🔗 Share this article

Let's address the central dilemma: Bill Gates denies political realities. Though he came to it late, he now recognizes environmental science. But he exists in stark, awkward denial about the realities of power. His recent article on climate, published last week, treats the issue as if it existed in a political vacuum. He pens words that disregard governmental authority, and pretending massive fortunes aren't relevant.

The Main Contention

His primary argument suggests that financial resources are scarce, so the delegates at this month's climate summit in Brazil should direct money away from "immediate carbon reduction objectives" towards climate resilience and spending on poverty and disease.

Certainly, money for worthy projects is limited, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, some implacable truth about human society. The reason is elite influence has declared war on benign state spending, causing the dismantling of aid agencies and substantial decreases in support money of additional nations. Budget cuts represent political decisions. The selection to enforce it originates with governments bowing to the wishes of billionaire class.

Available Resources

Massive amounts of wealth exist. Soon after the billionaire released his essay, research showed that the total wealth of America's wealthiest ten individuals expanded by hundreds of billions over the last year. These funds independently, the increment in the wealth of 10 people, is almost 10 times the annual amount required to end extreme poverty worldwide. How have they managed to channel so much of the world's money into their pockets? What prevents redistribution through effective taxation? The explanation involves their transformation of economic power into political power. The richer they become, the stronger their capacity to shape political and economic frameworks to their will, securing ongoing financial growth. But the philanthropist discusses nothing in his essay about methods and sources for additional funds for both environmental measures and economic assistance could be located.

'His writing appears primarily as reconciliation with 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 poverty Gates claims to care so much about and the fortunes he ignores. 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 holding down wages, racking up rents, weakening labor organizations and securing tax reductions and budget decreases, billionaires prosper while others experience hardship.

Study Results

A remarkable study 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 the great majority. The rich participants surveyed, sharply different from average people, considered fiscal shortfalls as critical of the issues it listed, and environmental collapse as unimportant. They were significantly more prone to argue that public retirement benefits and government medical care should be reduced, and significantly less prone to accept that jobless individuals deserve adequate living conditions, or that there should be more regulation of oil companies, banks and health insurers. They were fiercely opposed to redistribution.

Political Influence

Which perspectives dominate? The small elite or the vast population? Although the research occurred during the Obama administration, it found that the very rich had far more access to politicians and officials than average citizens. How about today? The situation hardly requires explanation.

Omissions and Assumptions

Here's another crucial exclusion from the billionaire's article: at no point in its 5,000 words does it mention Donald Trump. If Gates included this, he'd have to acknowledge that the second of his major assumptions is shaky: reductions in the cost of new green technologies lead inexorably to environmental progress. Naturally, it's beneficial that renewable energy costs are dropping significantly than fossil fuels. But Trump and similar demagogues are taking all possible actions to block the shift.

To some degree because of this, traditional energy sources stay very profitable. 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, in fact, increased.

Psychological Factors

Regarding Gates, confronting extreme wealth power could appear inconceivable. I don't mean only that it clashes with his worldview. Considering his significant avoidance of this subject, he could genuinely find it impossible to consider. Possibly this represents "extreme wealth mentality": 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 obtaining enormous fortunes compares to cognitive damage. Riches appear to disrupt specific mental processes, notably those concerning understanding and outlook.

Tactical Elements

However, strategic thinking might also be involved: his writing appears primarily as reconciliation with the former president. Trump certainly took it that way: "We've defeated the climate change falsehood." Gates has confessed his total mistake. It took courage to do so, and for that we are all grateful. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has historically been mistaken on this topic, even if not for the explanations Trump provides. 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, including the unsupported claim in his recent writing 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. So here's another tough truth he studiously ignores. If, as now seems likely, crucial Earth systems cross tipping points and rapidly fail, the impact on humanity, not to mention the existence of other species (a subject he consistently omits), would eliminate the gradual advancement he predicts. 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, while it might sound rational, generates substantial unreasonableness when addressing fundamental change, {prompting us to ignore the greatest