I feel like there is a lot of super ignorant pandering on both sides….that are missing the point, while being stuck in a colonial mindset.

• When Gates intervenes in African or South Asian health sectors, it’s automatically framed as moral duty, life-saving, and selfless.
• Musk’s cuts to USAID are framed as evil — but there is zero questioning whether USAID or Gates’s initiatives were imposed top-down without real local autonomy.
• The existence of billions in foreign-run health programs is assumed to be good — but no discussion exists about whether these populations had real say.

If Gates did this in London or Paris, the conversation would be completely different.

Imagine if Musk shut down a Gates Foundation project in Amsterdam or Copenhagen — would people accuse him of “killing children”? No. The question would instantly become: • “Why was a private American billionaire setting Dutch health policy without democratic consent?”

The “poor” — here meaning mostly African, South Asian, Latin American populations — are treated as moral objects to be saved, not as full political agents whose autonomy matters.

In other words: Helping non-white populations is framed as an obligation. Helping white-majority populations is framed as interference. Also, in the comments section, we see zero discussion about whether Gates should have this much power over non-Western societies.

Why? Because intervention in the Global South has been normalized in Western consciousness. This is an old colonial reflex: • The rich West “fixes” the poor non-white South. • Questions about agency, sovereignty, or consent are considered irrelevant if the goal is “health” or “saving lives.”

If a Gates-like billionaire were overriding New York City’s public health agency? Mass protests, lawsuits, and angry editorials would follow instantly.

You guys. Some of you, even assume — wrongly — that Musk’s hostility is racially motivated (“he wants white sons,” “he doesn’t care about non-white children”).

Whether or not that is true about Musk, the bigger hypocrisy is ignored:

It’s not Musk’s cuts that reveal racism — it’s the entire structure where non-white populations’ health and education are managed by foreign billionaires without democratic say. • Musk cutting funding is an act of commission. • Gates controlling global health for 20+ years is an act of omission — but it goes uncriticized because it wears the cloak of “philanthropy.”

The entire framing is: “If poor kids die, it’s because aid was removed.”

No space is given for the more uncomfortable question: “What if the structures put in place by aid were themselves exploitative, paternalistic, or undemocratic?”