By Gabriel Gherasim
The Great Reset is the brainchild of professor Klaus Schwab, a German economist and founder of the WEF, an annual gathering of high-level business and political leaders that since 1971 has usually met in Davos, Switzerland.
According to the Great Reset’s website, the project harbors a vision of the coronavirus crisis as having exposed “inconsistencies, inadequacies and contradictions” in social systems, but also providing a “unique window of opportunity” to shape the world. Specifically, the Great Reset advertises itself as an initiative to purportedly “build a new social contract that honors the dignity of every human being.”
To achieve that new social contract, the Great Reset’s architects argue that the world “must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.”
Schwab himself sees the predominant Western-based economic system, heavily laden with enormous debt estimated to be $277 trillion, as “not fit anymore for the 21st century” and in need of reform. The world, he believes, is entering what he calls a “Fourth Industrial Revolution” — a new era of paradigm change driven by technological breakthroughs such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing and robotics — and needs to adapt accordingly.
Some may argue that this paradigm is nothing else but an invitation to transhumanism, that insidious view that robots are better than human beings, and therefore it is the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology. Leaving aside that this simplistic view conveniently obscures, that the human being’s spirit and conscience, -which are being divinely created and gifted to us- are irreplaceable by any man or machine, the issue of “playing God” (or more likely the devil) in the restructuring of humanity is outright criminal.
The First Industrial Revolution used water and steam power to mechanize production. The Second used electric power to create mass production. The Third used electronics and information technology to automate production. Now a Fourth Industrial Revolution is building on the Third, the digital revolution that has been occurring since the middle of the last century. It is characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.
It is precisely this “blurring” of the ‘lines’ between the technological and biological spheres that is disconcerting because it raises a whole host of ethical if not legal concerns on the breaching of the above touted ‘dignity of human beings’ in the name of “technological advancements” and/or “in the interest of the state.”
In his own words: “With the economic emergency responses to the pandemic now in place, the opportunity can be seized to make the kind of institutional changes and policy choices that will put economies on a new path towards a fairer, greener future,” Schwab writes in his 2020 book The Great Reset, co-authored by French economist Thierry Malleret that: “Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed.”
However, for those who come from Communist, Nazist, Fascist and other Socialist dictatorships, the Great Reset poposed in January at Davos 2021 to be followed (determined) by a second phase in Singapore in May 2021, raises justified alarm bells of an oligarchy (governments, banks, military and/or secret service agencies) taking over the individual rights and responsibilities of the free citizens.
Big projects (dams, freeways, various edifices, heavy industries) were build by the dictatorial establishments and were falsely touted as successes, NOT because these dictators put in the hard work themselves (as the official propaganda would want us to believe), but because they had slaves. Oh, they called them ‘comerades’, and all these socialist oligarchies pretended to represent the “working man” and to do everything in his name and on his behalf, when in fact his very freedom of movement, of thinking, of religion, of language, essentially all his constitutional rights were brutally or gradually taken away and he was rendered to be a more or less glorified prisoner.
Even in the ‘civilized West’ guiltier of genocides and crimes in Western Europe and in the rest of the continents, much more horrendous than its more ‘primitive’ Central/Eastern European cousins with their tribal Balkan riots, but on the par with its Eastern Asian Barbarian counterparts (Russia, China and Japan), the idea of eugenicism, imperialism and socialism, have found a cozing medium with its ‘civilizing’ oligarchs of banks, industry, military and of course the politicians du jour, espousing Leftist or Right wing narratives which exacerbated the basest instinct in the human fibre and hit the world with WWI and WWII, as well as with the subsequent partition of the globe between them.
Moving on with the globalist agenda, there was a free-market form of globalisation leading up to the first world war, then a retreat during the inter-war period. The Bretton Bretton Woods Agreement (https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/bretton-woods-created ) led to an era of regulated globalisation from 1945 until the 1980s. But since then, the “global elite” has pushed back regulatory restrictions on everything from speculative financial flows across borders to mergers and acquisitions. One such example is the Glass Steagall Act of 1933 prohibitting investment banks from having a controlling interest in retail banks, which was conveniently repealed on November 12, 1999 by President Clinton ( https://www.thebalance.com/glass-steagall-act-definition-purpose-and-repeal-3305850 ) .
A “new era” is now required by this self-described ‘elite’, building on the Paris Agreement to limit climate change now that the Americans are joining again – with more support of a Green New Deal geared towards achieving net zero emissions and making the global economy truly ‘sustainable’.
Other planned mandates are aimed supposingly to tackle the threat of future pandemics; financial speculation, tax evasion and avoidance, and the threat of financial crises; and to reduce the unsustainable inequalities of wealth, income and power across the globe. When this is unilaterally planned by the financial elite it is like putting the proverbial wolves in charge of guarding the ‘sheep.’
It is then when the taxpayers’ money in the United States are being arbitrarily fielded to these sponsors because they are “too big to fail,” or the Vetos at the United Nations are allocated to countries with hundreds of years’ histories of genocides and imperialism, such as Communist China, Russia (tsarist, communist and and neo-communist), England (past to present), the US (its wars for petrol) and France (land exploitation or resurces in Africa to this day, directly or by proxy). Ironically, none of these vetoing countries have ever paid reparations on the German model to its victims, with the possible exception of the US paying a symbolic reparation to the forcefully encamped Americans of Japanese heritage during WWII.
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, prefect emeritus of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said that he welcomes economists and politicians meeting to discuss the world economy, as the economy must benefit everyone and not a select few. But he wonders what “image of humanity” is held by WEF members and those of other similar select groups. As for the initiatives such as the Great Reset, he takes a decidedly jaundiced view.
Without directly referring to the initiative, he told the Register on Jan. 29 that two sides: “profiteering capitalism, big-tech giants of Western countries” and the “communism of the People’s Republic of China” — are today “converging and merging into a unified capital-socialism,” producing a “new colonialism” that the Pope has “often warned against.”
The goal, Cardinal Müller believes, “is absolute control of thought, speech and action.”
“The homogenized man can be steered more easily,” he added “The Orwellian world of homo digitalis has begun. Through mainstreaming, total conformity of the consciousness of the masses is to be achieved via the media.” And he recalled the 19th-century French polymath Gustave Le Bon who predicted such a situation in his book The Psychology of Crowds.
Another argument is that corporate and political decision-makers will rise to the challenge as systemic and peaceful citizens’ opposition movements will provide pressure bottom-up. There needs to be sufficient popular pressure – from citizens, voters, consumers, workers, educators and activists – to push governments and business to change course fundamentally.
However… a careful look at who pays for movements such as the Occupy movement, the Me Too Movement, Black Lives Matter and countless climate crisis groups, may cast down credibility in terms of the true ‘independence of interests’ of these no doubt genuine movements, staffed by well-meaning often naïve or simply fearful and afraid peons. From the overt narrative of these movements to the true actions and beneficiaries of these movements, very often one notices Lenin’s, Stalin’s and Hitler’s common adage: “Say one thing and do the opposite.”
Since many brutal, cohersive or seductive leaders have followed this duplicitous motto over the centuries, this is a common strategy of duplicity and manipulation.
Like these globalist planners, the present pope also believes that the global economy needs to be reshaped coming out of the pandemic; but unlike them, his vision is anchored (at least in theory), in God’s grace.
Speaking at his weekly general audience on Jan. 27, the 76th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi extermination camp at Auschwitz, Pope Francis warned that humanity must be on guard to prevent such future horrors. His comments come as a world discussion of a ‘Great Reset’ is underway.
This is the same pope who beatified last year 8 (eight) bishops barbarily tortured and murdered in the Communist prisons for their Byzantine Catholic faith in Romania.
Since it first came to public attention in June 2020, much discussion has surrounded this “Great Reset” — a global vision pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and supported by various world leaders to rebuild a society after COVID based on greater solidarity and a more sustainable economy.
Prominent backers include President Joe Biden, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Britain’s Prince Charles. Each see it as a blueprint for “resetting capitalism,” a chance to “build back better” after the global pandemic, and to set the world on a more environmentally friendly and sustainable path for which there is “no alternative.”
But many others have criticized the Great Reset’s ambitions, including Brazil’s minister of foreign affairs, Ernesto Araujo, who outright rejected it, saying that “totalitarian social control is not the remedy for any crisis,” and the progressive author Naomi Klein, who is concerned it creates an “insidious” and “false impression” that global elites are serious about tackling the issues the Global Reset raises. In the Church, Cardinal Raymond Burke has called it a manipulative attack on freedom and the family.
More generally, critics see it as a flawed and dangerous agenda that paves the way for an autocratic global future more closely resembling the communist-capitalist system of an increasingly dominant China.
Renato Cristin, professor of philosophical hermeneutics at the University of Trieste, Italy, noted that “the problem of conscience” has no mention in Schwab’s book and that, by “subtracting elements of capitalism,” it introduces “principles of another kind: socialist above all, and therefore statist.”
In its rejection of capitalism, the Great Reset has perhaps its greatest commonality with the vision of Pope Francis, according to Cristin, who describes the Pope as being generally sympathetic to initiatives that are “hostile to the capitalist system.”
In fairness, true capitalism, the predatory kind, has long been replaced by the interchange of taxes for services, to free and/or affordable education, free medical care (with US’s notable exception, unless one has Medicaid), essentialy being transmuted into a “cradle to grave infrastructure,” in most of the western countries, while free initiative and a strong middle class still allow for entrepreneurs and corporations to still make beaocoup of profits, thus creating an eclectic meritocratic and at the same equitable system in the Occident.
The Great Reset paradigm raises the concern that the economies of the world will simply become the economies of some banks and corporations. These are the very same kid of establishments that have been invariably manifesting since their inceptions (some for hundreds of years) a pathological (in the clinical sense) thirst for assets, money, power and control.
The outcome actually, based on the confluence of elitist manipulations and the masses’ responses or reactions to them may be a deliberate global decimation of the majority population of the planet, as per the Georgia ‘Guide’ (sic!) Stones*, or the soaring of the human spirit to continue to create beauty on the par of El Condor Pasa.
*Concerning the Georgia Guidestones:
Most of the ten guides seem relatively innocuous; they talk about a new universal language, using reasons, fair laws, just courts, abandoning war, prizing truth, etc. But the first two messages are disturbing.
1: „Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.” While this would certainly take a lot of pressure off of the Earth’s resources and go a long way towards solving climate change and other environmental problems, it would cause economic chaos and massive unemployment unless it were implemented over a long interval.
But the greatest danger is how it would be phased in. Gabriel Gherasim suggests in the above essay that it would be accomplished by exterminating about 6.5 billion people in a massive genocide. It could also be done by reducing the birth rate to one child per couple. Over many generations the present 7 billion world population would be reduced to a half billion. But a system like Communist China with an enforced one child policy for urban dwellers and 2 children for rural areas is incredibly repressive because it forces women to have abortions against their will. It might be possible to persuade couples to have only one child through less intrusive means, but the system would still be subject to horrendous abuses.
2: ” Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.” This sounds innocent enough. Most people value fitness and consider diversity to be a positive factor. However, it sounds like a reimposition of eugenics policies that were popular in the first half of the 20th century and led to tens or hundreds of thousands of forced sterilizations of people who were considered undesirable. It was a major factor that led to the Nazi Genocide of twelve million persons during the 1930’s and early 1940’s.