🔗 Share this article

Let's begin with the fundamental problem: The Microsoft founder denies political realities. Though he came to it late, he now accepts the realities of climate science. But he exists in stark, awkward denial about the realities of power. His recent article on climate, published last week, discusses the topic as though politics didn't matter. 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 money is insufficient, so the representatives at the environmental conference in Brazil should direct money away from "immediate carbon reduction objectives" towards climate "adaptation" and allocating funds for economic hardship and illness.

Admittedly, resources for positive initiatives are insufficient, but that's not because of some natural law, an unchangeable fact of civilization. The reason is elite influence has declared war on benign state spending, leading to the destruction of USAID and substantial decreases in support money of various states. Budget cuts represent political decisions. The selection to enforce it originates with governments bowing to the wishes of extremely wealthy individuals.

Current Funds

Substantial financial resources are present. Shortly following Gates' latest publication, Oxfam revealed that the net worth of America's wealthiest ten individuals increased by nearly $700 billion during the previous twelve months. These funds independently, the increment in the wealth of 10 people, is almost 10 times the money needed each year to stop deep deprivation worldwide. Through what means did they accumulate of the world's money into their pockets? And why can't we get it back through effective taxation? The explanation involves their transformation of economic power into political power. The richer they become, the more they can bend government and financial structures to their desires, guaranteeing continued wealth accumulation. But the philanthropist discusses nothing in his essay about methods and sources for additional funds for both climate action and poverty relief could be located.

'The article seems designed as appeasement toward Donald Trump.' Bill Gates, right, with the Trumps at a private dinner for business leaders in Washington DC.

The Poverty-Wealth Connection

A clear connection exists between the deprivation Gates says concerns him and the wealth he fails to mention. In the US, unhoused populations are reaching new highs, and so is the percentage of resources held by the ultra-rich. While this might not be Gates's own business model, by keeping pay low, racking up rents, busting trade unions and securing tax reductions and budget decreases, the ultra-rich thrive on impoverishing other people.

Research Findings

A remarkable study in academic political journals, one of the rare examinations of this private sphere, found that billionaires maintain completely separate political opinions from the general population. The wealthy respondents in the study, completely unlike ordinary citizens, considered fiscal shortfalls as critical of the issues it listed, and environmental collapse as unimportant. They were much more inclined to demand that social security and federal healthcare should be cut, and significantly less prone to accept that jobless individuals deserve adequate living conditions, or that there should be increased oversight of energy firms, financial institutions and insurance providers. They were vehemently anti-taxation and redistribution.

Governmental Access

So whose views prevail? The tiny minority or the great majority? Even though the investigation happened under Obama, it found that extremely wealthy individuals enjoyed greater political access than average citizens. How about today? The current reality seems obvious.

Omissions and Assumptions

That's another telling absence in Bill Gates's essay: at no point in its 5,000 words does it mention Donald Trump. Were Gates to do so, he'd have to recognize that an important foundation of his argument is unstable: reductions in the cost of new green technologies lead inexorably to environmental progress. Of course it helps that wind, solar and other green technologies are becoming radically cheaper than fossil fuels. But Trump and like-minded politicians are doing everything they can to impede the transition.

In part due to these factors, fossil fuels remain highly lucrative. This potentially clarifies why, even though Gates states his organization sold all direct fossil fuel investments in 2019, its oil and gas financial assets have, truly expanded.

Psychological Factors

For Gates, challenging billionaire influence might seem impossible. I don't mean only that it clashes with his worldview. Considering his significant avoidance of this subject, he may actually be unable to conceptualize it. This might indicate "wealth-induced cognitive distortion": a fundamental failure to comprehend alternative viewpoints. While the ultra-rich are notoriously hard to study, 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. Wealth seems to scramble certain cognitive functions, especially those involving compassion and viewpoint.

Tactical Elements

However, strategic thinking might also be involved: his essay reads like nothing so much as a peace offering to Donald Trump. Trump certainly took it that way: "Our victory over climate misinformation is complete." 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 the issue, though not for the reasons Trump imagines. He has consistently lagged behind the curve, repeating traditional energy arguments (green technologies could reduce global CO2 emissions only at a "beyond astronomical" cost) significantly following their debunking. He has disseminated uncertainty and false information, like the baseless statement in his latest article that the purpose of Sri Lanka's disastrous ban on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

Further Difficult Realities

Gates calls his essay Three Tough Truths About Climate. Therefore, here's another challenging fact he deliberately overlooks. Should, as appears probable, vital planetary systems reach critical thresholds and suddenly collapse, the consequences for people, not to mention the existence of other species (a topic he fails, as usual, to mention), would ruin the consistent development he anticipates. Given that climate alteration may not happen incrementally and steadily, but through rapid shifts, 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, even if it seems logical, generates substantial unreasonableness when addressing fundamental change, {prompting us to ignore the greatest