A one-world government has been the dream of many people across the globe for a long time. Some think of the United Nations as a world government, but it is not. It is, however, along with many others, favoring one.
This idea is called The Great Reset. This is not a new development. It has been around since at least 1992, and some say 1971 when the World Economic Forum, which was originally founded as the European Management Forum, came into existence.
And its critics say that if The Great Reset takes place, the American form of government of mostly free markets, personal freedoms and a somewhat-limited federal government with open elections will be replaced with a world body that does not support the conservative ideals of the United States, like private ownership of property, individual choice, and free enterprise. Its ballot box will provide only one choice. That system is commonly referred to as “communism.”
Supporters charge that criticisms are conspiracy theories that totally misrepresent the stated goals of The Great Reset. But those criticisms require a good, thoughtful look.
Two well-known people in the world have made public statements about a unique opportunity that recently presented itself.
In June 2020, “the Prince of Wales and the head of the annual Davos summit launched an initiative calling for the pandemic to be seen as a chance for what they called a Great Reset of the global economy,” the BBC network reported. In a video about this, the Prince of Wales — England’s former Prince Charles, and now King Charles — said the following: "We have an incredible opportunity to create entirely new sustainable industries. The time to act is now."
The BBC report then turned to the second well-known person. “The other founder of the initiative is Prof. Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, which organizes an annual summit in a Swiss ski resort for some of the world's wealthiest and most powerful people.”
“He explained the idea behind the Great Reset in an article accompanying the launch: ‘The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.’”
Now, neither of those statements actually contain details which would scare people away from The Great Reset. For as with all ideas up for sale, it is portrayed in very positive terms.
But let’s not forget the message of 2010 regarding “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” a process that began with former President Barack Obama that is underway in the Biden administration, and has put the country in a seriously troubled condition.
In an article in Hillsdale College’s “Imprimis” publication — “What Is the Great Reset?” — author Michael Rectenwald, the Chief Academic Officer of the American Scholars organization, offers this description. “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.”
“This is the ‘social justice’ aspect of the Great Reset,” Rectenwald wrote. “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.”
In short, it will be a system where people and businesses are forced into compliance with a narrow set of “social justice” ideals, without the freedom to explore other ideas. Hence the references by Rectenwald and Agamben to “socialism” and “communism.”
In 2020, Schwab and author Thierry Malleret published a book called COVID-19: The Great Reset. In it, “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,’” Rectenwald wrote.
“In other words,” he explains, “‘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.”
Tom DeWeese, President of the American Policy Center describes our future this way: “The rule of law in our Republic, designed to insure individual rights from intrusive government, is being replaced by an undefined term called social justice, which demands that the concerns of interest groups supersede the inherent rights of the individual.”
“Further, the interests of the United States of America now tend to take a back seat to those of something called the ‘Global Commons.’ National identities and individual religions are being morphed into non-descript and indistinguishable arrangements called global religion.
“The teaching of history has become an exercise in group-promotion and political correctness,” DeWeese wrote, “with little regard for truth. Science has been reduced to nothing more than a convenient tool to promote political agendas. Self-determination is being replaced with group-think.”
This plan wouldn’t have much effect on some nations, and may be an improvement for some. But for others — most especially the United States of America — The Great Reset as it is described would be a catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment