Each year, the world’s elite hop into their private jets and descend upon Davos, Switzerland, the location of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual Davos Forum. Here, the self-proclaimed ruling class spend the week discussing their visions of the future and how to impose their ambitions on the rest of the world.1
As explained by Fox News anchor Jesse Watters, participants are divided into clear classes even there. Not only must you receive a personal invitation to attend, but once you’re there, your name badge will clearly illustrate which “elite class” or “subclass” you belong to.
If you’re a sufficiently wealthy VIP, you get a white badge with a blue line. If you’re married to a VIP, you get a plain white badge. If you’re just part of someone’s entourage, you get a green badge (wouldn’t want the true elite braintrust WEF’s planners and strategists — to accidentally mingle with and swap ideas with the servants).
The Future Is To Be Built by Them, Not Us
If you have any doubt that these individuals believe they have the right to own the world and make decisions for all mankind, just listen to WEF founder Klaus Schwab’s opening remarks:
“The future is not just happening. The future is BUILT, by US. By a powerful community, as you here, in this room.”
These three short sentences tell us a lot. They believe the future is theirs to create. They believe they, the attendees in that room, have all the power. And, by extension, they think that the rest of the world, those unfit to wear a Davos Forum badge, have no say in the matter.
We’re not powerful enough, or smart enough, or wealthy enough to be part of the planning. The people in that room, they are the ones responsible for making the decisions for everyone else.
They Want to Track Your Carbon Footprint
As noted by Watters, “They’re openly scheming up some of the craziest plans you’ll ever hear of, like tracking your carbon footprint.” In other words, they want to track where you travel, how you travel, what you eat and any other resources you might use in your day-to-day life.
This technology isn’t commercially available yet, but we’re told it’s coming. To start, it’ll be sold to you as a way for you to be a responsible citizen and track your own carbon footprint. Eventually, your carbon footprint will be part and parcel of your social credit score, and used against you in every conceivable and inconceivable way.
Make no mistake, the so-called “manmade climate change crisis” is a ploy to entice the world population into giving up the lifestyle we’ve become used to, no matter how modest.
You’re supposed to track and limit your carbon footprint, while these self-proclaimed elitists have no qualms about hopping on their private jets. At bare minimum, you’d think they’d humble themselves enough to fly commercially, but no. They’re too important for that. They’re the builders of the future, after all.
Failed Planners Continue Planning
Of course, the meeting also included discussion about pandemic response. Despite having utterly failed to prevent any of their previously predicted pandemics — and there have been several — they still believe they’re the only ones who can get it done.
They also openly admit that their plans will cause pain for the populace. We have to expect shortages of food and energy, for example. And why? Because they’ve decided societal changes need to occur faster than what technological advancement can keep up with.
As just one example, we currently don’t have viable alternatives to diesel-driven machinery used in construction and farming, but they’re not going to let that stop them from implementing their “green” agenda.
They also stressed that ‘inflationary pressures’ are ‘worth it.’ But the average person who can’t afford to drive to work and whose children cry from hunger is hardly going to agree that premature implementation of the green agenda is worth that kind of suffering.
Do you want to know what their solution is? They continue their lifestyle, while demanding that you give up creature comforts like air conditioning and heating, or like driving your car and flying overseas, until the green energy sector catches up. Never mind the fact that by the time that happens, many millions will have died from starvation and society as we know it will have crumbled.
They also stressed that “inflationary pressures” are “worth it.” Worth it for whom? Themselves, of course, because the average person who can’t afford to drive to work and whose children cry from hunger is hardly going to agree that premature implementation of the green agenda is worth that kind of suffering. It’s tone-deaf in the extreme, really.
Watters asks Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul for comment on what’s happening in Davos, and as noted by Paul, one of the greatest dangers of a One World Government is that it will be unelected.
Just look at how bad government performs when you’re allowed to vote for the representatives you actually want, he says. This Davos crowd, which wants and fully intends to form their own global government, doesn’t represent anyone but themselves. You can’t vote them in. You can’t vote them out. And they’re accountable to no one.
Elitists Clueless About Basic Economy
Living in an insulated bubble is also, apparently, hazardous to your intellect. As noted by Paul, these elitists actually blame inflation on greed, which is dangerously ignorant, and proves they’re really not qualified to manage anything, let alone a global economy.
“If you were in a third-grade class, I’d give you a failing grade if you told me inflation was caused by greed,” Paul says. “That is the dumbest explanation, the most implausible, lacking all facts, that someone could put forward.
Inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply … The Federal Reserve prints it up to borrow it; it floods the economy and drives prices up. If you don’t understand that, it’ll never get any better. My prediction is it’ll get a lot worse before November.”
World Health Organization Vies for Global Health Monopoly
Of course, global economies are not the only thing being destroyed by these billionaire parasites. They also want to be in charge of global health care, and to that end, the World Health Organization is now trying to get member states to agree to a Pandemic Treaty that will give the WHO complete authority over pandemic planning and response, even if its decisions violate national laws and civil rights.
It’s fitting then, that China was recently elected to the WHO’s executive board.2 Not a single member nation objected to the appointment. As noted by Spectator columnist Ross Clark,3 the election of China is further evidence WHO has “lost all credibility.” What’s more, Clark points out that the only European country on the WHO’s executive board is Slovakia, which also had one of the highest COVID-19 death rates.
‘Sustainable Financing’ of the WHO May Be Pure Fiction
Directing and coordinating international health is expensive, as you might imagine, so the World Health Assembly, the governing body for the WHO, has approved a draft decision, A75/9, which lays out the plan for “sustainable financing” of the WHO.
According to a supporting document titled “A Healthy Return — Investment Case for a Sustainably Financed WHO,”4 investing in the WHO “provides a return of at least U.S. $35 for every U.S. $1 invested.”
As noted by a Twitter user called Critical Sway,5 this return on investment claim is based on “complex economic calculations” involving “enormous sums of money, projects running worldwide over the next decade,” and factors in “an incalculable number of unknown and unknowable variables.” The models for these calculations were done by staff at the Victoria University in Melbourne, Australia, and were funded by the WHO itself.
In other words, the return on investment claim could be completely fictitious, especially when you consider that “This lot couldn’t accurately model one virus over the course of two years.”6 But they’ll use these fantasy calculations to milk governments for more money, and government can then tell the people that their money (because all government money comes from your tax dollars) is being “securely invested” and “well spent.”
Update on International Health Regulation Amendments
In addition to the WHO’s pandemic treaty, the World Health Assembly recently voted on a set of amendments7 to the International Health Regulations proposed by the Biden administration. These amendments would have stripped member nations of their sovereignty and given the WHO unprecedented power to restrict your medical freedoms and civil liberties in the name of biosecurity.8
The WHO, however, temporarily withdrew 12 of the 13 proposed amendments, May 25, 2022. That doesn’t mean they’re off the table, though. Another hearing on these amendments has been scheduled for June 16 and 17, 2022. According to the Liberty Counsel,9 a number of African nations, Iran, Malaysia and Brazil objected to the amendments, for a variety of reasons.
The African nations reportedly want the proposed IHR amendments to be consolidated into the Pandemic Treaty rather than being done piecemeal separately.
So, we’re not out of the woods yet. We must continue to pressure the U.S. delegation to the World Health Assembly to oppose these amendments. Some nations have expressed support for giving the WHO the power to mandate global universal health care as well, and this is yet another reason to push for national sovereignty and oppose the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty.
Take Action Today to Preserve Freedom for Tomorrow!
As reported by the Organic Consumers Association:10
“Lockdowns and mandates are bad enough when they’re imposed by local officials. At least, they can’t hide from our protests. We can show up where they work and live, and we can vote them out in the next election.
Things would be much worse if lockdowns and mandates were imposed from Geneva, Switzerland, by an unelected, corporate-controlled bureaucracy … and that’s exactly what the pharmaceutical companies are working on now.
TAKE ACTION! Tell the U.S. delegation to the World Health Assembly that you oppose their amendments to the International Health Regulations!
According to the World Council for Health, these amendments would give control over the declaration of a public health emergency in any member state to the WHO Director-General — even over the objection of the member state …
Under the amendments they’ve proposed, the U.S. would have just 48-hours to respond to a WHO risk assessment and accept or reject on-site assistance, forcing it to comply or face condemnation from the WHO and, potentially, sanctions from unfriendly nations.
Even worse than that, under the amendments, the WHO could declare their public health emergency based on secret information from anonymous sources …
Corruption at the WHO was already the ‘biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time’ according to a 2015 investigation.11 We don’t need U.S. amendments to the International Health Regulations making it any easier for the pharmaceutical companies to wield their influence.
‘Put simply, the proposed IHR amendments are directed towards establishing a globalist architecture of worldwide health surveillance, reporting, and management,’ says the World Council for Health.12 ‘Consistent with a top-down view of governance, the public will not have opportunities to provide input or criticism concerning the amendments. This, of course, is a direct violation of the basic tenets of democracy.’
The anti-corporate-globalization movement killed the World Trade Organization’s attempt to establish a global dictatorship where a bureaucracy run by the world’s largest corporations could override local democracy.
Now, like the regional trade agreements that replaced the WTO, the World Health Organization is trying to become a mini WTO just for the pharmaceutical industry to override national laws on the safety-testing and regulation of drugs and vaccines–via pandemic Emergency Use Authorizations. We must act now!”
The World Council for Health has facilitated this process by creating a form letter that you can easily modify if you want. You can find the form letter here. Once you’ve filled in the blanks and modified it to your liking, the letter will automatically be emailed to the U.S. Health and Human Services of Global Affairs with the push of a button.
How to Become Ungovernable
While the Schwabs and Gateses of the world may appear invincible and too powerful to knock down, we should not give in to such mental traps. Always remember that there are literally many millions of us for each and every one of them.
They can’t impose their ambitions on us unless we let them. They need our permission and cooperation to rule over us. So, part of the answer is to become ungovernable. I’m not talking about anarchy, violence or acting “out of control.” I mean forming parallel systems that operate completely outside of their control grid.
For example, a society that primarily relies on physical cash is ungovernable by technocrats because they can’t track everyone’s earning and spending. A society that refuses to carry geolocation trackers is ungovernable by technocrats because they don’t know where you are or what you’re doing.
They need all those data points in order to profile you, to create a digital identity of you. And without that digital identity, artificial intelligence cannot predict what you’re thinking or how you’ll respond to a given stimuli. The less data they have on us, the less governable we become.
Top-Down Rule Is a Failed Model of Governance
In a May 2, 2022, article, Michael Driver highlighted some of the global cabal’s apparent weaknesses, noting we actually have a lot to be optimistic about. Here’s a longer than usual excerpt from this worthwhile read:13
“I don’t worry about the World Economic Forum achieving their stated goals for 2030 … If history rhymes, it positively sings with the failure of such grandiose projects. The history books are littered with the corpses of centralized top-down ideas.
The reason why we are not talking enough about the impossibility of Klaus Schwab’s Great Leap Forward is because the opposition are guilty of the same failure of basic understanding. The opposition is making the flawed assumption that this project is doable.
In fact, the future is resistant to shaping. What we should all be preparing for is the failure of the WEF’s program. This should be a cause of profound optimism. Put simply the universe works against centralized top-down systemization.
‘They’ are swimming against the teleological tide of creation — an impenetrable future, the inevitability of the new, while we are surfing the wave of ontological emergence with decentralization as the key to developing solutions via free and open debate.
‘Mann Tracht, Un Gott Lacht’ — man plans and God laughs — is a Yiddish proverb. Well, she must be positively ROFL at the collection of billionaires and world leaders gathered in a fake village in Switzerland busily stitching together their own petards.
As David says in Psalm 59:8, ‘But you, O Lord, shall laugh at them: You shall have all the nations in derision.’ Derision and ridicule are the correct responses here, not abject panic. They are not going to succeed; Iron Mike got it right when he said ‘Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the face’ …
Schwab and his collection of command and control technocrats have taken the ideas of Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot and whoever wrote WeWork’s business plan and dressed them in new clothes.
These threadbare robes are camouflaged with words such as ‘stewardship,’ which actually means the absence of democracy; ‘sustainability,’ roughly translated as ‘you eat bugs while we flambé the wagyu’; ‘inclusivity,’ which is a big club and you ain’t in it, and ‘equity’ which redistributes assets to billionaires and associated parasites …
Every plan falls apart when you pull on its assumptions. The Great Reset sits on the implicit assumption that everything in nature can be known, ordered and controlled via technology. Some twisted fantasy they call artificial intelligence. A general theory that they claim applies to everyone and everything everywhere.
Globalism from above is just another in a long line of narrative fantasies stretching all the way back through the failed ideologies of the last century — communism, fascism, religious fundamentalism and so on. Our vital objective should be to avoid the fate of the victims of these failures …
Get angry, then get with the repudiation. Get with the presentation and promotion of decentralized, ground up, emergent philosophies. Get with the optimism. We are on the right side of history; they are on the precipice.”