Your Life: A Playground For Rich Liberals

By Ilana Mercer

“Make sure it doesn’t happen in your state next,” warns
Michelle Malkin, in “Rocky Mountain Heist,” a documentary in which the columnist puts her trademark shoe-leather journalistic sleuthing to work in exposing the Democrat-rigged “democracy” of Colorado. There, a group of well-heeled liberals used its power—and “every scheme possible”—to transform Colorado into a playground for the rich (and their liberal ideology) and a nightmare for “common” Coloradans.

Malkin, who once resided in our state, might already know that the dice are loaded against decent people in Washington, too. Take I-594, a gun-control measure which, we are led to believe, expresses the legislative will—even though it is, as The Zelman Partisans have noted, “the anti-gunners’ dream. Under the pretense of being ‘only’ a universal background check bill (common sense, you know!), it will criminalize nearly all transfers of firearms, including the most essential, innocent and fleeting. Loan a gun to a friend in need? Felony. Instructor hands a gun to student and student hands it back? Two felonies.”

The measure was “bankrolled by billionaires on the left,” among them former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Microsoft billionaires Paul Allen, Steve Ballmer and, of course, Bill Gates. These busybodies—who reside in fortified castles and are cosseted by security details—raised millions and gave unstintingly to make it harder for ordinary folks to defend life and property.

It runs in the family. In 2011, we were menaced by another unfathomably wealthy “man,” who got behind an effort to bilk Washington-State businessmen and women of more modest means. The Service Employees International Union (state and national locals), the National Education Association, and Washington teachers union locals all united to champion a new income tax. The poster boy for this regressive measure was William H. Gates Sr., father of Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

The late Steve Jobs was not the only man who had no time for that excuse of a man, Bill Gates. Less well-known for his contempt for the patronizing Gates was hedge-fund founder Robert W. Wilson. 

Having donated an estimated $600 million over his lifetime, Mr. Wilson was one of the most generous philanthropists in our country. Still, Wilson flatly refused to join what he derisively termed Bill Gates’ “worthless Giving-Pledge” charity.

And it was not only Gates’ showy, sanctimonious, very public giving that Mr. Wilson discounted.

But first—and against this background—let me add the following: The righteous give discreetly; the pious give publicly. Accustomed to the hedonism of Hollywood and the exhibitionism of cable news anchors, it may surprise some to learn that the manner in which most ordinary Americans give—anonymously—satisfies the exacting standards of righteousness specified by Maimonides. The 12th-century Jewish philosopher stipulated that the highest form of charity is practiced when “donor and recipient are unknown to each other.” To escape being lionized was not Mr. Wilson’s only message to the flabby Microsoftie. BuzzFeed published Bill Gates’ paternalistic, condescending, verbose missives to the late Mr. Wilson. As the latter’s replies are eminently quotable, I’ve shared them with you, courtesy of BuzzFeed:

From: Robert W. Wilson Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 12:16 PM To: Bill Gates Subject: Re: Giving Pledge discussion Mr. Gates, I decided more than ten years ago to try to give away 70 percent of my net worth and have already given away one-half billion dollars. (I’ve never been a Forbes 400.) So I really don’t have to take the pledge. Your “Giving Pledge” has a loophole that renders it practically worthless, namely permitting pledgees to simply name charities in their wills. I have found that most billionaires or near billionaires hate giving large sums of money away while alive and instead set up family-controlled foundations to do it for them after death. And these foundations become, more often than not, bureaucracy-ridden sluggards. These rich are delighted to toss off a few million a year in order to remain socially acceptable. But that’s it. I’m going to stay far away from your effort. But thanks for thinking of me. Cordially.

When the vapid Gates continued to nag him, Mr. Wilson became sufficiently piqued to terminate the exchange, and decisively so:

From: Robert W. Wilson To: Bill Gates Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 4:15 PM Subject: Re: Giving Pledge discussion Mr. Gates thanks much for your email. But as my previous email indicated, I wouldn’t have much fun or add much value to this group. You, being a liberal, think you can change people more than I think. But let me make one comment. When I talk to young people who seem destined for great success, I tell them to forget about charities and giving. Concentrate on your family and getting rich—which I found very hard work. I personally and the world at large are very glad you were more interested in computer software than the underprivileged when you were young. And don’t forget that those who don’t make money never become philanthropists. When rich people reach 50 and are beginning to slow down is the time to begin engaging them in philanthropy. I’d greatly appreciate just leaving it at that. Cordially.

Wilson, who “committed his life to donating his fortune to charities,” took his life late in 2013. While men with the (Melinda-inspired) mindset of a Bill Gates are multiplying; the likes of Robert W. Wilson, of blessed memory, are a dying breed.

 Contributor Ilana Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer, based in the U.S. She is a contributor to Junge Freiheit, a German weekly of excellence, and is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies. Her latest book is “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa.” Her website is www.IlanaMercer.com. Follow her on Twitter. “Friend” her on Facebook.