🔗 Share this article

LWe must begin with the fundamental problem: Bill Gates ignores the role of politics. Though he came to it late, he now accepts the realities of climate science. But he operates in blatant, cringeworthy denial about how politics works. His recent article on climate, published last week, discusses the topic as though politics didn't matter. He composes text ignoring political influence, and no such thing as billionaires.

Primary Argument

His main contention is that financial resources are scarce, so the participants in the upcoming climate meeting in Brazil should shift funding from "short-term pollution targets" towards climate resilience and spending on poverty and disease.

Admittedly, resources for positive initiatives are insufficient, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, 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 substantial decreases in support money of various states. Austerity is a political choice. The choice to implement it comes from authorities yielding to the demands of the ultra-rich.

Available Resources

There are truckloads of money available. Shortly following Gates' latest publication, data indicated that the combined assets of America's wealthiest ten individuals increased by nearly $700 billion during the previous twelve months. That money alone, the increment in the wealth of 10 people, is approximately ten times the yearly funding needed to eliminate severe poverty worldwide. Through what means did they accumulate of the world's money into their pockets? And why can't we get it back through proper tax policies? The solution lies in their conversion of financial influence into governmental control. The richer they become, the stronger their capacity to shape the state and economic system to their will, guaranteeing continued wealth accumulation. But the billionaire mentions nothing in his essay about how and where extra money for both climate solutions and hardship alleviation 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.

Wealth Inequality Relationship

There's a direct link 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 percentage of resources held by the ultra-rich. While this might not be Gates's own business model, by suppressing salaries, racking up rents, busting trade unions and winning tax and spending cuts, the ultra-rich thrive on impoverishing other people.

Investigation Conclusions

A significant investigation in political science publications, one of the rare examinations of this private sphere, found that extremely wealthy individuals hold vastly distinct political perspectives from most people. The multimillionaires it interviewed, completely unlike ordinary citizens, viewed government debt as paramount of the issues it listed, and climate breakdown as the least. They were significantly more prone to argue that social security and federal healthcare should be cut, 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

What opinions win out? The tiny minority or the great majority? Although the research occurred during the Obama administration, it found that billionaires maintained closer relationships with government figures than average citizens. And now? I scarcely think I need to spell it out.

Omissions and Assumptions

This represents another significant omission in Gates' writing: 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: lower prices for sustainable technology inevitably produces environmental improvement. Certainly, it's positive that clean technology prices are falling dramatically than traditional energy sources. But Trump and like-minded politicians are employing every method to hinder the change.

To some degree because of this, oil and gas continue generating substantial profits. This might explain, even though Gates states his organization sold all direct fossil fuel investments in 2019, its investments in traditional energy securities have, actually grown.

Cognitive Considerations

For Gates, challenging billionaire influence might seem impossible. It's not merely incompatible with his outlook. Considering his significant avoidance of this subject, he may actually be unable to conceptualize it. This might indicate "wealth-induced cognitive distortion": a deep inability to understand others' perspectives. While the ultra-rich are notoriously hard to study, extrapolating from research into how gaining wealth and status affects cognition could suggest that obtaining enormous fortunes compares to cognitive damage. Wealth seems to scramble certain cognitive functions, notably those concerning understanding and outlook.

Political Calculations

But perhaps there's also calculation here: his article seems designed as appeasement toward Trump. Trump certainly took it that way: "Our victory over climate misinformation is complete." The billionaire has acknowledged his complete error. This demonstrated nerve, and we're thankful. MAGA!!!"

Historical Context

Gates has always been completely WRONG on climate matters, though not for the reasons Trump imagines. He has repeatedly been behind current understanding, repeating traditional energy arguments (clean technology could decrease pollution only through enormous spending) well after their refutation. He has propagated misunderstanding and inaccuracies, such as the groundless assertion in his new essay that the intention behind Sri Lanka's failed prohibition on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

Additional Tough Truths

Gates calls his essay Three Tough Truths About Climate. Therefore, here's another challenging fact he deliberately overlooks. If, as currently expected, essential environmental mechanisms pass turning points and suddenly collapse, the effects on human life, not to mention the existence of other species (a topic he fails, as usual, to mention), would ruin the consistent development he anticipates. 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 position that all resources should follow existing data-driven assessments of human betterment, while it might sound rational, introduces in the face of systemic change a profound irrationality, {prompting us to ignore the greatest