What Is The End Game?

That is the question that Conservatives are constantly asking: specifically, what in Heaven’s name is going on at our Southern border, and what is the end game? Personally, I like most staunch Democrats, think Joey and specifically, the Border Czar Heels Up Harris are doing a fantastic job.  I mean really, what is there possibly to complain about?But, of course, the nitpicking radical right doesn’t see it that way at all.  They are always throwing up pertinent facts and figures to try and discredit our fearless leader, Joey Talibiden.  I mean, can’t they leave this maverick alone to play with his dog on the beach and have a waffle cone or two!  As Jen Goebbels Psaki says, “he barely has time to think”, (which most I’m told, didn’t think he was capable of).  I mean, little Joey has ONLY been away from the White House 27% of the time, during his first year.  What average working American doesn’t get 14+ Weeks vacation……….on second thought, let’s skip that one. Let’s look at some of these accusations by Conservatives.

Southern Border Debacle

They point out, that given the avalanche of policy debacles, arguably, the Southern border crisis is the most egregious.  Simply put, the most important job of one’s government is to protect their citizens.  After all, WE are paying these life long incompetents (insert Joey, 49 years and counting) to do a job, they say.  Intentional failure to secure our border is tantamount to treason.  This starts with the waffle cone eating buffoon installed in the White House Joey, followed by the inept cackling air head Hyena Harris, and the equally inept stooge Homeland Security Secretary, Daddy Warbucks Mayorkas, amongst others. President Trump is a racist!Conservatives point out that no administration can possibly be this incompetent.  So, they reason that this abomination is done by design. Seeing as though Lyin Biden hasn’t addressed or done one iota about it; what else can it be then?  They point out the real reason behind this disgusting travesty, is all a power play; to keep the Nazi’s, I mean the Democrats in power.  Flooding the once great United States with ILLEGAL ALIENS, I mean Democratic voters.

Census Flim -Flam

The New York Times, Fair and Balanced Reporting

Well, it’s not really before our eyes, the border coup that is, says the radical right. A vast majority of the fair and unbiased (wink, wink) news and media give absolutely no coverage to this debacle. Even your apolitical paper Pravda, I mean, The New York Times, doesn’t cover this at all, Deano.  More important things need to addressed, like elected President Trump’s tax returns or singing the praises of Stormy Daniels lawyer (currently, in prison).  You do have plenty of coverage of the Insurrection (which, no one was charged with, by the way).  ‘The news that’s fit to print,” that is your motto, right? Or is that the motto of your publisher AG Sulzberger, affectionately know as Slushy to the gang.  I mean out of site out of mind, right champ.  Maybe CNN can just show a picture of the guy at the Capitol wearing the horns 24/7 until the midterms.  This will take our attention away from the political coup being orchestrated against the legitimate tax paying, hard working Americans, besides all the other dumpster fires this inept administration has perpetuated.

Barack Hussein’s Wife Gets Involved

Hey Deano, I understand that Barry’s wife Michael took out a full page add in your esteemed paper.  I understand she is gearing up for the midterm elections and has put a call out for 100,000 volunteers.  Bravo, it’s good to see her doing her civic duty.  Of course the right says she needs at least this many: to tape up windows and provide muscle at Democratic polling places, also needing van and truck drivers to deliver all those legitimate mail in ballots Democrats are so fond of.  Hopefully she talks to Georgie Soros first to provide funding.  How appropriate that your “newspaper” sponsored this, good show Deano.Hey, I’m also glad that you guys and CNN, WAPO and the like have welcomed Dick Cheney back into the fold.  You know, seeing as though his baby girl Lizzie who suffers from TDS, is instrumental in the Insurrection Kangaroo Court.  It seems like only yesterday you were referring to Ole Dick as a demonic war criminal.  Ah time heals all wounds, eh Deano.

New York Gets A New Boss

Well, we are all sorry to see one of the greatest mayors, Warren Wilhlem aka Billy Deblasio, the City of New York has ever seen go, but time marchs on.  He and his wife, the lovely Chirlane should be able to manage on his pension……..and $850,000,000 unaccounted dollars dedicated to his wife’s mental illness and homeless program, which went nowhere…… well with them I guess.  President Trump is a racist!But Eric Adams looks to be a shining star already, he has named his kid brother Bernard, Deputy Police Commissioner at an annual salary of $240,000.  The radical right cries nepotism, but I disagree.  The man obviously is more than qualified for the job.  His former job was as assistant director for PARKING, at the Virginia Commonwealth University.  I mean, what more qualifications do you need?  Plus Eric says he needs someone he trusts, as he fears white supremacy.  He must have gotten the willies watching those white supremacist’s burning cities down for all of 2020!  He also agrees  with Warren’s previously installed vaccine mandates, that should help small businesses, I’m sure.  And he also signed into legislation a law that allows over 800,000 non-citizens to vote in local elections. What’s not to like about this guy?  I don’t know Deano, but I have a feeling this guy will be even greater than Billy Deblasio was for New York.  What do you think buddy?

Joey, The Racial Unifier

Has there ever been a better President to unify this country, I mean besides Barry Soetoro/Barack Hussein obviously.   Firstly, Joey is prioritizing the testing for covid according to race; where minorities get access first before whites.  What could go wrong with this logic, right Deano?Conservatives throw out this scenario:  Elected President Trump prioritized whites to get testing kits before minorities.  Any idea what would be the response Deano?  I wonder what Chardonnay Pelosi, Maxine “get up in their faces” Waters, Reverend “I don’t pay no stinking taxes” Sharpton, Heels Up Harris and of course, teleprompter puppet Joey Talibiden, would have to say?  I’m sure your NY Times, as well as CNN, WAPO, MSNBC would give elected President Trump the same coverage that it is now giving installed stooge, sorry installed POTUS Brandon.

Racist Voting Laws?

The following is adapted from a talk delivered at Hillsdale College on November 7, 2021, during a Center for Constructive Alternatives conference on “The Great Reset.”

Is the Great Reset a conspiracy theory imagining a vast left-wing plot to establish a totalitarian one-world government? No. Despite the fact that some people may have spun conspiracy theories based on it—with some reason, as we will see—the Great Reset is real.

Indeed, just last year, Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF)—a famous organization made up of the world’s political, economic, and cultural elites that meets annually in Davos, Switzerland—and Thierry Malleret, co-founder and main author of the Monthly Barometer, published a book called COVID-19: The Great Reset. In the book, they define the Great Reset as a means of addressing the “weaknesses of capitalism” that were purportedly exposed by the COVID pandemic.

But the idea of the Great Reset goes back much further. It can be traced at least as far back as the inception of the WEF, originally founded as the European Management Forum, in 1971. In that same year, Schwab, an engineer and economist by training, published his first book, Modern Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering. It was in this book that Schwab first introduced the concept he would later call “stakeholder capitalism,” arguing “that the management of a modern enterprise must serve not only shareholders but all stakeholders to achieve long-term growth and prosperity.” Schwab and the WEF have promoted the idea of stakeholder capitalism ever since. They can take credit for the stakeholder and public-private partnership rhetoric and policies embraced by governments, corporations, non-governmental organizations, and international governance bodies worldwide.

The specific phrase “Great Reset” came into general circulation over a decade ago, with the publication of a 2010 book, The Great Reset, by American urban studies scholar Richard Florida. Written in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, Florida’s book argued that the 2008 economic crash was the latest in a series of Great Resets—including the Long Depression of the 1870s and the Great Depression of the 1930s—which he defined as periods of paradigm-shifting systemic innovation.

Four years after Florida’s book was published, at the 2014 annual meeting of the WEF, Schwab declared: “What we want to do in Davos this year . . . is to push the reset button”—and subsequently the image of a reset button would appear on the WEF’s website.

In 2018 and 2019, the WEF organized two events that became the primary inspiration for the current Great Reset project—and also, for obvious reasons, fresh fodder for conspiracy theorists. (Don’t blame me for the latter—all I’m doing is relating the historical facts.)

In May 2018, the WEF collaborated with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to conduct “CLADE X,” a simulation of a national pandemic response. Specifically, the exercise simulated the outbreak of a novel strain of a human parainfluenza virus, with genetic elements of the Nipah virus, called CLADE X. The simulation ended with a news report stating that in the face of CLADE X, without effective vaccines, “experts tell us that we could eventually see 30 to 40 million deaths in the U.S. and more than 900 million around the world—twelve percent of the global population.” Clearly, preparation for a global pandemic was in order.

In October 2019, the WEF collaborated with Johns Hopkins and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on another pandemic exercise, “Event 201,” which simulated an international response to the outbreak of a novel coronavirus. This was two months before the COVID outbreak in China became news and five months before the World Health Organization declared it a pandemic, and it closely resembled the future COVID scenario, including incorporating the idea of asymptomatic spread.

The CLADE X and Event 201 simulations anticipated almost every eventuality of the actual COVID crisis, most notably the responses by governments, health agencies, the media, tech companies, and elements of the public. The responses and their effects included worldwide lockdowns, the collapse of businesses and industries, the adoption of biometric surveillance technologies, an emphasis on social media censorship to combat “misinformation,” the flooding of social and legacy media with “authoritative sources,” widespread riots, and mass unemployment.

In addition to being promoted as a response to COVID, the Great Reset is promoted as a response to climate change. In 2017, the WEF published a paper entitled, “We Need to Reset the Global Operating System to Achieve the [United Nations Sustainable Development Goals].” On June 13, 2019, the WEF signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the United Nations to form a partnership to advance the “UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” Shortly after that, the WEF published the “United Nations-World Economic Forum Strategic Partnership Framework for the 2030 Agenda,” promising to help finance the UN’s climate change agenda and committing the WEF to help the UN “meet the needs of the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” including providing assets and expertise for “digital governance.”

In June 2020, at its 50th annual meeting, the WEF announced the Great Reset’s official launch, and a month later Schwab and Malleret published their book on COVID and the Great Reset. The book declared that COVID represents an “opportunity [that] can be seized”; that “we should take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity to reimagine our world”; that “the moment must be seized to take advantage of this unique window of opportunity”; and that “[f]or those fortunate enough to find themselves in industries ‘naturally’ resilient to the pandemic”—think here of Big Tech companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon—“the crisis was not only more bearable, but even a source of profitable opportunities at a time of distress for the majority.”

The Great Reset aims to usher in a bewildering economic amalgam—Schwab’s stakeholder capitalism—which I have called “corporate socialism” and Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben has called “communist capitalism.”

In brief, stakeholder capitalism involves the behavioral modification of corporations to benefit not shareholders, but stakeholders—individuals and groups that stand to benefit or lose from corporate behavior. Stakeholder capitalism requires not only corporate responses to pandemics and ecological issues such as climate change, “but also rethinking  [corporations’] commitments to already-vulnerable communities within their ecosystems.” This is the “social justice” aspect of the Great Reset. To comply with that, governments, banks, and asset managers use the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) index to squeeze non-woke corporations and businesses out of the market. The ESG index is essentially a social credit score that is used to drive ownership and control of production away from the non-woke or non-compliant.

One of the WEF’s many powerful “strategic partners,” BlackRock, Inc., the world’s largest asset manager, is solidly behind the stakeholder model. In a 2021 letter to CEOs, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink declared that “climate risk is investment risk,” and “the creation of sustainable index investments has enabled a massive acceleration of capital towards companies better prepared to address climate risk.” The COVID pandemic, Fink wrote, accelerated the flow of funds toward sustainable investments:

We have long believed that our clients, as shareholders in your company, will benefit if you can create enduring, sustainable value for all of your stakeholders. . . . As more and more investors choose to tilt their investments towards sustainability-focused companies, the tectonic shift we are seeing will accelerate further. And because this will have such a dramatic impact on how capital is allocated, every management team and board will need to consider how this will impact their company’s stock.

Fink’s letter is more than a report to CEOs. It is an implicit threat: be woke or else.

In their recent book on the Great Reset, Schwab and Malleret pit “stakeholder capitalism” against “neoliberalism,” defining the latter as “a corpus of ideas and policies . . . favouring competition over solidarity, creative destruction over government intervention, and economic growth over social welfare.” In other words, “neoliberalism” refers to the free enterprise system. In opposing that system, stakeholder capitalism entails corporate cooperation with the state and vastly increased government intervention in the economy.

Proponents of the Great Reset hold “neoliberalism” responsible for our economic woes. But in truth, the governmental favoring of industries and players within industries—what used to be known as corporatism or economic fascism—has been the real source of what Schwab and his allies at the WEF decry.

While approved corporations are not necessarily monopolies, the tendency of the Great Reset is toward monopolization—vesting as much control over production and distribution in as few favored corporations as possible, while eliminating industries and producers deemed non-essential or inimical. To bring this reset about, Schwab writes, “[e]very country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed.”

Another way of describing the goal of the Great Reset is “capitalism with Chinese characteristics”—a two-tiered economy, with profitable monopolies and the state on top and socialism for the majority below.

Several decades ago, as China’s growing reliance on the for-profit sectors of its economy could no longer be credibly denied by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), its leadership approved the slogan “socialism with Chinese characteristics” to describe its economic system. Formulated by Deng Xiaoping, the phrase was meant to rationalize the CCP’s allowance of for-profit development under a socialist political system. The CCP considered the privatization of the Chinese economy to be a temporary phase—lasting as long as 100 years if necessary—on the way to a communist society. Party leaders maintain that this approach has been necessary in China because socialism was introduced too early there, when China was a backward agrarian country. China needed a capitalist booster shot.

Stripped of its socialist ideological pretensions, the Chinese system amounts to a socialist or communist state increasingly funded by capitalist economic development. The difference between the former Soviet Union and contemporary China is that when it became obvious that a socialist economy had failed, the former gave up its socialist economic pretenses, while the latter has not.

The Great Reset represents the development of the Chinese system in the West, but in reverse. Whereas the Chinese political class began with a socialist political system and then introduced privately held for-profit production, the West began with capitalism and is now implementing a Chinese-style political system. This Chinese-style system includes vastly increased state intervention in the economy, on the one hand, and on the other, the kind of authoritarian measures that the Chinese government uses to control its population.

Schwab and Malleret write that if “the past five centuries in Europe and America” have taught us anything, it is that “acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state. It’s always been the case and there is no reason it should be different with the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The draconian lockdown measures employed by Western governments managed to accomplish goals of which corporate socialists in the WEF could only dream—above all, the destruction of small businesses, eliminating competitors for corporate monopolists favored by the state. In the U.S. alone, according to the Foundation for Economic Education, millions of small businesses closed their doors due to the lockdowns. Yelp data indicates that 60 percent of those closures are now permanent. Meanwhile companies like Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google enjoyed record gains.

Other developments that advance the Great Reset agenda have included unfettered immigration, travel restrictions for otherwise legal border crossing, the Federal Reserve’s unrestrained printing of money and the subsequent inflation, increased taxation, increased dependence on the state, broken supply chains, the restrictions and job losses due to vaccine mandates, and the prospect of personal carbon allowances.

Such policies reflect the “fairness” aspect of the Great Reset—fairness requires lowering the economic status of people in wealthier nations like the U.S. relative to that of people in poorer regions of the world. One of the functions of woke ideology is to make the majority in developed countries feel guilty about their wealth, which the elites aim to reset downwards—except, one notices, for the elites themselves, who need to be rich in order to fly in their private jets to Davos each year.

The Great Reset’s corporate stakeholder model overlaps with its governance and geopolitical model: states and favored corporations are combined in public-private partnerships and together have control of governance. This corporate-state hybrid is largely unaccountable to the constituents of national governments.

Governance is not only increasingly privatized, but also and more importantly, corporations are deputized as major additions to governments and intergovernmental bodies. The state is thereby extended, enhanced, and augmented by the addition of enormous corporate assets. As such, corporations become what I have called “governmentalities”—otherwise private organizations wielded as state apparatuses, with no obligation to answer to pesky voters. Since these corporations are multinational, the state essentially becomes globalist, whether or not a one-world government is ever formalized.

As if the economic and governmental resets were not dramatic enough, the technological reset reads like a dystopian science fiction novel. It is based on the Fourth Industrial Revolution—or 4-IR for short. The first, second, and third industrial revolutions were the mechanical, electrical, and digital revolutions. The 4-IR marks the convergence of existing and emerging fields, including Big Data, artificial intelligence, machine learning, quantum computing, genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics. The foreseen result will be the merging of the physical, digital, and biological worlds, which presents a challenge to the ontologies by which we understand ourselves and the world, including the definition of a human being.

There is nothing original about this. Transhumanists and Singularitarians (prophets of technological singularity) such as Ray Kurzweil forecasted these and other revolutionary developments long ago. What’s different about the globalists’ vision of 4-IR is the attempt to harness it to the ends of the Great Reset.

If already existing 4-IR developments are any indication of the future, then the claim that it will contribute to human happiness is false. These developments include Internet algorithms that feed users prescribed news and advertisements and downrank or exclude banned content; algorithms that censor social media content and consign “dangerous” individuals and organizations to digital gulags; “keyword warrants” based on search engine inputs; apps that track and trace COVID violations and report offenders to the police; robot police with scanners to identify and round up the unvaccinated and other dissidents; and smart cities where residents are digital entities to be monitored, surveilled, and recorded, and where data on their every move is collected, collated, stored, and attached to a digital identity and a social credit score.

In short, 4-IR technologies subject human beings to a kind of technological management that makes surveillance by the NSA look like child’s play. Schwab goes so far as to cheer developments that aim to connect human brains directly to the cloud for the sake of “data mining” our thoughts and memories. If successful, this would constitute a technological mastery over decision-making that would threaten human autonomy and undermine free will.

The 4-IR seeks to accelerate the merging of humans and machines, resulting in a world in which all information, including genetic information, is shared, and every action, thought, and motivation is known, predicted, and possibly precluded. Unless taken out of the hands of corporate-socialist technocrats, the 4-IR will eventually lead to a virtual and inescapable prison of body and mind.

In terms of the social order, the Great Reset promises inclusion in a shared destiny. But the subordination of so-called “netizens” implies economic and political disenfranchisement, a hyper-vigilance over self and others, and social isolation—or what Hannah Arendt called “organized loneliness”—on a global scale. This organized loneliness is already manifest in lockdowns, masking, social distancing, and the social exclusion of the unvaccinated. The title of the Ad Council’s March 2020 public service announcement—“Alone Together”—perfectly captures this sense of organized loneliness.

In my recent book, Google Archipelago, I argued that leftist authoritarianism is the political ideology and modus operandi of what I call Big Digital, which is on the leading edge of a nascent world system. Big Digital is the communications, ideological, and technological arm of an emerging corporate-socialist totalitarianism. The Great Reset is the name that has since been given to the project of establishing this world system.

Just as Schwab and the WEF predicted, the COVID crisis has accelerated the Great Reset. Monopolistic corporations have consolidated their grip on the economy from above, while socialism continues to advance for the rest of us below. In partnership with Big Digital, Big Pharma, the mainstream media, national and international health agencies, and compliant populations, hitherto democratic Western states—think especially of Australia, New Zealand, and Austria—are being transformed into totalitarian regimes modeled after China.

But let me end on a note of hope. Because the goals of the Great Reset depend on the obliteration not only of free markets, but of individual liberty and free will, it is, perhaps ironically, unsustainable. Like earlier attempts at totalitarianism, the Great Reset is doomed to ultimate failure. That doesn’t mean, however, that it won’t, again like those earlier attempts, leave a lot of destruction in its wake­—which is all the more reason to oppose it now and with all our might. 

COLUMN  BY

Michael Rectenwald

Michael Rectenwald is the chief academic officer for American Scholars. He has a B.A. from the University of Pittsburgh, an M.A. from Case Western Reserve University, and a Ph.D. in Literary and Cultural Studies from Carnegie Mellon University. He has taught at New York University, Duke University, North Carolina Central University, Carnegie Mellon University, and Case Western Reserve University. He is the author of numerous books, including Nineteenth-Century British Secularism: Science, Religion, and Literature; Google Archipelago; Beyond Woke; and Thought Criminal.

EDITORS NOTE: This Imprimis Digest column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

As long as the Democrats are all hopped up about Law & Order today, let’s see if they’ll do something about the gargantuan criminal monster they created.  I’m talking about the Soros DAs, the prosecutors who won’t prosecute.  They are a threat to democracy.

Manhattan’s new DA Alvin Bragg has taken it upon himself to ignore the state legislature and change the laws so that many crimes no longer carry jail sentences.  He’s doing this in the name of “fairness and safety”.  That’s pretty cheeky, don’t you think?  He is also imposing ‘incarceration impact statements’, meaning prosecutors can’t recommend prison terms if it will make it harder for defendants to get a job or they will suffer racially disparate outcomes in the future.  He also changed the law where it allows sentences of life without parole.  He unilaterally limited punishment in those cases to a maximum of 20 years.

Bragg claims all this will make the city safer because criminals will find it easier to reintegrate into society.  Maybe that will actually happen in a handful of cases where the criminal wouldn’t eventually straighten out anyway, but what about the rest of the cases where criminals have no intention of reforming?  They will receive kid glove treatment under Bragg’s policies and thus be incentivized to commit more crimes.  What’s the net?

Police unions did not hold back in their criticism.  “In Bragg’s Manhattan, you can resist arrest, deal drugs, obstruct arrests, and even carry a gun and get away with it,” one said.  Another said this is all very demoralizing for the police.  “Police officers don’t want to be sent out to enforce laws that the district attorneys won’t prosecute and there are already too many people who believe that they can commit crimes, resist arrest, interfere with police officers, and face zero consequences.”

In Seattle, where crime is spiking, police are allowed to go to the scene where a stolen vehicle is reported, surround the vehicle, and draw their guns.  That’s it.  They’re not allowed to pursue the vehicle if the car thief drives away, as just happened in a case this week.  But don’t worry, under the logic of the Soros DAs, the poor oppressed car thief should be allowed to keep the car because it’s a crime of poverty.  The car thief needs the car, and the rich owner of the car has insurance and can replace the car.  In other words, the car thief wins because the car thief is a class hero and everybody else loses because they are class enemies, just like in communist countries.  I defy you to tell me what democracy can survive if those are the rules of the game.

The Soros DA in San Francisco has been in office two years.  He has made it easier for violent and non-violent offenders to get released, but, to hear him tell it, recent smash-and-grab robberies are not his fault.  It’s society’s fault because society doesn’t prevent these crimes before they happen.   Let me see if I’ve got this right.  Prosecutors shouldn’t have to prosecute, because there shouldn’t be any crime in the first place.  It is society that is bad, not criminals who are bad.  So I guess that means the criminals should be prosecuting US for giving THEM a hard time when it is US who are bad.  I feel so much better now that I understand just how bad I’ve been all this time, including the two times robbers have stuck a gun in my face and gotten away with it.

By the way, the San Francisco DA faces a recall election next June.  I hope San Francisco voters come to their senses and kick this guy out.   It’s not impossible.  In November, voters in Seattle rejected a candidate for City Attorney who wanted to abolish the police and prisons entirely.

However, a recall effort against the Soros DA in Los Angeles failed last year.  One consequence is that a murderer who received a 50 year sentence is free after just six years.  The Soros DA did not even have the decency to tell the victim’s family the early release was in the works.  It’s not the first time he sought a reduced sentence for a murderer.  So, apparently, murderers are class heroes in this guy’s book and everybody else just has to suck it up.

If you’re worried about insurrection today, you should worry about the Soros DAs who are overthrowing the criminal justice system in cities around the country.  If you don’t want to see the death of democracy, then you need to mobilize against the Soros DAs who ignore state legislatures, turn criminals into class heroes who always win no matter what, and you the voters into chumps who should just keep paying big salaries to prosecutors who won’t prosecute because some billionaire wants to turn your cities into cesspools.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Christopher Wright.