🔗 Share this article

Let's address the central dilemma: Bill Gates ignores the role of politics. While he was slow to accept it, he now acknowledges climate change facts. But he lives in flat, embarrassing denial about how politics works. His latest essay 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.

Central Claim

His main contention is that funds are very limited, so the delegates at this month's climate summit in Brazil should direct money away from "near-term emissions goals" towards climate "adaptation" and investing in poverty reduction and healthcare.

Admittedly, resources for positive initiatives are insufficient, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, some implacable truth about human society. This results from wealthy interests attacking on public welfare investments, leading to the destruction of USAID and severe reductions in assistance funding of various states. Austerity is a political choice. The choice to implement it comes from leaders submitting to the preferences of billionaire class.

Existing Wealth

Massive amounts of wealth exist. Just after Gates published his new missive, data indicated that the combined assets of the 10 richest US billionaires 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 money needed each year to stop deep deprivation worldwide. Through what means did they accumulate of economic resources into private hands? What prevents redistribution through proper tax policies? The solution lies in their conversion of wealth into policy-making authority. The richer they become, the stronger their capacity to shape government and financial structures to their will, ensuring that they become richer still. But the billionaire mentions nothing in his essay about methods and sources for additional funds for both climate action and poverty relief could be located.

'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 poverty Gates claims to care so much about and the fortunes he ignores. In the US, homelessness is breaking records, and so is the share of assets owned by the top 0.1%. While this might not be Gates's own business model, by keeping pay low, increasing housing costs, busting trade unions and winning tax and spending cuts, extremely wealthy individuals benefit from others' economic struggles.

Research Findings

A significant investigation in academic political journals, among the very few to have penetrated this secretive world, found that billionaires maintain completely separate political opinions from the general population. The wealthy respondents in the study, in stark contrast to mere earthlings, viewed government debt as paramount of the issues it listed, and environmental collapse as unimportant. They were far more likely to insist that social security and federal healthcare should be cut, and much less inclined to think that the unemployed should have a "decent standard of living", or that there should be more regulation of oil companies, banks and health insurers. They were strongly against wealth redistribution.

Governmental Access

Which perspectives dominate? The few wealthy or the many citizens? Although the research occurred during the Obama administration, it found that billionaires maintained closer relationships with government figures than ordinary people. How about today? I scarcely think I need to spell it out.

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 acknowledge that the second of his major assumptions is shaky: reductions in the cost of new green technologies lead inexorably to environmental progress. Certainly, it's positive that clean technology prices are falling dramatically than fossil fuels. But Trump and like-minded politicians are employing every method to hinder the change.

To some degree because of this, fossil fuels remain highly lucrative. This could be why, even though Gates states his organization sold all direct fossil fuel investments in 2019, its fossil fuel stock and bond holdings have, actually grown.

Psychological Factors

For Gates, challenging billionaire influence might seem impossible. This isn't just about conflicting with his perspective. Considering his significant avoidance of this subject, he could genuinely find it impossible to consider. This might indicate "wealth-induced cognitive distortion": a profound incapacity to see the world from other people's point of view. While the ultra-rich are notoriously hard to study, 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, especially those involving compassion and viewpoint.

Strategic Considerations

Yet, political maneuvering could be present: his writing appears primarily as reconciliation with the former president. Trump definitely understood it as such: "We've defeated the climate change falsehood." Gates has confessed his total mistake. This required bravery, and we appreciate it. MAGA!!!"

Previous Positions

The billionaire has consistently been incorrect on the issue, even if not for the explanations Trump provides. He has continually trailed scientific consensus, reciting fossil fuel claims (green technologies could reduce global CO2 emissions only at a "beyond astronomical" cost) well after their refutation. He has disseminated uncertainty and false information, including the unsupported claim in his recent writing that the intention behind Sri Lanka's failed prohibition on chemical fertilizers involved emission reduction.

Further Difficult Realities

Gates calls his essay Three Tough Truths About Climate. So here's another tough truth he studiously ignores. If, as now seems likely, crucial Earth systems cross tipping points and quickly deteriorate, the effects on human life, ignoring the persistence of additional organisms (a topic he fails, as usual, to mention), would destroy the smooth and steady progress he foresees. Given that climate alteration may not happen incrementally and steadily, but via abrupt transitions, the possible impacts on human wellbeing are extremely hard to predict. His claim that financial support should match current analytical approaches to quality of life, although it may appear reasonable, generates substantial unreasonableness when addressing fundamental change, {prompting us to ignore the greatest