Capitalism

Forget the Great Reset. The Great Escape is Here.

The authors of COVID-19: The Great Reset and their most conspiratorial critics share an unfounded faith in the competence of central planners.

|

HD Download

"The coronavirus pandemic has no parallel in modern history. It is our defining moment." 

Those are the words of Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum (WEF), in COVID-19: The Great Reset, the 2020 book he co-authored with Thierry Malleret. 

"Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal," they write in the book's introduction. "The short response is: never."

At the latest WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland, this January, Schwab set the tone for the conference with his glowing introduction of the opening speaker: Xi Jinping, China's president and chairman of the Chinese Communist Party 

"Major economies should see the world as one community… and should coordinate the objectives, intensity, and pace of fiscal and monetary policies," said Xi in his address to the WEF.  

This vision of a united globe with a coordinated economy managed by experts captures Schwab's vision of the post-COVID world. "We have to redefine the social contract," said Schwab at a 2020 WEF book launch event for The Great Reset. 

These grand proclamations, the ominous book title, and Schwab's odd personal style have led many people to speculate that the "great reset" is part of a conspiracy of global financial elites and politicians to depopulate the planet so that they can more easily institute one-world government, or even that COVID was engineered to that end. 

I don't buy it. Far-reaching, global conspiracies require levels of coordination and shared purpose likely to be quickly exposed and fall apart, especially in the networked age. Instead of spinning our wheels searching for a secret agenda, take a look at the one right out in the open.  

"I think we are moving from short-term to long-term, from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism," said Schwab at his 2020 book event.

What Xi, the WEF, and people like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) have in common is that they favor so-called stakeholder capitalism, which is a euphemism for making companies answer first to special interests. They want to reorganize corporate boards to include representatives from labor, environmental, and social justice groups. Warren proposed a bill to require 40 percent of large corporate board seats be elected by workers. In China, the state simply owns or controls a majority stake in most of the country's largest firms.

The WEF and many state leaders believe global coordination and governance is essential to manage global problems: climate change, international financial instability, and future pandemics. Ironically, it's not only Schwab's conspiratorial critics who place too much faith in central planners to manage the globe. 

A crucial flaw in Schwab's theory is that it puts too much faith in the ability of governments to reengineer society in a way that better serves the needs and desires of all citizens. He wants a  rethinking of capitalism that escapes "the tyranny of GDP growth" so that companies create  "goods and services for the common good" instead of "maximizing profits." 

But the phrase "common good" points to his fundamental misunderstanding of capitalism, which is nothing new: central planners were using this idea to maximize their own power at the expense of individual freedom back in the 1940s, when the Nobel Prize–winning economist F.A. Hayek wrote The Road to Serfdom, which would go on to sell over two million copies.

"The welfare and the happiness of millions cannot be measured on a single scale of less and more," Hayek writes, "[and] depends on a great many things that can be provided in an infinite variety of combinations."

Every single one of the billions of people who populate this planet have unique goals and desires that are impossible to reduce to a unified whole, whether that's GDP or whatever supposedly holistic metric the WEF wants to replace it with, as Hayek and his mentor Ludwig von Mises argued. Profits are a signal to entrepreneurs and investors that they are satisfying the disparate needs of their customers. 

"One of the great lessons of the past five centuries in Europe and America is this: acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state," write Schwab and Thierry in The Great Reset. "It's always been the case, and there is no reason why it should be different with the COVID-19 pandemic."

They are right that war is the health of the state, as the writer Randolph Bourne once put it, and the government's response to COVID has been similar to military conflict in terms of the cost and the chaos it has engendered. World Wars I and II and the Great Depression ushered in a powerful modern welfare and warfare state that irreversibly altered America and the world.  

But is the sort of permanent expansion of state power that Schwab predicts, and which would make the world worse off in the long run, really inevitable? 

I'm more optimistic this time, thanks in large part to the power of technology to provide everyday citizens with an exit. Instead of the Great Reset, in which sclerotic 20th-century institutions accumulate even more power, I think we're entering… the Great Escape

This is possible because technological progress is outpacing the ability of the state to control and regulate it. Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls. Technology can be designed to facilitate decentralization, in which the flow of money and information can't be controlled. Ideas emerge from the bottom up.

Expecting governments and international bodies to orient every large company toward some widely agreed upon "common good" assumes that many of the very institutions that bungled the COVID-19 response can competently handle the planet's most intractable problems. 

My hope is that after witnessing the colossal failure of governments in the face of a global crisis, many more people will be looking for a different approach.

There's evidence everywhere of the Great Escape: The U.S. population shift away from expensive, restrictive, and poorly governed states and cities spurred by the rise of remote work, the exodus from government-run schools, the growing use of cryptocurrency, the popularity of encrypted, private communication platforms and the expanding reach of independent voices in our increasingly decentralized media. 

Hayek called central planning the "fatal conceit," writing that "the curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."

And Schwab even touches on this idea, writing that "complexity creates limits to our knowledge and understanding of things; it might thus be that today's increasing complexity literally overwhelms the capabilities of politicians in particular—and decision-makers in general—to make well informed decisions." 

He dubs this quantum politics but never quite explains how policy makers will realistically overcome this dilemma. 

Maybe there's record-low trust in our institutions because the people running them are attempting the impossible: planning the future for billions of people.

"Humiliating to human pride as it may be," Hayek wrote in the Constitution of Liberty, "we must recognize that the advance and even the preservation of civilization are dependent upon a maximum of opportunity for accidents to happen." Policy makers could and should be more focused on securing the freedom that allows such decentralized experimentation and accidental progress to occur.

The fear of a Great Escape—of losing control—is understandable because there are systemic risks that could destroy human civilization, including future natural or man-made pandemics, runaway inflation, and ecological disaster. 

"Small boats may not survive a storm, but a giant ship is strong enough to brave a storm," said Xi in his WEF address this January.   

But if we're all stuck in the same large ship in the same storm, we're all going down with it when the winds finally get bad enough. 

Concentrated power itself presents an existential risk: A bad intervention applied to economies of the entire world at once can bring down the entire system. But the distributed power and humble trial-and-error of markets and decentralized governance brings progress in fits and starts with less risk of total ruin.

What Schwab, Xi, and central planners around the world miss is that when securing the rights of the individual comes first, the rest tend to follow.

Written and produced by Zach Weissmueller, animation by Tomasz Kaye, additional graphics by Nodehaus

Photos: CHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom; CHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom; Li Tao / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Ken Cedeno / Pool via CNP / SplashNews; Ahmad Abdo/dpa/picture-alliance/Newscom;  Ed Lefkowicz / VWPics/Newscom;  Albin Lohr-Jones/Sipa USA/Newscom; Li Xiang / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Kyodo/Newscom; CHINE NOUVELLE/SIPA/Newscom;  Li Tao / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom;  Lan Hongguang / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom

Stock footage: Timo Volz from Pexels; Alexander Bobrov from Pexels 

Music: "Thunder" by straget licensed under Creative Commons Attribution; "Aqueous Pulse" by thatjeffcarter licensed under Creative Commons Attribution.

NEXT: The Revolt of the Canadian Truckers

HD Download

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Schwab, the WEF, and their politically-aligned creatures in the western governments in particular are simply the latest iteration of World Government fetishists who have been around since the League of Nations, and really ramped up as World War II was winding down.

    There's always been a pretense by these types that the only way to guarantee worldwide peace and harmony is to put the entire planet under the overview of some unaccountable, unelectable global bureaucracy.

    1. My advice is to watch “Don’t Look Up” but watch it as an allegory for the “experts” of this century. So think of DiCaprio’s character as General Petreaus who convinced Bush/Obama he could win wars and achieve our goals and he became a celebrity just as Fauci and Greenspan and Bernanke and Gates and all of the experts we have trusted these last 21 years in what was supposed to be another American century.

      I think the mistake we are making is having power too concentrated and the solution is to diffuse decision making and obviously don’t do super dumb things like Iraq and Afghanistan.

      1. that movie is a bit shit.
        might as well watch the documentary "idiocracy"

        1. Yeah, it was total garbage. Typical urban shitlib sperging about "divisiveness" preventing the US from beating their main bete noire, climate change, while people are struggling to deal with the current administration taking us back to the 1970s.

          The only good movie Adam McKay's ever done was The Big Short, and that's because most of the memorable shit was lifted directly from Lewis's narrative in the book.

    2. Most gather in Belgium now and scheme about punishing the Brexiteers.

    3. The problem is they are finally getting the mindshare in the united states, and the technocratic control necessary to impose their elitist goals.

      1. This right here ^^^. We are seeing shifts, but they are collusionary shifts. Particularly here in the US, the press used to see its role as one to hold the government accountable. They have instead become conspiratorial and the arm of and/or spearheads for those they align with. We used to see courts, justice departments, intelligence, and crime agencies operate independently from their political masters. They have instead become their hammer.

        It's not necessary to uncover or draw a roadmap of global conspiracy in order to see its outline. But it isn't really what it was before when it was competing philosophical visions with the same purpose. It's now quickly morphing into an elitism vs everyone else. There has always been an underpinning of this concept but the biggest change that COVID has brought around in my opinion is that the elites have taken off the gloves and become far more brazen in displaying their inclinations. It literally gave them a laboratory to test the willingness of subjects.

        We are used to seeing that in many other countries, but it's a relatively new but seemingly highly successful deployment that is rather stark in contrast when we see it unfold in ostensibly democratic civilizations such as Australia and Canada. In the US, there's a little thing called the Constitution that is a burr under the new saddle, but it's not a roadblock to a government that controls all the assets of coercion and is increasingly willing to use them to define their political enemies as deplorables.

    4. "World Government fetishists who have been around since the League of Nations,"

      World Government fetishists who have been around since the Babylonian Empire,
      As in, "Tower of Babel."

      1. I realize people like to play these false equivalencies in an effort to look sophisticated, but the ancient Babylonians have about as much in common with the Schwab crowd as a hamster does with a Doberman.

        1. It's easier to say "same ole shit" thoughtlessly than it is to admit the dreadful reality of what's here and what's coming.

      2. The Tower of Babel was a myth cribbed from previous similar myths, M'Lady. *Tips fedora, meaning the same thing in any language.*

        And translator apps have undone the language divide and further proved the non-existence of JHVH-1 without denying anyone's freedom.

        Translator apps are just a hair's length away from running in real time as part of the ambience like on Star Trek. I use them almost daily in my retail workplace when my Spanish and French is rusty.

  2. This is possible because technological progress is outpacing the ability of the state to control and regulate it. Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls. Technology can be designed to facilitate decentralization, in which the flow of money and information can't be controlled. Ideas emerge from the bottom up.

    How fucking delusional can you get?

    1. You tell us. Governments may not be fading away, but a lot of their supposed super control of economies is illusory and propaganda. Look at the pot market; it's been booming for years, and government is still incapable of catching up. Food and housing take a smaller and smaller portion of disposable income, leaving a lot of spending which the government is unaware of. I'd say the majority of my friends and neighbors earn more unreported income than reported, and barter work with the wider community, off the books.

      1. I am not saying that government is not a danger and won't get worse. I am saying that if you really think government is so bad as to make TFA wrong, you are delusional.

      2. Propaganda?

        Sure.

        It's not really happening and we are freer than we've ever been.

        1. More sneers without content. Assertions are meaningless except as delusional propaganda.

          1. Sneers are appropriate when your response to "freedom is being systematically trampled upon" is met with "not as long as more people are smoking weed."

            Your response was bullshit, so you get bullshit back.

            1. Fascism+weed does not equal utopia?

            2. To your bullshit:
              You.
              Are.
              Full.
              Of.
              Shit.
              Is appropriate.

      3. No, if you want to see whether governments are imposing super-controls, watch their ridiculous mandates and how they treat those who dare object.

        20 years ago it was inconceivable that we would have handed out healthcare over to the government. 5 years ago it was inconceivable that a western government could ban you from opening your business and pay you to accept that, knowing damn well you'd be paying for it in the near future. Two years ago it was inconceivable that a government would/could shut down energy sources and intentionally put hundreds of thousands out of work by any due process, and never by administrative fiat. A year ago, it was inconceivable that a government would/could get you fired for not taking their "free" poke. Six months ago it was inconceivable that a government would label you a domestic terrorist for getting irate at a school board meeting. Still think you're winning?

        And we are not alone. Never would I have dreamed that Australia would go full Soviet on their citizens or that a Canadian PM would essentially declare Martial Law and suspend Parliament until he could exercise his power to destroy those who oppose him over ridiculous and now pointless mandates, and he got away with it.

        The fact that there are black markets you speak of isn't evidence that they are out of control. And if you have friends that make more off the books than on, then you don't hang with a typical crowd, and their time is coming. As digital controls and AI are developed, it's just a matter of time till they know where 99.9% of money flows. I've still got a few sources of quiet cash, but most of them have become harder or impossible to not report. They missed the coup de gras with the attempt to get every bank to report any transaction greater than $600, but it will come back.

        For most of these, it is that they haven't caught up to it... yet, have decided that the payback is too little, or just throwing you a chicken bone to make you think you are winning. These have always existed but now there are tools that can be deployed to find these, if, when and at a time of their choosing. In the meantime, if you think you're still in control because you made a couple hundred last weekend and this makes you think you're in control, so much the better. You'll shut up and sit down because you don't want anyone to notice.

        You don't think the government is in charge of the weed market? The control is obviously far from complete but compare this to 20 years ago. They are making progress. In the meantime, should you jump through all the government hurdles and become legal, the government will still pressure banks to not work just to remind you that you operate at their pleasure.

        1. True words....
          The Phucko Knows

        2. Agreed, Bluwater!
          And right now, it's inconceivable that our government would lock down (or turn off) the Internet and prevent all "unauthorized" communications.
          Were they to do that, game over.

    2. Clearly Wiessmuller is looking to improve his social credit score. There is no way someone could actually believe that with what we just saw in Canada and the tracking down of J6 protesters.

      1. There is no way someone could actually believe that

        No kidding. This article has not aged well in spite of being published... checks...less than three hours ago. Wendy's French fries have a longer shelf life.

    3. [JOIN NOW] I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($200 to $300 / hr.) online from my laptop. Last month I got cheek of nearly 30,000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don’t have to go office, Its home online job. tyg You become independent after joining this job. I really thanks to my friend who refer me this:-
      ..
      SITE….., http://moneystar33.blogspot.com/

  3. “The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”
    ― Thomas Sowell

    1. The third rule of leftist politics is to blame hoarders.

      1. Herbert Hoover blamed hoarders for making it impossible for government agents to nationalize their assets via prohibition-law forfeiture and confiscation. Bert--Hitler's own Republican ally and devout congregant of prohibitionist mystical bigotry--is now the leftiste? Or was the idea to prove that fascism is the same as all other socialism?

        1. Yes. Hoover was a government interventionist in the market. The idea he was for “letting the market sort it out” is one of the great lefty lies about the depression.

          Hitler was a (non-Marxist) socialist as well, since you brought him up.

          1. Hitler was absolutely a Marxist, despite his self description and leftist revisionism.
            Fundamentally, Marxism = people are not individuals but simply interchangeable units of abstract identity classes, classes that are at perpetual war with each other for power and in an appropriate hierarchy.
            Hitler had a different version of Marxism than Lenin or Stalin or Mao, but it was nonetheless Marxism.
            Incidentally, it's primarily Hitlerian Marxism which guides the left today, since (and overt's done a good job describing this) economic class divisions in the US haven't been as rigid as they were in Europe. Thus the fertile ground for class war isn't economic but racial/identitarian.

  4. Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls.

    Um, no. Government will never abandon anything. They'll just be in a never ending game of catchup.

    1. Now is not the time to risk shifting to austerity....

  5. At some point, the old guys who are doing this will be dead.

  6. I encourage everyone to go to the WEF website and look around it's an eye-opening experience.

    It's essentially Scientology for billionaires and world-leaders from second string countries (Argentina, Canada, New Zealand).

  7. Yep the wef people are evil, but they will realize they can't control everything and then side with freedom. Yep that's what history teaches us. When dictators start loosing control of the people they Bend to the will of the people, not stomp harder to the detriment of everyone.
    This is straight up the parable of the scorpion and the turtle.

    1. The entire article is a delusion pipe dream counseling people to effectively ignore the unified global crackdown proceeding at breakneck speed and pretend that freedom is winning.

      Great advice.

      Wake the fuck up, will you people?

      You're going to have to fight and get your hands dirty. And I mean fight for real. Sitting around smoking weed and fucking around with crypto isn't doing dick to preserve anyone's freedom.

      1. Yeah this is a very ignorant article given what is out in the open now.

      2. Reason is pro totalitarian.
        They're goal is to convince people to just lie back and take it.

      3. Stuff it up your ass, will you GG?

        1. "Big Brother really isn't so bad, and I'm sure it won't control ever more of our lives"
          -sevo

          Bold take, buddy.
          Keep that faith in The System and It Can't Happen Here alive!

        2. Dude.... U really shouldn't be shouting what a complete jackass u r. F-ing gross ass human is WHAT u be.
          The Phucko Knows

  8. Profits are a signal to entrepreneurs and investors that they are satisfying the disparate needs of their customers.

    Profits are also the price we pay for efficiency. Without profits there'd be no incentive to innovate and create easier ways to do things. Which also explains why government is ridiculously inefficient. No profit motive. Their job is to spend money, not make it.

    1. It’s not just the absence of a profit motive. There’s a huge agency problem. The goals of those running government are in no way aligned to those who they supposedly serve and those that put them there. It’s why charitable non-profits are, in general, run a lot better than governments (and they often aren’t so good either).

      1. Public Choice Theory applies as well. Government actors are just as self interested as the rest of us. Except instead of pursuing profits and money they want to maintain and increase their power. It's difficult to trust government once you understand that simple point.

        1. Harder still when you understand that the power they seek is the time derivative of capacity to kill en masse.

        2. Then there is the Irony of Neighbors, as I've heard it called. Basically, it is that being elected to office or hired as a bureaucrat somehow confers credibility and expertise on that person to make decisions for you that you'd otherwise tell him to fuck off if he was just your neighbor and getting into your business.

          It goes well with the attitude that government officials and bureaucrats are our bosses, superiors, and leaders rather than our representatives or often... that derp that couldn't make it in the private sector.

  9. Here's a Canadian MP asking about the WEF'S involvement, and the Speaker of the House, who's a WEF Fellow, says there's a microphone glitch and they can't record the question.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFTVCJr8-qg

    1. Almost as convenient as all the hard drive failures of the Obama administration, apparently caused by congressionally issued subpoenas.

  10. The coronavirus pandemic has no parallel in modern history. It is our defining moment.

    What a fucking idiot.

    It happened 100 years ago. The whole world freaked out, lots of people got sick and died, authorities insisted on people wearing masks, lots of people protested wearing masks, fear, social unrest, blah blah. SOUND FAMILIAR?

    "No parallel in modern history." Give me a fucking break.

    And 100 years ago, it was over in two years. And from what I've read, some people even found time to enjoy life afterwards.

    Fuck off, slavers.

    1. You underestimate the power of weasel words like “modern history.” All he needs to say is that 100 years ago is not “modern” history.

      I remember circa 1994 the Clinton Administration was pushing the talking point that Clinton was “the most vilified President in recent memory.” A Democrat operative I know pulled this line on me at the time. I responded by asking about Reagan, Nixon, Ford, Carter and LBJ. His response: “They’re not recent memory.”

    2. There was a difference, though. The 1918 Spanish Flu overwhelmingly targeted children, whereas COVID-19, bad as it is for the elderly and those with co-morbidities, largely spares children.

  11. The last time I heard an “expert” say that things would never return to normal was when Paul Krugman said the world would never recover from the depression caused by the election of Trump.

  12. "conspiratorial critics", wtf?

    1. It's kind of lame to infer it's a conspiracy theory when the WEF's own books and website are saying "We're trying to take over the world".

      Here's Schwab bragging that they "penetrated" the Argentinian and Canadian governments, and that Trudeau, Merkel and Putin are former World Economic Forum Young Global Leaders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B1Mc0PbXjw

      Here's Schwab bragging about Trudeau's loyalty to his World Economic Forum: https://twitter.com/TheNo1Waffler/status/1493702862471323661?

      Scientology for the aristocracy.

      1. Except scientology isn't actively trying to destroy western society and subjugate the masses under a Leninist global dictatorship

      2. To be fair, when he talks about conspiratorial critics, he specifically means the critics who claim Schwab is on a campaign to depopulate the earth.

        I think adding that was just plain stupid. You don't need to both sides this. Schwab believes that our fucking economies ought to be run by technocratic elites. That is evil enough, and worth condemning. We don't need to spare one breath mentioning flat-earthers or illuminati watchers. Those crackpots have nothing to do with what Schwab and the WEF is trying to visit upon our country.

  13. Free speech defenders! Arise! Truth has banned DevinNunesCow.

    I'm sure you are as outraged by this as I am (cough, cough) and IT MUST NOT STAND IF AMERICA IS STILL AMERICA!!!!

    1. What the hell are you babbling about? Pretty shitty distraction attempt BTW.

      1. Joe hasn’t received the latest talking points. He’s flying blind.

    2. So your account got banned. What'd you do to deserve it?

  14. On what earth have we seen this as true lately?

    “Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls. Technology can be designed to facilitate decentralization, in which the flow of money and information can't be controlled. Ideas emerge from the bottom up.”

    1. To the contrary, if history has demonstrated anything, it is that every wave of technological advancement is invariably followed by a wave of government using that new technology to crush freedom --- which then results in a fatal struggle, often on a global scale, after which the belligerents typically come to an uneasy truce in recognition of the fact that the price of fighting a war was a bad idea. Alternatively, the government wins, freedom is crushed, and everyone is fucked for the next hundred years or so.

      There has never been a magical third option where freedom just flourishes, and it sure as fuck isn't happening now.

    2. “Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls. Technology can be designed to facilitate decentralization, in which the flow of money and information can't be controlled. Ideas emerge from the bottom up SPEND HARDER.”

  15. I'm sure there are a few people claiming the "New Normal" agenda is about transhumanism and depopulation (even, for what it's worth, amongst the agenda's advocates). But, most of the "conspiracy theorists" talking about said agenda are talking exactly about what the advocates of that agenda have in mind - a centralized global governance system that robs the individual of any autonomy, free choice or personal worth. They're able to get that conspiracy theory right because, unlike what Weissmueller suggests, those engaged in that conspiracy aren't particularly trying to hide it. They advertise it quite explicitly, albeit in more flattering terms ("You'll own nothing and be happy!"). What Weissmueller gets wrong, that the conspiracy theorists get right is that the conspirators aren't selfless but misguided. The world they envision would cement themselves in a dominant position in the social and economic hierarchy. Premier Xi isn't basing his goals on what's best for Xiao Chinaman. He wants "global coordination" to ensure that those pesky Xiao Chinamen don't subvert his supremacy and planning with their pesky individual decisions.

    1. Excellent post, but it's a wall of text. So I'm just going to repost it with spaces to make it easier to read.

      I'm sure there are a few people claiming the "New Normal" agenda is about transhumanism and depopulation (even, for what it's worth, amongst the agenda's advocates).

      But, most of the "conspiracy theorists" talking about said agenda are talking exactly about what the advocates of that agenda have in mind - a centralized global governance system that robs the individual of any autonomy, free choice or personal worth.

      They're able to get that conspiracy theory right because, unlike what Weissmueller suggests, those engaged in that conspiracy aren't particularly trying to hide it.
      They advertise it quite explicitly, albeit in more flattering terms ("You'll own nothing and be happy!").

      What Weissmueller gets wrong, that the conspiracy theorists get right is that the conspirators aren't selfless but misguided. The world they envision would cement themselves in a dominant position in the social and economic hierarchy.

      Premier Xi isn't basing his goals on what's best for Xiao Chinaman. He wants "global coordination" to ensure that those pesky Xiao Chinamen don't subvert his supremacy and planning with their pesky individual decisions.

      1. Thanks. That really cleaned up my scribblings.

    2. I think this is exactly Weissmueller's point. The conspiracy stuff was just sloppy writing that should have been edited out.

      This is the main thesis of the article and it should have been more forceful: "This vision of a united globe with a coordinated economy managed by experts captures Schwab's vision of the post-COVID world. " [and this is fucking evil and ought to be resisted at every turn for the following reasons].

      I think you and Weissmueller are quite aligned here...its just that the editing at Reason needs much more work.

      1. When everyone is an editor at your magazine, nobody is.

      2. Except, Weissmueller spent much of the video assuming that Schwab and company were advocating for that vision because they mistakenly thought it was best for the governed and that if he just explained their mistake to them, they'd see the error of their ways. But, that isn't going to happen. They want this vision because it enmeshes themselves as rulers and elites. And no amount of explaining that it isn't best for those they're imposing it on is going to change that judgement.

    3. Ah soooo... so "not really" altruists, but instead misguided. Altruism goood, misguiding baaad.

  16. What Xi, the WEF, and people like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) have in common is that they favor so-called stakeholder capitalism

    If you think Xi is remotely interested in any form of capitalism, you're not paying attention.

    1. "Stakeholder capitalism" is a euphemism for fascist communism

  17. https://twitter.com/Partisan_O/status/1496537619567718413?t=L0YLBw6A3OKZ-EKkPAGy4Q&s=19

    1. In 1966, Marxist theoretician Amilcar Cabral gave an address in Havana, explaining the importance of class suicide:

    2. “…the elimination of the native pseudo-bourgeoisie so that national liberation can be attained also offers the petty bourgeoisie the chance of playing a role of major and even decisive importance in the struggle to truly fulfill the role in the national liberation struggle…

    3. “…the revolutionary petty bourgeoisie must be capable of committing suicide as a class in order to be reborn as revolutionary workers, completely identified with the deepest aspirations of the people to which they belong…

    4. “…This alternative—to betray the revolution or to commit suicide as a class—constitutes the dilemma of the petty bourgeoisie in the general framework of the national liberation struggle…

    5. “…The positive solution in favor of the revolution depends on what Fidel Castro recently correctly called the development of revolutionary consciousness…”

    Found this in a recent essay at @theammind

    [Links]

    For Marxism to triumph, it may require America’s middle-class to commit suicide. Success depends on instilling a “revolutionary consciousness,” that would convince everyday Americans that their own subjugation and gradual eradication is both desirable and just.
    I would argue this is at the heart of these so-called “culture war” battles that are raging across the country today.

    1. We're basically living in the result of what Peter Hitchens calls the "Kierkegaardian revolution".

      They don't storm the barracks, take possession of the post office and police headquarters, press offices, and fly a flag over the parliament. It's a quiet revolution that leaves all the buildings standing, all the institutions in place, but resulted in a philosophical capture of all the existing institutions via the 'long march'.

  18. Governments will have no choice but to abandon their efforts to construct physical and metaphorical walls.

    What incredibly naïve wishful thinking. The entire history of the world demonstrates that the governmental response to failure is more control, not abandonment. In fact coordinating the entire world eliminates the very escapes which have worked in the past, migration, revolution, and conquest.

    Central planners have always tried to force a single model as broadly as possible to eliminate our ability to escape them. This was/is the goal of the Comintern, the EU, and nationalization of every policy and disagreement in America. The idea is always to eliminate competition which makes the scale of central planning failure obvious. Once competition is eliminated those in control respond to any complaint about failure by scapegoating alternate system. Just as Biden and Sanders claim inflation is caused by greedy capitalists future failures will be blamed on incomplete socialism.

    1. Well said.

  19. https://twitter.com/EricMMatheny/status/1496539943988076556?t=ubA0Pu989NJRyCCxSdyG8g&s=19

    Hey guys, the year-long spike in gas prices, the record high inflation, and the supply chain crisis we experienced before Christmas is actually due to the crisis that just emerged over the last 48 hours.

    1. And all the blue checks plus Jeff and Shrike will be blaming the Ukraine situation from now on.

    2. This is the response I love!!!
      "The prices went up because they wanted to date AOC."

  20. https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1496283978399195136?t=AwpGXsTLTYOX17uZWF4A3w&s=19

    1913 “trust us” they said. “The federal income tax will only apply to a few people and it won’t be much.” Repeal the 16th amendment.
    [Graphic]

  21. https://twitter.com/cosminDZS/status/1496524407925268484?t=9TFbmXI3zrJ8dAXba6J1mQ&s=19

    Journalists: The WEF has not infiltrated governments.

    WEF: We have infiltrated governments.

    1. That top comment nails it.

      "because they've also infiltrated journalists"

      LOL bang on.

      1. Makes you wonder about Mr. Weissmuller.

        1. I’m sure they penetrate him a lot.

  22. https://twitter.com/M_Millerman/status/1496508617771597828?t=f4x87pvikdmKcju46hzO4g&s=19

    Globalism is wrong. It is based on an erroneous political philosophy. It has a false political anthropology and political theology. It can only lead to ever more technically sophisticated forms of tyranny.

  23. What Xi, the WEF, and people like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) have in common is that they favor so-called stakeholder capitalism, which is a euphemism for making companies answer first to special interests.

    That's one way of saying it. Another way of saying it is that corporate activities and profits are driven by national goals.

    Another way of saying that is Fascism.

    1. "ESG" seems to be the progressives' preferred way of saying it right now. Of course, progressive terminology changes every 15 minutes so they can scold anyone using outdated offensive language.

  24. I don't buy it. Far-reaching, global conspiracies require levels of coordination and shared purpose likely to be quickly exposed and fall apart, especially in the networked age. Instead of spinning our wheels searching for a secret agenda, take a look at the one right out in the open.

    Let's look at another one.

    The Young Global Leaders program which, according to Schwab himself, has resulted in the "penetration" (his word, not mine) many of the West's government's leadership cabinets.

    What do those people believe? What were they taught at this Young Global Leaders program that was put together by Schwab himself? That's a little murkier, but we can guess what they're taught, by looking at everything else on the website of the WEF.

    It's not a conspiracy theory when it's true, right out in the open, and admitted by the involved parties themselves.

  25. World Economic Forum, Strategic Intelligence, the Digital Identity:

    Having a trusted, verifiable identity is essential. As digital interaction increases at unprecedented rate, not least due to the COVID-19 crisis, the information comprising our identities is being widely shared in ways that create both opportunities and risks. If designed right, digital identities can provide countries with economic value equal to as much as 13% of their GDP, save hundreds of billions of hours through streamlined e-government, and cut trillions of dollars in costs for businesses by 2030, according to one estimate. For the roughly one billion people going without official proof of identity (and the more than three billion people unable to effectively use an identity on digital channels), collaborative and user-centric digital identity models guided by shared principles can be empowering.

    1. The World Economic Forum curates the Platform for Good Digital Identity to advance global digital identity activities that are collaborative and put the user interest at the center.

      The Forum convenes public-private digital identity collaborations from travel, health, financial services in a global action and learning network – to understand common challenges and capture solutions useful to support current and future coalitions. Additionally, industry-specific models such as Known Traveller Digital Identity or decentralized identity models show that digital identity solutions respecting the individual are possible.

      *Cue Music*

      "We do the work, you do the pleasure!"

  26. Noam Chomsky once said something (back when he had a modicum of sanity) to a journalist who was challenging him, "Do you really think I don't believe the things I believe?"

    Chomsky: I do think you believe the things you say you believe. But if you didn't believe them, you'd be replaced by someone else who believes the things you believe.

    I guess I have to post this article again.

    It's not a "conspiracy theory". It's worse than that. it's a massive top-down group think that filters out any noise that's not in harmony.

  27. My hope is that after witnessing the colossal failure of governments in the face of a global crisis, many more people will be looking for a different approach.

    Jesus fucking christ. They ARE looking for a different approach, and when they show up with a different approach, they're called Racists, Misogynists, Insurrectionists, Terrorists, alt-right, Nazis and 'non-representative', then a War Powers act is dropped on them like a ton of bricks, bank accounts are closed, opinions are shuttered and people are arrested until there's no one left talking about a "different approach".

    You REALLY don't get how this works.

    1. So now we’re at the point of tyranny where the ‘leaders’ want real emergency powers for hypothetical protests. And since the protests COULD restart at any time, it’s easy to envision Trudeau continuing to demand these powers in perpetuity. The more cynical among us might even speculate that one of the ways government would ‘ensure’ there’s no more protesting is to monitor social media posts and attack protests before they even get started.

      But the tyrants are just getting started in Canada. Ottawa’s mayor wants to sell the trucks the state ‘confiscated’ during the protest. And inside the article we find something ironic, at the very least:

      Prior to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoking the Emergencies Act for the first time in Canadian history last week, police had difficulties finding tow truck operators willing to tow the semi-trucks and other vehicles in the Canadian capital. Under the Emergencies Act, the government is able to force tow truck operators to carry out their work or they could face potential fines or prison time if they refuse.

      The government was literally forcing tow truck drivers to work under the threat of prison. Isn’t there a word for when somebody forces you to work against your will? Eh, I’m sure it will come to me.

      https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/a-little-more-tyranny-eh

      Tyranny doesn't backpedal.

      1. The Current Approach will strangle you in your sleep while smiling at you, promising you universal healthcare, a guaranteed minimum income, Fifteen Now!, and vigorously affirming your professed gender identity.

      2. it’s easy to envision Trudeau continuing to demand these powers in perpetuity.

        Canada's Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland says she now plans to make some of the emergency powers permanent

        Chrystia Freeland is also a director of World Economic Forum itself. Not just a Fellow or a program grad like Trudeau and Singh. Some MP's have called that a conflict of interest.

  28. That elite prove every day they are dangerous and they must be stopped at all cost. They are hell-bent on destroying the world and making everyone a slave to their any stupid policies

    1. TRANSLATION: vote for the Trumpanzee party or we any any all gonna die!

  29. The Mainstream Media’s Silence On Durham Revelations Is Growing Louder
    Sometimes the loudest thing in the world is silence, and when it comes to the huge revelations from John Durham’s probe of the FBI’s investigation of Trump-Russia allegations, the Left wing media’s (and Reason's) silence is deafening.
    The bombshell from Durham this past week was a filing alleging that former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussman was involved in data mining linked to Trump Tower, another Trump property, as well as the Executive Office of the President (though that data may be limited to the time period of the Obama administration.)

    It was enough for the Wall Street Journal, not exactly a bastion of Trumpism, to ink an editorial bluntly stating “Trump Really Was Spied On.” But don’t try telling that to sycophantic outlets like CNN, NPR, and the New York Times (and Reason)
    For these Democratic Party public relations firms there was a story alright, but it wasn’t about Clinton campaign-linked operatives monitoring Trump linked Internet data, it was about Republicans pouncing!

    TDS seems to be an incurable disease. Reason seems to be suffering from it.

    1. Lily Liver is your standard-issue Trumpanzee Party Faithful here to infiltrate these upstart Libertarians. The LP DARED to rob Orange Fuhrer of His popular vote victory in 2016, then queered BOTH his election victories in 2020. Nothing eats Trumpanzee livers like the way Libertarian spoiler votes repeal fascist "Progress." Sick sycophants and sore lewsers are here to enlist us as goosestepping Gee-Oh-Pee urine analyzers.

      1. Cripes. Grandpa Hank got into the cough syrup again.

  30. https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1496557984268308496?t=BJFQLtJKzHUDl37sXpy1fg&s=19

    Proposed hate speech legislation would allow people to take others to court if they suspect that someone will post content deemed hateful online.

    Read more: [link]

  31. Brainwashed morons

    https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1496580110769610753?t=0AlRh7vc82tn0n9iJh8cbQ&s=19

    this is representative of today's woke Trudeau-ites. A protestor trucker pulls a CBC reporter out of a ditch. A CBC reader is bewildered at capacity of a subhuman deplorable to "show humanity".
    [Link]

  32. This why I think political consolidations such as the EU and an overly centralized United States are terrible ideas. It is the political equivalent of large companies merging again and again in the name of market share, economies of scale and vertical integration. It looks good on paper but it stifles the creativity and risk taking that made the companies successful in the first place. Everyone being in the same boat isn’t good when that boat sinks. Natural competition between companies, states and nations is what leads to actual progress but with inevitable failures. That’s the risk that balances the reward. What’s the fun in everyone getting ice cream if there is only vanilla?

    1. "but it stifles the creativity"

      Giving money and resources to creative people promotes creativity. Ensuring they don't waste time and energy in competing and not creating. Look at all the effort that the internal combustion lobby put into suppressing electrical urban transport around the early 1900s, for example.

    2. From the first word to the last. That article was pure bullshit. WTF is up with this rag?
      The Phucko Knows

  33. "Sure, it's been tried before. And it's always been a disaster. But this time the right people will be in charge."

  34. So instead of a Hitler-Stalin or Molotov-Ribbentrop pact we have NSDAP gnosse Schwab and Fearless Leader Chan Ling Fance of Wuhan germ lab fame setting us down and setting us straight. WHOOPEE.

    1. A global problem needs a co-ordinated global approach to a solution. Especially if trillions if not quadrillions of dollars are on the line. Especially when almost half the globe's population live in two far off countries. Especially when Mother Nature doesn't give a shit about the petty squabbles that nation states have indulged in since they first arrived on the scene.

      1. Sure it does.

        Fuck off, slaver.

        1. "Fuck off, slaver"

          You think it's better for China and India to dictate global affairs on climate issues? I disagree. A global problem needs a global solution. Whinging about the unfairness of it all is not going to change that.

          1. Realistically, I don't think China or India are ever going to do anything to ameliorate their impact on climate change. Therefore, anything the rest of the world does that might unilaterally weaken their economies, hurt their people, and accomplish next-to-nothing is a bad idea.

            Kowtowing to China in order to get them to at least pretend that they will act in any manner other than in what they think is best for China's leadership, is misguided at best and likely very dangerous.

            Having said that, anything that countries might do to reduce their impact on the climate that is not unilaterally damaging--for example, increasing wind and solar capacity--they should pursue those.

      2. Wait a minute, didn't, "global approach to a solution. **PUT*** trillions if not quadrillions of *useless* dollars on the line."????

        I'm sure glad I labored and saved up so dipsh*t "global approach" solutionists could STEAL it right out for under me.

        1. ........... Same Party of Slavery .............

        2. You're not the only one to have bought in to this laboring and saving propaganda. What you need is to take a clear look at the situation and ignore the ideological blowhards who make reassuring promises they can't keep.

          1. I wouldn't say it's a, "who make reassuring promises they can't keep."
            I'd say it's electing politicians who WON'T keep their promise of office.

            Otherwise known as; criminals, liars and crooks.

  35. It's not about depopulating the planet (that seems like a strawman to discredit people), it's about using authoritarian measures and a China style social credit system to impose desired behavior...

    And we've literally been seeing that with Covid. Next up, they'll be doing it for "climate change"

    1. Don’t forget we’ll also get to eat bugs.

    2. You asked for massive computing power ubiquitously available and delivered at almost instantaneous speeds, these are the unintended consequences.

      "Next up, they'll be doing it for "climate change"

      Depends how serious they are about facing the issue and trying to do something. Perhaps more 'algorithmic control' is in the works in any case. Even if world leaders choose to ignore the threat of climate change and only want to appease those with the greatest investment, emotional and economic, in continuing to burn fossil fuels.

  36. "A crucial flaw in Schwab's theory is that it puts too much faith in the ability of governments to reengineer society in a way that better serves the needs and desires of all citizens. "

    It's impossible for governments to satisfy the needs and desires of all citizens and that is not the function of government in any case. Societies are composed of individuals with individual needs and desires, often as not in conflict with each other. Any Marxist will tell you this.

    1. And this is why we tell government to get the fuck out of the way and let people satisfy their own needs. No, global problems don't need orchestrated global solutions. Damn near every one of them was created by globalists. Like the Germans had the Vichy and slavemasters had overseers, globalists have people like you. Crack that whip boy and don't you lighten up on the lashes to those runaways [or as we call them now, insurrectionists].

      1. "And this is why we tell government to get the fuck out of the way"

        In your dreams. In reality you vote for them and pay your taxes.

  37. A “Planned” economy denies your ability to plan.
    Wife and I have a tradition of lunch ‘out’ on Christmas day; lunch at a tavern, big dinner at home later. We have, all of us, watched the news, seen economic trends, adjusted plans as a result and (I’m assuming most of us) had some idea what we might do for lunch next Christmas. No longer true.
    In a (largely) market based economy, you can pretty much plan on that place being open on Christmas day, as they have for the last X years. No longer true
    Courtesy of Newsom getting up on the wrong side of the bed several weeks back and a huge remaining cohort of Chicken Littles (fuck you JFree, with your PANIC flag wrapped around the chain on a running chainsaw, ditto CNNMSNBCCBSPBS, etc) about the only place open for lunch was a casino on the SF peninsula. Off we went to about the worst meal in memory (THAT’S Sweet and Sour Pork?!). Wife was considering what we might do next year; No longer true.
    In an economy ‘planned’ by asshole econ-ignoramuses like Newsom, what might be open next Christmas day pretty much depends on whether he has a hangover or not on a certain day; there is no way to predict that with any degree of reliability.
    This needs to be understood in the macro also: International trade functioned very well indeed for years as the managers of the trade companies could see with a great degree of accuracy and in large amounts what was gonna go where and when (don’t waste your time pitching autarchy; another ‘planned’ economy)
    Want huge numbers of empty containers where they aren’t needed? Want traffic jams of container ships off the CA coast? Want to put up with crummy meals since restaurants closed? Want shelves empty and inflation besides?
    Easy: let even very smart people try to ‘plan’ the economy, let alone econ-ignoramuses like Fauci, Newsom and Cuomo.
    Planned economies DO NOT WORK!

  38. These grand proclamations, the ominous book title, and Schwab's odd personal style have led many people to speculate that the "great reset" is part of a conspiracy of global financial elites and politicians to depopulate the planet so that they can more easily institute one-world government, or even that COVID was engineered to that end.

    I don't buy it. Far-reaching, global conspiracies require levels of coordination and shared purpose likely to be quickly exposed and fall apart, especially in the networked age. Instead of spinning our wheels searching for a secret agenda, take a look at the one right out in the open.

    It's not a "conspiracy", it's an ideology. There is nothing "secret" about the agenda.

    This is possible because technological progress is outpacing the ability of the state to control and regulate it.

    Central planning is hard. Centrally keeping a population in fear is not. And technological progress makes this a lot easier.

    Concentrated power itself presents an existential risk: A bad intervention applied to economies of the entire world at once can bring down the entire system.

    So? How does that bother the people in power? The Soviet Union only fell because the West was there as a counterexample. Once you have central planning at a global level, economic failure won't be apparent to most people because they don't have any basis for comparison.

    What Schwab, Xi, and central planners around the world miss is that when securing the rights of the individual comes first, the rest tend to follow.

    And here you reveal that you really are a progressive at heart: you care about outcomes, not principles.

Please to post comments