Name: Why Billionaires Won't Save Us
Uploaded: 2021-06-12T11:35:30.000Z
Duration: 14 min 46 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

On January 25th, 2021, a group of elite billionaires and political movers convened through their

screens for the World Economic Forum, also known as Davos. If ever there was an event

that laid bare just how strong the connection between money and power is, this would be

it. Across the span of four days, thought leaders, politicians, and billionaires basked

in the light of ideas like “Fairer Economies”, “Good Tech,” and “How to Save the Planet.”

In short, it's a conference for the global ruling class to decide on how they think the

world should work, and to put those ideas into action. Davos is just one example of

elite do-gooding and philanthropy in the billionaire class. At first glance, big ticket donations

seem great, especially for climate action. More money towards crucial initiatives right?

Well, as we'll soon see, billionaire philanthropy is far from the social good we paint it out

This video is sponsored by CuriosityStream, which now comes with Nebula for free when

you sign up using the link in the description.

The State of Climate Philanthropy As wealth inequality soars and climate change

destroys the lives of millions, the hyper-rich are beginning to realize that hoarding ALL

their money might not be the best thing for their public image. As a result, there's

been a deluge of high-profile climate philanthropy in recent years, with the likes of Bill Gates,

Jeff Bezos, and Elon Musk at the helm. They almost seem to be trying to outcompete each

other in terms of donations. Musk created a four year tech competition that awards $100

million to whoever invents the most effective carbon capture technology. Bill Gates wrote

a whole book on climate change, which I'll talk about later, and gathered his billionaire

boys club to create a $1 billion venture fund that invests in fringe climate technologies

like cloud seeding. And finally, Jeff Bezos stomped into the climate philanthropy space

by establishing a $10 billion Earth Fund, which will dole out grants to climate-oriented

nonprofits and for-profits over the next 10 years. While these gifts initially seem impressive,

even a cursory glance at the math reveals otherwise. Musk's $100 million reward is

just .06% of his wealth as of writing this. That's the equivalent of someone with a

net worth of $40,000 giving away $23. To add insult to injury, his $100 million prize is

actually spread out over a number of different winners and runners-up, so the grand prize

is really only $50 million. Jeff Bezos' $10 billion fund is definitely larger, but

still insignificant considering he's currently the wealthiest man on the planet right now,

and the sum is also being handed out over a 10 year period. So really the fund is granting

just 0.51% of Bezos' net worth every year. But these quick calculations are just the

tip of the iceberg. If you dig even deeper, the new world of climate philanthropy is a

lot less about changing the world than philanthropists would like us to think.

How Philanthropists Changed Change “It's these nice deeds, this sprinkling

of nice deeds, that help us uphold a system in which rich people can monopolize the future,

horde progress and kill the American dream. And not satisfied with that, they're trying

to kill the planet now, too.” That's Anand Giridharadas, author of Winners Take All.

This clip perfectly demonstrates how philanthropy, especially in the climate space, is more of

a charade than an actual avenue for change. Philanthropy should be seen less as an act

of altruism and more as an act of self and wealth preservation. Philanthropy, as far

back as Rockefeller and Carnegie, works to benefit billionaires in three main ways. The

first is through image whitewashing. One way this happens is through large donations to

museums and schools in return for a family name on a building or a gallery wing. This

is exemplified in the Sackler family's donations to a number of academic institutions in the

midst of lawsuits accusing the family of fueling the opioid crisis in the U.S. with their company's

product OxyContin. And we can also see this in Jeff Bezos' multiple environmental donations

that seem to attempt to counteract the dismal environmental and ethical reputation of Amazon.

A union-busting company that has acquired a massive carbon footprint and squeezes its

workers so hard that they have to pee in bottles just to complete orders. Same thing with Elon

Musk, and even Bill Gates, who amassed his fortune by crushing the competition with intellectual

property laws and monopolies. On top of all of that, multiple studies have shown that

the richest 1% cause double the amount of emissions of the world's poorest 50%. So,

if these billionaires really want to make change, they first need to look towards the

exploitative practices that are making them rich. And if you're thinking these industry

titans are extremely generous, they're not. A recent study found that the richest 20 people

only donated .8% of their wealth. Essentially, billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk

are spending millions to mask the harm they cause making billions.

This philanthropic whitewashing not only allows billionaires extreme cultural and political

influence, but it allows for even more financial consolidation. The way the U.S. tax code is

set up, which is where most of the richest people live, the government essentially subsidizes

big ticket giving. When a billionaire like Bezos puts billions of dollars into a donor

advised fund or gives to a non-profit, he is then able to write that amount off in his

taxes. Essentially, when Bezos donates $500 million to wildfire relief, he is then taxed

less because of that. This robs the government and the people of vast sums of money, and

only returns a semblance of that capital under the control of billionaires. This is an inherently

undemocratic way to decide how money is distributed in our society.

Maybe the most insidious effect of big philanthropy is how billionaires are now changing what

change means. Over the past 20 years, small donor donations have decreased, while mega-donations

have increased. The ultra-rich are slowly consolidating funding for non-profits into

the hands of the few. This rise in big ticket donations means an increased control of what

nonprofits and foundations choose to focus on. Simply put, if your organization relies

on the money of Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, you'll be hesitant to criticize Tesla, Amazon, or

espouse anti-capitalist views lest they pull their funding. A collective of radical feminists

of color, INCITE!, write about this struggle in the intro to their anthology, The Revolution

Will Not Be Funded. After securing funding from the Ford Foundation in early 2004, INCITE!

developed two projects dedicated to abolishing state and interpersonal violence. Yet, six

months later the Ford Foundation suddenly pulled its funding because of INCITE!'s

vocal support of the Palestinian liberation struggle. On a personal note, this year I

took a sponsorship from Bill Gates' private office to promote his new book. An act which

I very much regret. Not only were some of the solutions in the book questionable, but

I had to water down my criticism of Bill Gates to one line for fear of losing the sponsorship.

I have since redistributed the money I received from the sponsorship, but the mere act of

self-censorship was illuminating for me. If I, who wasn't reliant on that ad revenue

to continue the channel, wasn't able to criticize Gates, what does that mean for a

non-profit whose very existence is tied to the “generosity” of the billionaire class?

Both these instances reveal the power of financial donations as a way to control progress. Big

gifts come with big asterisks. Some stipulations might just be a name on a building or a seat

on the board, but some can also mean dragging organizations away from radical change and

into tinkering within the status quo. They co-opt organizations and even whole departments

in universities and steer them with financial capital away from substantial systems change.

This is at its core undemocratic. Who decided that Bill Gates gets to be the tsar of global

health or that Elon Musk gets to rule over all things electric cars and space? The moment

we began to rely on the unelected, wealthy few to create change, was the moment we were

held hostage to their political whims. The reality is that big philanthropy helps to

uphold the very system that is trashing the planet, exploiting workers, and making the

The money that Gates and Musk are committing to climate action for example, only seem to

entrench their techno-optimist worldview. They're pouring billions into untested technological

字幕リスト動画再生

Why Billionaires Won't Save Us

essentially

struggle

essential

content