The Gates Letter
February 27, 2018 11:53 AM Subscribe
This year the Gates Letter answers 10 tough questions.
Of course, there's also some less tough questions at Reddit.
Of course, there's also some less tough questions at Reddit.
2018: the year I assumed Gates referred to Rick not Bill.
posted by klarck at 12:31 PM on February 27, 2018 [12 favorites]
posted by klarck at 12:31 PM on February 27, 2018 [12 favorites]
Not all of all us believe in Saint BillG just yet.
posted by JoeZydeco at 12:31 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by JoeZydeco at 12:31 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
Mod note: A few comments deleted; let's rewind and maybe start over without an instant meta-derail about how to discuss Gates at all. There's a link to read and discuss.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:34 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:34 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
The idea that the "actual tough" questions are the ones that deal primarily with American concerns is...something I'm exhausted by, honestly. They did acknowledge some big flaws in their approach to US education, even if it wasn't focused on the program you wanted to hear about. If anything, giving so much oxygen to 3 US-centric questions (I'm counting the Trump one, too) was perhaps too much already.
It's a big world, I'm glad that they're spending money in ways that recognize that and I'm glad they attempt to do the hard things along with the easy (and obvious) ones.
posted by mosst at 12:35 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
It's a big world, I'm glad that they're spending money in ways that recognize that and I'm glad they attempt to do the hard things along with the easy (and obvious) ones.
posted by mosst at 12:35 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
My point still stands - these aren't "the tough questions" at all, because the real tough questions for the Gates Foundation are the ones that hold it accountable. And I'm sorry, but no, the fact that they fund worthwhile initiatives doesn't make things like their funding a war on teaching go away, nor does it make the bigger question that got brought up when we discussed the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation - what does it mean for us as a society to cede this sort of control to a handful of unaccountable individuals?
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:42 PM on February 27, 2018 [19 favorites]
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:42 PM on February 27, 2018 [19 favorites]
– what does it mean for us as a society to cede this sort of control to a handful of unaccountable individuals?
That’s the main question asked by the 2017 book The Givers, written about our new gilded age. As The New Republic put it, "Have the Rich Become Super Citizens?"
posted by LeLiLo at 1:01 PM on February 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
That’s the main question asked by the 2017 book The Givers, written about our new gilded age. As The New Republic put it, "Have the Rich Become Super Citizens?"
posted by LeLiLo at 1:01 PM on February 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
Calling the Gates Foundation's work a "war on teaching" is the sort of meaningless divisive rhetoric that inflames but doesn't inform. I get that they're trying to change education in the US and that upsets people. Can anyone recommend some informed and neutral critique of their efforts so far? I've mostly read about their international work, not the US.
I hate to break this to the Metafilter brigades, but in capitalist societies rich people have power. I admire that the Gates Foundation (and Warren Buffett, too) are directing the power of their wealth towards trying to improve the world. (Compare, say, Larry Ellison or Peter Thiel.) Philanthropy is a double edged sword; it makes change, but without the will of the people through a government. OTOH both Gates and Buffett do also regularly call for higher taxes on super wealthy people like them, to help better fund the government too.
posted by Nelson at 1:39 PM on February 27, 2018 [28 favorites]
I hate to break this to the Metafilter brigades, but in capitalist societies rich people have power. I admire that the Gates Foundation (and Warren Buffett, too) are directing the power of their wealth towards trying to improve the world. (Compare, say, Larry Ellison or Peter Thiel.) Philanthropy is a double edged sword; it makes change, but without the will of the people through a government. OTOH both Gates and Buffett do also regularly call for higher taxes on super wealthy people like them, to help better fund the government too.
posted by Nelson at 1:39 PM on February 27, 2018 [28 favorites]
I don't think "war on teaching" is meaningless at all. They want to shape children into interchangeable drones that will slot into interchangeable jobs. On charitable days I imagine that Bill thinks this would be a net increase in the American educational situation. On most days I figure he thinks it would be good for business.
posted by turkeybrain at 1:54 PM on February 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by turkeybrain at 1:54 PM on February 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
They want to shape children into interchangeable drones that will slot into interchangeable jobs.
What leads you to believe this?
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 1:59 PM on February 27, 2018 [8 favorites]
What leads you to believe this?
posted by a snickering nuthatch at 1:59 PM on February 27, 2018 [8 favorites]
NoxAeternum: "what does it mean for us as a society to cede this sort of control to a handful of unaccountable individuals?"
I mean, to their credit they do ask themselves this question, even if I find the answer wholly unsatisfactory:
I mean, to their credit they do ask themselves this question, even if I find the answer wholly unsatisfactory:
Is it fair that you have so much influence?posted by crazy with stars at 1:59 PM on February 27, 2018
... If we think it’s unfair that we have so much wealth, why don’t we give it all to the government? The answer is that we think there’s always going to be a unique role for foundations. They’re able to take a global view to find the greatest needs, take a long-term approach to solving problems, and manage high-risk projects that governments can’t take on and corporations won’t. If a government tries an idea that fails, someone wasn’t doing their job. Whereas if we don’t try some ideas that fail, we’re not doing our jobs.
I get that they're trying to change education in the US and that upsets people.
Stop with the bloodless dismissals. The reality is that the Gates Foundation is a major funder of the modern "education reform" movement, which seems less about improving education and more about a) turning public education into another way to extract public money into private coffers and b) shoring up the tech industry's lie that they can't find qualified people.
I hate to break this to the Metafilter brigades, but in capitalist societies rich people have power. I admire that the Gates Foundation (and Warren Buffett, too) are directing the power of their wealth towards trying to improve the world.
That's the whole point - they are "improving the world" in the way they see fit - which may not be the way the rest of us want to see the world move.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:01 PM on February 27, 2018 [13 favorites]
Stop with the bloodless dismissals. The reality is that the Gates Foundation is a major funder of the modern "education reform" movement, which seems less about improving education and more about a) turning public education into another way to extract public money into private coffers and b) shoring up the tech industry's lie that they can't find qualified people.
I hate to break this to the Metafilter brigades, but in capitalist societies rich people have power. I admire that the Gates Foundation (and Warren Buffett, too) are directing the power of their wealth towards trying to improve the world.
That's the whole point - they are "improving the world" in the way they see fit - which may not be the way the rest of us want to see the world move.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:01 PM on February 27, 2018 [13 favorites]
On most days I figure he thinks it would be good for business.
I see someone who's spending almost all of his wealth in what he thinks is the most socially beneficial manner. Informed criticism of his judgement and vision and what some people consider his hubris and lack of accountability seems reasonable, but I have difficultly understanding why you think he is thinking about monetary profits.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 2:02 PM on February 27, 2018 [14 favorites]
I see someone who's spending almost all of his wealth in what he thinks is the most socially beneficial manner. Informed criticism of his judgement and vision and what some people consider his hubris and lack of accountability seems reasonable, but I have difficultly understanding why you think he is thinking about monetary profits.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 2:02 PM on February 27, 2018 [14 favorites]
On most days I figure he thinks it would be good for business.
Are you saying you believe the Gates foundation is increasing Bill's net worth?
posted by rocket88 at 2:07 PM on February 27, 2018
Are you saying you believe the Gates foundation is increasing Bill's net worth?
posted by rocket88 at 2:07 PM on February 27, 2018
Are you saying you believe the Gates foundation is increasing Bill's net worth?
More that he's a product of his industry, and brings those biases with him to his philanthropy. Again, one of the points of the "education reform" movement is to serve as justification for the argument that the US doesn't produce enough STEM trained individuals - which is in turn used to justify the use of bodyshops bringing in foreign tech workers.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:19 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
More that he's a product of his industry, and brings those biases with him to his philanthropy. Again, one of the points of the "education reform" movement is to serve as justification for the argument that the US doesn't produce enough STEM trained individuals - which is in turn used to justify the use of bodyshops bringing in foreign tech workers.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:19 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
I am not a fan of the Gates Foundation's education work so far. I wouldn't describe it as a "war on teaching" because I don't think that's a very helpful descriptor. But not a fan, and there's a lot of valid criticism out there.
But that effort (and US investments in general) are a small % of what they fund, and it is frustrating when debates about what the Foundation actually does get stuck on that, when the majority of funding and the most critical work are focused elsewhere in the world and on things like vaccines and disease prevention. (There are valid criticisms of those efforts as well! Though usually more on the "how they're done" rather than they "should we be doing it" level.)
posted by feckless at 2:24 PM on February 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
But that effort (and US investments in general) are a small % of what they fund, and it is frustrating when debates about what the Foundation actually does get stuck on that, when the majority of funding and the most critical work are focused elsewhere in the world and on things like vaccines and disease prevention. (There are valid criticisms of those efforts as well! Though usually more on the "how they're done" rather than they "should we be doing it" level.)
posted by feckless at 2:24 PM on February 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
doesn't this letter explicitly acknowledge their efforts in education aren't actually helping, though?
also it sounds like part of the reason they went all-in on new schools was that changing old schools is way harder than starting a new school, and the only people starting new schools this decade were the charter schools people
I mean, I think these are all reasonable criticisms! But they're framed like the Gates Foundation wouldn't agree, which is hard to argue when one of their 'tough questions' is 'hey why does your education work suck so many balls'
posted by Merus at 2:35 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
also it sounds like part of the reason they went all-in on new schools was that changing old schools is way harder than starting a new school, and the only people starting new schools this decade were the charter schools people
I mean, I think these are all reasonable criticisms! But they're framed like the Gates Foundation wouldn't agree, which is hard to argue when one of their 'tough questions' is 'hey why does your education work suck so many balls'
posted by Merus at 2:35 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
... If we think it’s unfair that we have so much wealth, why don’t we give it all to the government? The answer is that we think there’s always going to be a unique role for foundations. They’re able to take a global view to find the greatest needs, take a long-term approach to solving problems, and manage high-risk projects that governments can’t take on and corporations won’t.It seems like sending humans to the moon and getting them back alive and in one piece is a pretty high-risk project that takes a global view, to name one successful government project in living memory. I'm not sure I get the argument for why we need private billionaire foundations for anything except playthings like Musk's flamethrowers, if government is effective and working for it's people.
The point about Gates, Musk, Thiel, Soros, Kochs, et al. is that they are using their frankly unimaginable personal wealth to fund their personal priorities. The reason they don't give money to the government (not the only option I'll grant, but one they mention in that blurb) is because then they don't personally decide where that money gets spent. It's pure ego, and fundamentally undemocratic. We should be terrified that private individuals now control more wealth than a number of sovereign democratically-governed nations. At the level of wealth these people control it's pure power, and giving one person that much power just isn't benign, regardless of their stated intentions.
posted by aiglet at 4:26 PM on February 27, 2018 [15 favorites]
If you'd asked me about Bill Gates in 2016, I'd have said something about how great it is that he's using his resources to fight disease, child mortality, etc.
But now I'd say to hell with him. Gates, your country is burning. Burning! And you could stop it. Gates, by himself, could counter the Kochs and Adelsons and Mercers of the world. And he doesn't. He just watches the spectacle and is silent. With great power comes great responsibility. To hell with him.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 5:04 PM on February 27, 2018 [10 favorites]
But now I'd say to hell with him. Gates, your country is burning. Burning! And you could stop it. Gates, by himself, could counter the Kochs and Adelsons and Mercers of the world. And he doesn't. He just watches the spectacle and is silent. With great power comes great responsibility. To hell with him.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 5:04 PM on February 27, 2018 [10 favorites]
I volunteered for an education service that is funded by the Gates Foundation. It wanted "real scientists" to help mentor students on science projects, but to do that, the real scientist had to work through a really cumbersome web interface, and then grade quizzes and help students do science projects. I'm a real scientist who works long hours, and grading quizzes took a lot of my time for no real advantage to the students. But even worse, the experiments were terrible, and I had a hard time encouraging students to do experiments that didn't test hypotheses in any meaningful way. I finally had to resign, because I would have needed to work full time in actual face-to-face contact with the students to actually help them. Like... a teacher.
posted by acrasis at 5:13 PM on February 27, 2018 [13 favorites]
posted by acrasis at 5:13 PM on February 27, 2018 [13 favorites]
Random positions on the Gates Foundation:
Education: The Gates' first and biggest mistake was to treat education reform like an engineering problem, rather than a social problem. Most of the rest of the outcomes were dictated by that assumption.
Politics: I don't think the Gates should want to be interventionist in "saving" democracy. It would be wrong, ethically speaking, and play out exactly like it sounds: billionaires contending for control of government, which is the opposite of saving democracy.
Until we have effective governments that can plan for the long term I think we will need billionaire philanthropists. Its up to "we, the people" to create those governments.
On the whole, I think the Foundation's goals and impacts on humanity are net positive. They have literally saved millions of lives, and on the face of it there is nothing wrong with trying to improve educational and economic outcomes for the disadvantaged.
As for whether it's good for his bottom line: I think BillG recognized early on that there are billions of potential Microsoft customers out there, provided they can a) live long enough, and b) reach a standard of living that enables them to become one. I don't think there's anything inherently bad or wrong with that, since in general those people would like to achieve the same outcome (living longer, more prosperous lives, maybe without Clippy).
posted by simra at 5:58 PM on February 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
Education: The Gates' first and biggest mistake was to treat education reform like an engineering problem, rather than a social problem. Most of the rest of the outcomes were dictated by that assumption.
Politics: I don't think the Gates should want to be interventionist in "saving" democracy. It would be wrong, ethically speaking, and play out exactly like it sounds: billionaires contending for control of government, which is the opposite of saving democracy.
Until we have effective governments that can plan for the long term I think we will need billionaire philanthropists. Its up to "we, the people" to create those governments.
On the whole, I think the Foundation's goals and impacts on humanity are net positive. They have literally saved millions of lives, and on the face of it there is nothing wrong with trying to improve educational and economic outcomes for the disadvantaged.
As for whether it's good for his bottom line: I think BillG recognized early on that there are billions of potential Microsoft customers out there, provided they can a) live long enough, and b) reach a standard of living that enables them to become one. I don't think there's anything inherently bad or wrong with that, since in general those people would like to achieve the same outcome (living longer, more prosperous lives, maybe without Clippy).
posted by simra at 5:58 PM on February 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
scientists who are inventing cutting-edge tools to cure diseasephrasing
posted by kleinsteradikaleminderheit at 7:44 PM on February 27, 2018
billionaires contending for control of government, which is the opposite of saving democracy.
I have some bad news: the worst billionaires are already in control of government.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 9:06 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
I have some bad news: the worst billionaires are already in control of government.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 9:06 PM on February 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
Pragmatically I'm kind of whatever about this, in that I'll gladly take money from foundations or private philanthropy if it means that more beneficial science gets done in the US than the NIH/NSF budgets would otherwise allow. But I don't think they should really exist and I think they can distort scientific priorities in a way that is not awesome (e.g. work on malaria vaccines that a lot of parasitologists were kinda skeptical of, when bed nets and swamp drainage could have had a much more substantial and immediate effect for the same money). I feel kind of similarly about Bell Labs and its modern equivalents.
posted by en forme de poire at 9:47 PM on February 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by en forme de poire at 9:47 PM on February 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
It seems like sending humans to the moon and getting them back alive and in one piece is a pretty high-risk project that takes a global view, to name one successful government project in living memory.
That project took a nationalist view - here's a transcript of Kennedy in 1962 talking to NASA boss James Webb and others, here's a clear statement:
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 11:00 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
That project took a nationalist view - here's a transcript of Kennedy in 1962 talking to NASA boss James Webb and others, here's a clear statement:
KENNEDY: But we’re talking about these fantastic expenditures which wreck our budget and all these other domestic programs and the only justification for it, in my opinion, to do it in this time or fashion, is because we hope to beat them and demonstrate that starting behind, as we did by a couple years, by God, we passed them [the Soviets].If you read from about page 14 it can be paraphrased "Yeah, sure, science is great, whatever, you fuckin' nerd, put a man on the moon ASAP so I can teabag the commies."
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 11:00 PM on February 27, 2018 [4 favorites]
what does it mean for us as a society to cede this sort of control to a handful of unaccountable individuals?
Our government seems pretty unaccountable right now. It's well known that there are many policies that an overwhelming majority support that the government won't address. Boycotting bad people's products or getting people fired through social media seems to be the way to have an effect. Or starting a foundation.
posted by Obscure Reference at 6:50 AM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
Our government seems pretty unaccountable right now. It's well known that there are many policies that an overwhelming majority support that the government won't address. Boycotting bad people's products or getting people fired through social media seems to be the way to have an effect. Or starting a foundation.
posted by Obscure Reference at 6:50 AM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
We have billionaires actively trying to destroy civil society and bring about a fascist theocracy, and some people would still rather shit on the one who's out curing diseases and shit.
posted by rocket88 at 7:21 AM on February 28, 2018 [8 favorites]
posted by rocket88 at 7:21 AM on February 28, 2018 [8 favorites]
We have billionaires actively trying to destroy civil society and bring about a fascist theocracy, and some people would still rather shit on the one who's out curing diseases and shit.
Because he was also trying to destroy civil society by damaging our education system, as well as there being some serious questions about how many of these programs are handled.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:29 AM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
Because he was also trying to destroy civil society by damaging our education system, as well as there being some serious questions about how many of these programs are handled.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:29 AM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
Also, if you're going to point to the behavior of other billionaires to argue for why there should be no accountability for the Gates Foundation, I daresay you've lost the plot. Just because they are doing things that we consider to be good doesn't mean that they should be exempt from scrutiny - you would never say that about the government, as an example. It's our societal tendency to treat philanthropy as a gift and thus be grateful to the benefactors, but we need to fight that - because as it turns out, there is power in philanthropy, and as such we need to be watching it with a cautious eye.
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:42 AM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by NoxAeternum at 7:42 AM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
Yes its truly a shame to see how the top notch US education system has fallen under the tyrannical rule of the gates foundation.
posted by some loser at 7:46 AM on February 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by some loser at 7:46 AM on February 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
if y'all want a counterpoint to how the Gates are distributing their wealth, I recommend looking up a group called Resource Generation. there's a really great podcast episode about their work over at Reckonings. here's a snip of their mission statement to give you a taste:
posted by runt at 7:56 AM on February 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
Resource Generation organizes young people with wealth and class privilege in the U.S. to become transformative leaders working towards the equitable distribution of wealth, land and power. [...] We believe social justice movements need to be led by communities most directly impacted by injustice. As young wealthy people, we support the leadership of working class communities, poor people, communities of color, women and LGBTQ folks in transformative social justice movements. We also bring our full selves and our own good thinking. We build cross-class relationships in working for a just healthy world.emphasis mine. there's a point in the podcast episode where one of the wealthy participants talks about their first experience giving money away - and how they felt they needed to be in direct control of it as it was their wealth, their property. it was a paradigm shift for them realizing that the need to exert control over their wealth, even after it has been designated as 'charity', was not tangibly different from how they were exerting power already - telling people how to spend your money is effectively broadcasting your will into a world run on money. the paradigm shift for them is, as Nox is pointing out, accountability - ie responsibility to others, particularly the people you think you are benefiting. cross-class relationships means trust and trust means giving money away, shod of your will over it
posted by runt at 7:56 AM on February 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
some people would still rather shit on the one who's out curing diseases and shit
I mean, the system of wealth inequality is the same no matter the intention. the same system that gives the Gates the power to affect the US education system in a debatably positive way gave the Koch brothers the power to mold our modern political landscape into the shithole it is now
it's maybe not a stupid idea to think 'hey but what if we just stripped power from the whole lot via taxes and other regulations' instead of letting individual, mostly old white men who live very different lives than we do have outsized power in determining how our world is constructed
posted by runt at 8:07 AM on February 28, 2018 [3 favorites]
I mean, the system of wealth inequality is the same no matter the intention. the same system that gives the Gates the power to affect the US education system in a debatably positive way gave the Koch brothers the power to mold our modern political landscape into the shithole it is now
it's maybe not a stupid idea to think 'hey but what if we just stripped power from the whole lot via taxes and other regulations' instead of letting individual, mostly old white men who live very different lives than we do have outsized power in determining how our world is constructed
posted by runt at 8:07 AM on February 28, 2018 [3 favorites]
it was a paradigm shift for them realizing that the need to exert control over their wealth, even after it has been designated as 'charity', was not tangibly different from how they were exerting power already - telling people how to spend your money is effectively broadcasting your will into a world run on money.
This is the thing to remember - philanthropists aren't really "giving money away", they're directing funds to be spent in a manner that they deem fit. And if you're wondering what the harm can be with that, this dynamic is why the "autism is caused by vaccines" bullshit continues to live - because that's what one major benefactor of autism research believes, and if you want their funding, you need to at least pretend to believe as well. Not to mention that philanthropic power can be exerted more blatantly - Bloomberg quashed a good deal of dissent as mayor of NYC simply by reminding community groups of exactly who was signing over their funding.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:17 AM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
This is the thing to remember - philanthropists aren't really "giving money away", they're directing funds to be spent in a manner that they deem fit. And if you're wondering what the harm can be with that, this dynamic is why the "autism is caused by vaccines" bullshit continues to live - because that's what one major benefactor of autism research believes, and if you want their funding, you need to at least pretend to believe as well. Not to mention that philanthropic power can be exerted more blatantly - Bloomberg quashed a good deal of dissent as mayor of NYC simply by reminding community groups of exactly who was signing over their funding.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:17 AM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
I have some bad news: the worst billionaires are already in control of government.
I certainly don't always agree with Gates on many things, but then I think about generosity and social concern of the Koch brothers, Walton, Bloomberg, and others....
posted by BlueHorse at 9:06 AM on February 28, 2018
I certainly don't always agree with Gates on many things, but then I think about generosity and social concern of the Koch brothers, Walton, Bloomberg, and others....
posted by BlueHorse at 9:06 AM on February 28, 2018
I hate to break this to the Metafilter brigades, but in capitalist societies rich people have power.
Patronizing tone aside, sure, obviously. But the difference in degree now is everything: our capitalist society has forgotten that capitalism is an intrinsically amoral system, and must have considerable limits, regulations and controls to serve human moral and ethical needs and concerns. Our current, thoroughly de- and un-regulated versions of capitalism have created individuals who are far, far too wealthy for that to be any good, no matter what they choose to do what that money--one of the whole points of Enlightenment political philosophy is that this is a priori bad, and that there are certain limits or controls that must exist to ensure that unaccountable, massive power does not accrue to individuals without our collective intent or choice.
Ultra-rich individuals are profoundly destabilizing influences to a capitalist system, not symptoms of its success. The irony of democratic, post-Enlightenment social and political philosophies and systems is that, while largely centering on the freedom and liberty of the individual human being, they must prioritize collective good above any individual's right to...anything, really, because to implement a system that values and protects the individual person, it must value and protect every individual person; that is, collectively, all of us.
posted by LooseFilter at 9:25 AM on February 28, 2018 [4 favorites]
Patronizing tone aside, sure, obviously. But the difference in degree now is everything: our capitalist society has forgotten that capitalism is an intrinsically amoral system, and must have considerable limits, regulations and controls to serve human moral and ethical needs and concerns. Our current, thoroughly de- and un-regulated versions of capitalism have created individuals who are far, far too wealthy for that to be any good, no matter what they choose to do what that money--one of the whole points of Enlightenment political philosophy is that this is a priori bad, and that there are certain limits or controls that must exist to ensure that unaccountable, massive power does not accrue to individuals without our collective intent or choice.
Ultra-rich individuals are profoundly destabilizing influences to a capitalist system, not symptoms of its success. The irony of democratic, post-Enlightenment social and political philosophies and systems is that, while largely centering on the freedom and liberty of the individual human being, they must prioritize collective good above any individual's right to...anything, really, because to implement a system that values and protects the individual person, it must value and protect every individual person; that is, collectively, all of us.
posted by LooseFilter at 9:25 AM on February 28, 2018 [4 favorites]
Whether he's right or wrong, I'm glad to see that Bill Gates contemplates these issues in the Time Vault at S.T.A.R. Labs from the Flash TV show.
posted by straight at 9:28 AM on February 28, 2018
posted by straight at 9:28 AM on February 28, 2018
Also, if you're going to point to the behavior of other billionaires to argue for why there should be no accountability for the Gates Foundation, I daresay you've lost the plot. Just because they are doing things that we consider to be good doesn't mean that they should be exempt from scrutiny.
Well, yeah, capitalism is evil and we should start the process of dismantling it right away, but in the mean time kids are dying of preventable diseases and our governments are doing fuck-all about it and I, for one, am glad one billionaire is saving their lives while we figure out how to make him accountable.
posted by rocket88 at 12:28 PM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
Well, yeah, capitalism is evil and we should start the process of dismantling it right away, but in the mean time kids are dying of preventable diseases and our governments are doing fuck-all about it and I, for one, am glad one billionaire is saving their lives while we figure out how to make him accountable.
posted by rocket88 at 12:28 PM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
Well, yeah, capitalism is evil and we should start the process of dismantling it right away, but in the mean time kids are dying of preventable diseases and our governments are doing fuck-all about it and I, for one, am glad one billionaire is saving their lives while we figure out how to make him accountable.
Except that their presence there is not without issue:
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:48 PM on February 28, 2018
Except that their presence there is not without issue:
Now is the moment for me to address the inevitable objection. Many people, including leftists, consider it unseemly, even churlish, to criticize the Gates Foundation. Time and again, I’ve heard, “They do good work on health care in Africa. Leave them alone.” But the Gates Foundation has created much the same problem in health funding as in education reform. Take, for example, the Gates project to eradicate malaria.The point is this - we would never take the attitude of “They do good work on health care in Africa. Leave them alone.” if we were talking about a government or an NGO - and yet when we have philanthropists doing the same thing (and with the concentration of wealth we are seeing in the 1%, increasingly at the same scale) we suddenly find it uncouth to take a critical view. That's the whole problem, and the first step in accountability has to be us pushing that tendency aside to be critical of those efforts.
On February 16, 2008, the New York Times reported on a memo that it had obtained, written by Dr. Arata Kochi, head of the World Health Organization’s malaria programs, to WHO’s director general. Because the Gates Foundation was funding almost everyone studying malaria, Dr. Arata complained, the cornerstone of scientific research—independent review—was falling apart.Many of the world’s leading malaria scientists are now “locked up in a ‘cartel’ with their own research funding being linked to those of others within the group,” Dr. Kochi wrote. Because “each has a vested interest to safeguard the work of the others,” he wrote, getting independent reviews of research proposals “is becoming increasingly difficult.”
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:48 PM on February 28, 2018
but in the mean time kids are dying of preventable diseases and our governments are doing fuck-all about it and I, for one, am glad one billionaire is saving their lives while we figure out how to make him accountable.
don't be the change you want to see in the world; actually, super powerful institutions and super rich people should do that change. me, I'm just some helpless guy who loves Windows 10's Aero Peek function more than he loves boring stuff like talkin about ethics or whatever
posted by runt at 1:05 PM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
don't be the change you want to see in the world; actually, super powerful institutions and super rich people should do that change. me, I'm just some helpless guy who loves Windows 10's Aero Peek function more than he loves boring stuff like talkin about ethics or whatever
posted by runt at 1:05 PM on February 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
Wow, this thread went negative right from the start. No, Bill Gates is not perfect, but he's an incredibly rich man who became aware of the immense poverty and inequity facing the majority of people in the world, and decided to do something about it. Something huge. Their investments in vaccines have literally saved millions of lives. I'm a microbiologist who works in international health and vaccine research and BMGF has funded most of my work for the past ten years. I work in Vietnam, Indoneisa, Laos, Mongolia, and Papa New Guinea on collaborative projects with local scientists and clinicians- all focused on reducing childhood pneumonia, the leading cause of death for children under 5 worldwide (aside from birth defects). BMGF has been a game changer for health research in low and middle income countries. It's true that the immense influence they have in this sphere can be problematic- but what happens if they stop? USAID, NIH, and CDC have all been gutted. The WHO, who in an ideal world would be a powerful leader in global health improvement, essentially has the budget of one, medium sized US hospital. The foundation is clear on the fact that they target the low hanging fruit- buy vaccines, save lives is a lot more feasible than trying to restructure the US political system. I know very little about their work in education but it is a very small part of what they do. Not every health project will be successful. Certainly BMGF should not be immune from criticism. But don't discount the massive amount of good they have done.
posted by emd3737 at 1:25 PM on February 28, 2018 [8 favorites]
posted by emd3737 at 1:25 PM on February 28, 2018 [8 favorites]
don't be the change you want to see in the world; actually, super powerful institutions and super rich people should do that change.
I definitely don't think they *should* do it, but nobody else is.
Me, I think a few million kids' lives are more important than having to suffer the horror of a rich prick getting praise.
posted by rocket88 at 1:33 PM on February 28, 2018 [3 favorites]
I definitely don't think they *should* do it, but nobody else is.
Me, I think a few million kids' lives are more important than having to suffer the horror of a rich prick getting praise.
posted by rocket88 at 1:33 PM on February 28, 2018 [3 favorites]
Me, I think a few million kids' lives are more important than having to suffer the horror of a rich prick getting praise.
My problem isn't that he's getting praised. My problem is that this philanthropy is actually a powerful exertion of soft power, one that can very easily be bent to bad ends - and that this reality winds up getting obscured because we're so focused on the good that we don't see all the more problematic parts of it all.
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:40 PM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
My problem isn't that he's getting praised. My problem is that this philanthropy is actually a powerful exertion of soft power, one that can very easily be bent to bad ends - and that this reality winds up getting obscured because we're so focused on the good that we don't see all the more problematic parts of it all.
posted by NoxAeternum at 1:40 PM on February 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
It's pretty funny and extremely meta that that web page will not render in my Firefox browser, running on a Linux desktop, because I block cookies by default.
See also: the 1990s history of the web
posted by intermod at 9:10 PM on February 28, 2018
See also: the 1990s history of the web
posted by intermod at 9:10 PM on February 28, 2018
Not really about Gates, but since we're talking Malaria, some of you might find this: http://opensourcemalaria.org/ interesting
(if you like videos there's a LinuxConfAU talk here too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBodnd68iwU )
posted by nickzoic at 7:55 PM on March 1, 2018
(if you like videos there's a LinuxConfAU talk here too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBodnd68iwU )
posted by nickzoic at 7:55 PM on March 1, 2018
« Older Beauty in the face of pending doom: Gulag Art by... | Campaign Workers Of The Workd Unite! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Nelson at 12:18 PM on February 27, 2018 [3 favorites]