Alex Park and Jaeah Lee wrote an article in “Mother Jones” detailing what they call the Gates Foundation’s “hypocritical investments.”
While professing concern for children’s health, they are heavily invested in companies like Coca-Cola and McDonald’s.
It also has a major investment in Walmart, as well as smaller sums in privately managed prisons.
While professing concern about climate change, Gates invests in many oil and gas companies, like Exxonmobil.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Perhaps the Foundation’s most revealing investment is in Monsanto, which is busy privatizing the agricultural gene pool and controlling the global food supply.
After all, Gates’ genius was never as a technologist, but as a monopolist.
Gates’ hypocrisy lies not only in his investments, but also his attempts to remake America’s education system into his own personal assembly line of automatons. But that is only for OUR kids. HIS kids get something far better- a real education. Outside of the public sector. A comparison of the education his children get at the Lakeside School in Seattle reveals the perversity of Gates’ funding of Common Core and its ill crafted, private interest serving attempts to cram every public school attending child into a one size fits all program of instruction leading to readiness for nothing more than low paying careers and community college associate degrees. Gates calls small class sizes a waste of money- yet his kids go to a school that proclaims it’s very foundation rests upon the special relationships that result between teacher and student in very small classes. Gates support of Common Core indicates a belief that narrowing the public school curriculum to focusing on English/Language Art and mathematics is best for our children- yet his children attend a school that centers not on job skills, but education of the whole child through programs of study rich in the arts, service learning, outdoor education, technology, and independent studies. Gates wants to turn our schools into institutions of mediocrity that will produce human capital for American, I’m sorry, global, corporate interests- yet his kids attend a school that sends National Merit Scholars to highly selective colleges and universities. Very clearly, Bill Gates knows what is best for his children- a well rounded education that educates the whole child to dream and aspire to greatness. As a parent Bill Gates clearly understands that truly educating children involves creating caring, aware, empathic individuals capable of collaborating with others to solve the world’s problems. Given the stark, 180 degree difference between the narrow, dumbed down Common Core, which the Gates Foundation underwrote to the tune of 100s of millions of dollars, and the wonderful, holistic education Bill and Melinda Gates have chosen for their children, one can only draw one conclusion- Bill Gates is a hypocrite of colossal proportions, and a very, very dangerous one at that.
Jonboy.. beautifully said. I only disagree with one comment:
You state, “Given the stark, 180 degree difference between the narrow, dumbed down Common Core, which the Gates Foundation underwrote to the tune of 100s of millions of dollars, and the wonderful, holistic education Bill and Melinda Gates have chosen for their children, one can only draw one conclusion- Bill Gates is a hypocrite of colossal proportions, and a very, very dangerous one at that…” There is not a stark “180 degree” difference between what the kids of Gates get for an education and what he wants for “the rest”.. there is a 359 degree difference! The one extra point is for the seasoned public school teachers whose idealism still keeps them in the job trying to give what crumbs of real education they can despite being under such a daunting yoke!
Art,
Are you saying that but for that one degree there is no difference between Gates’s kids and the rest? That’s what 359 degrees would be 🙂
180 degrees = exact opposite. 360 = same direction.
“Do as I say, not as I do”… indeed!
When it comes to hypocrisy, so many
of them—Gates, his underling John King
and countless other corporate reform hypocrites—
pay tens of thousands of dollars so that
their own children figuratively as far away
from the schools that they demand millions
of others attend… the Common Core
curriculum and testing, sky-high class
sizes, etc.
On the subject of class size hypocrisy,
here’s an old article by Dr. Ravitch
from this blog:
https://dianeravitch.net/?s=Weastneat+Gates
———————————————————
Here’s a devastating article that points up Bill Gates’ hypocrisy when it comes to the variation between what he demands for his own children, and what he subjects children from middle and lower income communities to:
http://seattletimes.com/html/dannywestneat/2014437975_danny09.html
THE SEATTLE TIMES’ Danny Westneat takes Gates to task for promoting policy all over the country that jacks class size sky high, with Gates using the common-sense-defying logic that kids will fare better in larger classes.
Well, Westneat sends his own kids to public schools, and will eventually attend Garfield High School (in the news of late). These are the schools that—once Gates has his way—will have obscenely large class sizes… A bit fed up, Weastneat did what perhaps no other writer has yet dared to do:
he investigated the two rich kids’ private school where Gates sends his own children and—doncha know it? —these schools major selling point is that they have… wait for it… EXTREMELY SMALL CLASS SIZES:
WESTNEAT: “I bet (Gates) senses deep down as a parent that pushing more kids into classes isn’t what’s best for students. His kids’ private-sector grade school has 17 kids in each room. His daughter’s high school has 15. These intimate settings are the selling point, the chief reason tuition is $25,000 a year — more than double what Seattle schools spends per student.”
Calling out Gates’ hypocrisy, Weastneat ends the article with a knockout finish:
WEASTNEAT: “Bill, here’s an experiment. You and I both have an 8-year-old. Let’s take your school and double its class sizes, from 16 to 32. We’ll use the extra money generated by that — a whopping $400,000 more per year per classroom — to halve the class sizes, from 32 to 16, at my public high school, Garfield.
“In 2020, when our kids are graduating, we’ll compare what effect it all had. On student achievement. On teaching quality. On morale. Or that best thing of all, the “environment that promotes relationships between teachers and students.”
“Deal? Probably not. Nobody would take that trade. Which says more than all the studies ever will.”
Gates was and will always be a cutthroat businessman. He entered into a licensing arrangement with IBM allowing IBM to use what came be known as MD-DOS before he owned it. He gave the program developer as I recall about $50,000 for ownership and made himself an instant multi-millionaire through his licensing deal with IBM. Several years later he had to pay the developer an amount I believe was 30 million as determined by a court case. The attempt by Gates to pass himself off as a philanthropist is laughable at best. His wealth was estimated 30-50 billion just a few years ago. Now it’s estimated somewhere around 70 billion. I dare say his number one goal is to hit a nice round 100 billion. Has a nice ring to it.
I wish I could say I’m surprised by the article re the Gates Foundation, but I’m not.
Gates and his empire have an inexhaustible capacity to thrive on personal contradictions and institutional hypocrisy; that is nothing new: his history of business piracy is well known.
That his foundation invests as it does is hardly surprising. What would one expect from Captain Bill? After all, Gates is attempting to do nothing less than dismantle public school education and remake it in his own, Microsoft, image.
Trashing Gates, pointing out his odious ideological posture, is easy pickings: like “shooting a sitting duck”. What is more demanding and potentially ‘rewarding’, is to take our knowledge and use it, as necessary, to connect Foundation investments on Wall and ‘education reform’.
One possible question question is how to use MJ’s investigative reporting in the service of supporting public school education. Mother Jones has long fought the good fight. Is it not time to reach out and build bridges with MJ? Perhaps, I see a potential alliance where none exists. Not reaching out has a known result.
The question is how can the public be educated more rapidly on the destructive policies of the billionaire boys club and the Obama administration. The mechanism exists right now to get the public’s attention. It’s the NEA and AFT/UFT. For example: a day of real action, such as a one day national strike, unlike the lame “actions” such as wearing a colored arm band, would be very disruptive, get national coverage, and result in a much more involved public. Problem is the union leaders are also in the pocket of Gates and his ilk. Randi Weingarten has made a few statements about delaying VAM etc., but basically supports common core as does Van Roekel of NEA. Perhaps this blog should concentrate more on the union leaders since the unions have the wherewithal to counteract these policies if the will was there. While I greatly support Diane Ravitch’s efforts to educate the public I feel the union leaders have not been called to account.
MB….this post from 11/4. The conversation which followed is even better….find it
I have a simple policy: When you are fighting for your life, you don’t get into battles with the others on your side. There is a long history of doctrinal and personality battles that have split the opposition to those in the highest seats of power. The story of leftwing politics is a history of doctrinal quarrels. My first job when I arrived in New York City was as an editorial assistant at the New Leader magazine, a small magazine of ideas with a history of democratic socialism (i.e., anti-Communism). It was founded by Sol Levitas, who sympathized with the anti-Communist Mensheviks. When I got a job as an editorial assistant at the age of 22, I knew nothing of these quarrels, but over time I learned about not only the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks, but the Trotskyites, the Lovestoneites, the Cannonites, the Schachtmanites, and a few other splinter groups. All of this was fascinating to me, a wide-eyed young college graduate who never heard of any of this stuff before arriving at the dusty offices of the New Leader on East 15th street in New York City.
The message I learned was to try, try, try to build a coalition; try not to fight with your allies; try not to get into quarrels over doctrine while your enemies grow stronger, while they feed and encourage your quarrels, and while they gloated as you battled.
That is why I make a point of never criticizing those who are on the side of public education, even when I disagree with them. Maybe someone will find an example where I broke that rule, but that’s what I aspire to. I also try never to get involved in union politics. To begin with, I don’t belong to a union, but to end with, it does us no good to fight internally when the forces we face are so well-armed with money, a rigid ideology, and expensive public relations.
Others don’t agree with me.
In the spirit of open dialogue, I present here a recent exchange of letters between Mercedes Schneider and Randi Weingarten.
Since I admire them both, I would like to see them working together as allies. I hope this exchange brings that day closer.
The assumption is the union leaders are on our side. That’s the problem.
http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/an-open-exchange-with-aft-president-randi-weingarten/
Also see:
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2013/12/is-turn-trying-to-take-over-your-union.html
If possible, one does not seek out fights with ones assumptive allies. But as long as national teachers unions take money from Gates and his ilk, then the union posture remains suspect: their allegiance is tainted by accepting funding. Perhaps, such contradictions can be rationalized, but they do not disappear. Have the national unions, through their acceptance of funding been co-opted by such acceptance? Only time will tell.
The internecine ideological struggles fought by the Old Left, must be understood in the context of those times; the immigrant generation brought with them to the tenements and beyond, too the world of the New York intellectuals, all the ideological conflict that was brewing in the late 19th century and the first fifty years of the 20th century.
Progressives need all the allies that can be summoned; that can’t be argued. While your sentiments are sensible, the current objective and subjective conditions, are not analogous to those encountered and debated in the old CCNY cafeteria, the various ideologically driven periodicals and finally lived in the Soviet Union, Germany, Spain and Europe.
The ‘research’ of ‘education reform’ hoists its own petard and is easily refuted. What is far more subtle and toxic are the social, economic and cultural assumptions that drive this ersatz reform.
Michael Fiorillo (frequently posts here) has a good article describing the universities presence at the Bread and Roses strike in Lawrence MA
” the context of those times; the immigrant generation brought with them to the tenements and beyond, too the world of the New York intellectuals, all the ideological conflict that was brewing in the late 19th century and the first fifty years of the 20th century.”
look at his article on NYC educator
“The ‘research’ of ‘education reform’ hoists its own petard and is easily refuted. What is far more subtle and toxic are the social, economic and cultural assumptions that drive this ersatz reform.”
this needs to be further explored; thank you
yes the commissioners have been co – opted; the teacher unions co-opted