Divorce can hardly be as shattering for the average Westerner as it can be in Africa, for instance. But there is still something of a surprise in the unravelling of the Gates.
The theory is that two people who can communicate at the same wave length can hardly divorce because good communication is a cure for the conflict of frames that leads to break-up. So, marriage within a same class, age-grade, sphere of interest and so on are generally recommended.
It does not always follow but the assumption is that some level of sameness, especially of sphere of interest, could act as a binder for couples in an enterprise such as marriage which has no formula for success.
This is what Melinda says
Bill and Melinda Gates fulfil much of these, especially the question of sphere of interest. As the cover picture for this story shows, they have been together in philanthropy, doing what both obviously enjoy doing.
Would so distant a divorce produce negative consequences nearby?
As at today, a Bill Gates withdrawal from funding global health governance can lead to something like a collapse of that domain. The World Health Organisation, (WHO) which animates global health governance is perpetually broke. So broke that its leadership of global health governance has been a butt of jokes.
It is thus surprising that the question does not seem to have been adequately posed about whether whether the break-up would affect global health governance where individuals exercise a great deal of influence. The influence of individuals there comes from the peculiar nature of the domain of global health governance. Unlike climate change or the governance of energy or terrorism, global health governance is a space of what its most authoritative scholar, David Fiddler, calls unstructured plurality. All manner of actors are at work. Most of the very successful campaigns carried out in this domain are the handwork of private actors rather than that of nation states. In this regard, Bill Gates is in the front ranker’s front ranker. His philanthropy in global governance has come with a lot of stories of weaponisation of vaccines to undo population profiles of developing parts of the world. Some of those narratives are as one – dimensional as they are complicated. The last line is that he has been a foremost actor in that domain.
And although the separation note between him and Melinda Gates says they would continue, the question is whether the continuity is immunised against fall – outs of the great break-up. In human affairs, there are little things that assume big implication beyond individuals. What is the guarantee that what are personal to Bill and Melinda from the break-up do not become social and even global in consequences? In a world in which many states are existing only in name with particular reference to provision of basic health needs, can anybody say such consequences may not matter? This is more so at a time the WHO is becoming weaker and weaker, what with great powers extending their endless fear of each other to the politics of pandemic.
Probably aware of this concern, a part of the joint statement on their divorce had this to say: “Over the last 27 years, we have raised three incredible children and built a foundation that works all over the world to enable all people to lead healthy, productive lives. … We continue to share a belief in that mission and will continue our work together at the foundation, but we no longer believe we can grow together as a couple in the next phase of our lives”. Hopefully so!
