Clearing out globalists
In all, the World Economic Forum plan is to remove national democratic autonomy and private property in return for safety, security and material necessities.
It has not gone unnoticed by opponents of globalism that the World Economic Forum (WEF) has massively expanded its influence during recent years. The Covid-19 pandemic allowed the WEF’s allies, sympathisers or operatives – identified depending on your viewpoint – to impose their mutual agenda around the world. That was only the latest step in a campaign to erase nations.
According to its own website, the WEF was founded in 1971 in Geneva by Dr Klaus Schwab, its current executive chairman. Its goals include a Great Reset consisting of managing economic change, using global governance to direct action, suppressing security disruption and using public-private partnerships to control populations. Rather more tangible goals include dissolving national hard currencies (to be replaced by digital ones), instating global human rights (which would prevent national borders from being policed by populations) and forcing favoured economic and technological “solutions” upon the world.
All of these goals are carefully prepared over years, co-ordinated with major international banks, corporations, charities and NGOs, before being introduced as “shovel-ready” policies to government ministers with the lifespans of mayflies – and just as much long-term responsibility as mayflies. These politicians have no skin in the game. When they leave office, they go on to be directors or consultants, part of the international jet-set of the nomadic elite with multiple homes and children in highly-paid NGO jobs. These politicians have more loyalty to international colleagues than their electorates.
In all, the WEF plan is to remove national democratic autonomy and private property in return for safety, security and material necessities. “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy,” as WEF’s notorious “prediction” proclaimed beatifically. Renting everything in your life, only at your death to have these items and properties retrieved by mega-corporations (contracted to the regional arm of a global government) violates our natural human desire to make a legacy and build a home in our own land so that they may be passed on to our children. To the super-rich and those who live off the public purse, that sounds fine – because, of course, they will be exempt. To the rest of us, it sounds like a threat.
Young Global Leaders
In 1992, the WEF’s Global Leaders for Tomorrow programme was launched, intended to prepare cadres of globalist politicians at an early stage in their careers. All were promising individuals aged thirty-eight or younger. This programme was reconstituted in 2003 as “Young Global Leaders”. The candidates of the two programmes have become the world’s leading business figures, bankers, scientists, educators, journalists, authors, lawyers, activists and politicians. Wikispooks has compiled a very thorough list of alumni of the Young Global Leaders (YGL). This list includes:
[Politicians:] Emmanuel Macron (French President), Sanna Marin (Finnish Prime Minister), Mikheil Saakashvili (President, Georgia), Pete Buttigieg (US Secretary for Transportation), Enrique Pena Nieto (Mexican president), Alexander de Croo (Belgian Prime Minister), Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand Prime Minister), Justin Trudeau (Canadian Prime Minister), Melanie Joly (Canadian Foreign Minister), Chrystia Freeland (Canadian Deputy Prime Minister), José Zapatero (Spanish Prime Minister), Gavin Newsom (Governor, California), US politicians Dan Crenshaw, Tulsi Gabbard, Huma Abedin, Nikki Haley, Gabbi Giffords, British politicians Rory Stewart, Jo Cox, Chukka Umunna, Shami Chakrabati, Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Charles Kennedy, William Hague;
[Social-media/Big Tech executives:] Mark Zuckerberg (founder/director, Facebook), Sheryl Sandberg (COO, Facebook), Larry Page (co-founder, Google), Eric Schmidt (senior executive, Google/Alphabet);
[Business leaders:] Jeff Bezos (founder, Amazon), Peter Thiel (billionaire investor), Jack Conte (founder, Patreon), Poppy Allonby (senior executive, BlackRock), Paul Allen (co-founder, Microsoft), Lila Tretikov (vice-president, Microsoft), Stephane Bancel (CEO, Moderna), Jimmy Wales (co-founder, Wikipedia);
[Media figures:] Marc Benioff (proprietor, Time magazine), Matthias Dopfner (proprietor, Axel Springer), Matthew Bannister (Director General, BBC).
Not only are there these prominent individuals, there are also numerous scions to multi-billion-dollar dynasties with track records in social and political activism, including the families of Clinton, Murdoch, Rothschild, Soros, Goldsmith, Gaddafi, Salles, plus members of royal families.
The list of alumni runs to over two thousand, with over one hundred added yearly. These YGL individuals are at very high levels in all areas of public life, whether or not they are recognisably public figures. The vast majority of the YGL politicians listed actively supported the attempted soft coup against democratic rule, civil rights and personal liberty under the Covid lockdowns. Many of the leading figures in think-tanks, nudge units, soft science and science journalism who supported and provided evidence for this soft coup are YGL alumni. Their common goals are global governance and population reduction and key routes to these is through monitoring and control of populations through biometric, bio-security passports, which have been started to be issued under the supposed contingency of “protecting people from Covid”. Social-credit systems, personal carbon credit limits and institution of digital currencies will be initiated as measures to combat “ecological crisis”, a justification which will be supported by climate science groups and legacy/social-media outlets, partially staffed, led and funded by WEF-related individuals and organisations.
This is not conspiracy but convergence of aims, where all parties agree on a common set of values, means and aims, all of which have been set out in public – and sometimes through contracts and ratified treaties – over many decades. There is no conspiracy because it is all perfectly in the open. Despite the setbacks of recent weeks to the WEF agenda, the goals have not changed; merely the pretext and schedule has been adjusted.
WEF, enemy of everyone
What’s not to oppose here?
For supporters of democracy, the WEF is anti-democratic; for nationalists, the WEF is anti-nationalist globalism; for socialists, the WEF is a cabal of capitalists; for the religious, the WEF hubristically secular; for ethno-nationalists, the WEF is propagator of demographic replacement; for non-conformists, the WEF is authoritarian and liberty-infringing; for traditionalists, the WEF is a homogenising global entity; for humanists, the WEF is a promoter of technocratic post-humanism; and so forth. The WEF is the vanguard of the technocratic managerial elite, supported by its functionaries and appointed heirs and an anamorphous group of half-informed middle-class liberals who have always assumed world government and the curtailing of tradition were “good things” but have not found the time to look closely at the blank cheque they are writing for authoritarians.
Clearly, the WEF is a threat to nation states and to national populations, especially indigenous ones, worldwide. The reason why national leaders often support the WEF is because they see the WEF’s agenda as inevitable. After all, think of how advantageous it would be to the ones who steered the ship of state towards the safe harbour of global governance. Not least, in narrow terms of self-interest and partisan advantage, these leaders see themselves and their parties as natural leaders of the regional node that will supplant their country.
What “right”?
Well, perhaps we could elect a rightist government to eject WEF influence.
Except the parties and politicians you have at your disposal are often compromised. The list of alumni above includes figures from the establishment “right”. These elected politicians from the right are all mainstream milquetoast figures, without any serious credentials of traditionalism or reactionary positions. Interestingly, Sebastian Kurz, former Austrian Chancellor and head of the Austrian People’s Party, was also an alumnus of the YGL, but he has been purged from the WEF records. Perhaps he was subsequently deemed too off-brand.
The claim that Vladimir Putin participated in the YGL is apparently not true, despite Klaus Schwab’s claim. Putin has attended many WEF events but there is no evidence he attended WEF’s Global Leaders for Tomorrow programme in the 1990s.
If you want a political right, you will likely have to build your own, possibly from scratch. That will include carefully vetting senior members for connections to the WEF and associated NGOs. Unless you fancy a spate of entryism. The danger with joining a political system is that the system will alter your priorities to conform with the demands or norms of the system, rather than allowing you to implement your values.
“Clear them out!”
On 20th February 2022, this tweet by ‘The Original Roland Rat’ gained some circulation: “We should start a British pressure group dedicated to a single issue: forcing MPs to declare WEF affiliation and getting the government to launch a "transparency inquiry" into foreign interference in British Politics.”
This seems a promising first step. Making it a notifiable circumstance for publicly-elected officials – and civil servants – to declare their association with the WEF will at least raise in the general public’s mind the problem of the WEF. Knowing that WEF has its network of alumni in so many key positions is the first stage of making explicit a) the threat of infiltration of public bodies with globalists and b) demonstrating that a new regime will implement its anti-globalist goals. This would align with the actions of the Polish, Russian and Hungarian governments, which restricted the activities of anti-government organisations, especially internationally funded groups promoting human rights. (Human rights are the Trojan Horse issue for globalists, in the way peace and disarmament were for Communists.) Of course, the WEF does not have branches and operates through informal networks, which needs to be born in mind.
To go further, one could call for a boycott, deselection or ban on all WEF affiliates from holding elected office or working for the civil service. The difficulty here is that public-private partnerships – so ardently promoted by the WEF – embed privately employed staff in public service provision. However, if one has the will, every contract and partner can be scrutinised in order to locate and remove each WEF affiliate from public funding.
A purge of WEF affiliates sounds difficult – a Sisyphean task, almost, given the extent of the WEF’s reach – but then new nations need causes and founding myths. These myths can be true or false. The national myth of a nation forged in opposition to an anti-human, technocratic, autocratic globalist WEF is true and is a cause that nationalists, regionalists, the religious and social conservatives can join to together to back without reservation.
