4 ms·

I hold no special place for Bill Gates in my heart (if anything, I find him mildly annoying) but this article is nothing better than slander, at best. Sure, it

I hold no special place for Bill Gates in my heart (if anything, I find him mildly annoying) but this article is nothing better than slander, at best. Sure, it does some sort of "follow the money" analysis, and then draws a variety of "links" between Bill Gates' entourage and other entities. But then it entices the reader to wink wink fill in the blank about what the motives are behind these relationships, while providing no evidence of wrong doing or ill intention. In one case where I just happen to have done basic independent research, the author mentions Gates focus on family planning in Africa. The author suggests that this is some evil scheme to prevent a population boom, because $leave_it_to_the_reader_to_imagine_nefarious_purpose. In fact, this effort was motivated by research proving that the best way to improve survivability of children was to educate women. The only sensible conclusion I could glance from this article is this: the author is of the opinion that billionaires shouldn't exist, because the author can't comprehend such a mind-blowingly large number.

rich_sasha 5y ago
The base premise of the article seems to be “rich people are evil because they are evil”. The low point to me was the bit about how, if Gates was for real, he wouldn’t be getting richer anymore. Such articles also fail to explore what things look like without the philanthropy. Even if Gates is somewhat evil, is the net result positive? Could his work be replaced by other organisations? I think both are answered in favour of Gates.
ganafagol 5y ago
Yeah it's quite sad. A lot of critisism in the article is valid, but why make it so personal then? I share a lot of the critisism, but billionaires are not "sick in the head". They are playing by the rules that society gives them. They were exploiting them with luck and smarts to get where they are. This is not praise, but a counterargument to the sentiment. Society needs to set boundaries, instead of not doing it and then villifying those who take advantage of that.
- js8 5y ago
  But isn't villifying those who take advantage of lack of boundaries just an argument for the boundaries? I don't see how you could make that argument effectively without pointing out the transgressions.
AYBABTME 5y ago
After doing some looking behind the cover, my hunch is that "mintpressnews.com" is some sort of propaganda news platform. I guess I wasted a good 10min reading this article. Sometimes I wish there was an overlay on website, giving a fact-check score e.g. "this website tends to be biased toward XYZ side of ABC issues".
goldcd 5y ago
Indeed. After mentioning they funded family planning, next line is " As such, he appears almost more interested in eliminating the people who are suffering than the source of the suffering itself." I know a hatchet when I see one.

rich_sasha 5y ago

The base premise of the article seems to be “rich people are evil because they are evil”. The low point to me was the bit about how, if Gates was for real, he wouldn’t be getting richer anymore. Such articles also fail to explore what things look like without the philanthropy. Even if Gates is somewhat evil, is the net result positive? Could his work be replaced by other organisations? I think both are answered in favour of Gates.

ganafagol 5y ago

Yeah it's quite sad. A lot of critisism in the article is valid, but why make it so personal then? I share a lot of the critisism, but billionaires are not "sick in the head". They are playing by the rules that society gives them. They were exploiting them with luck and smarts to get where they are. This is not praise, but a counterargument to the sentiment. Society needs to set boundaries, instead of not doing it and then villifying those who take advantage of that.

js8 5y ago
But isn't villifying those who take advantage of lack of boundaries just an argument for the boundaries? I don't see how you could make that argument effectively without pointing out the transgressions.

AYBABTME 5y ago

After doing some looking behind the cover, my hunch is that "mintpressnews.com" is some sort of propaganda news platform. I guess I wasted a good 10min reading this article. Sometimes I wish there was an overlay on website, giving a fact-check score e.g. "this website tends to be biased toward XYZ side of ABC issues".

goldcd 5y ago

Indeed. After mentioning they funded family planning, next line is " As such, he appears almost more interested in eliminating the people who are suffering than the source of the suffering itself." I know a hatchet when I see one.