essay that the objective of Sri Lanka's catastrophic restriction on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

More Challenging Facts

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 rapidly fail, the effects on human life, let alone the survival of other life forms (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 potential effects on human welfare are very difficult to forecast. His claim that financial support should match current analytical approaches to quality of life, although it may appear reasonable, creates significant illogic when confronting systemic transformation, {prompting us to ignore the greatest