March 21, 2023
Dear Friends and Family,
In this segment we will look at three sources where potentially Klaus Schwab came up with many ideas he has interjected into the World Economic Forum and the “Great Reset” ideology.
The first source is an American elitist organization, The Trilateral Commission, which was founded in 1973 and is still in existence. It has a philosophy of Technocracy and allegedly influenced the origin of Schwab’s 4th Industrial Revolution, per author Alex Jones.
The second is the Italian based Club of Rome. In Schwab’s book Stakeholder Capitalism, he references it three different times. In 1973, Aurelio Peccei, president of the Club of Rome, gave a speech to the World Economic Forum about its famous study on “The Limits of Growth.” Having never heard of the Club of Rome, I found their book “The Global Revolution” (259 loose leaf pages unbound) to learn of perspectives that may have influenced Schwab’s thinking.
Then in Alex Jones’ book The Great Reset I learned of Yuval Noah Harari, Schwab’s top advisor.
You will find excerpts from all three sources which are primarily globalist ideas which most probably influenced Schwab to some degree. Among the themes included are:
Happy Learning,
Harley
Dear Friends and Family,
In this segment we will look at three sources where potentially Klaus Schwab came up with many ideas he has interjected into the World Economic Forum and the “Great Reset” ideology.
The first source is an American elitist organization, The Trilateral Commission, which was founded in 1973 and is still in existence. It has a philosophy of Technocracy and allegedly influenced the origin of Schwab’s 4th Industrial Revolution, per author Alex Jones.
The second is the Italian based Club of Rome. In Schwab’s book Stakeholder Capitalism, he references it three different times. In 1973, Aurelio Peccei, president of the Club of Rome, gave a speech to the World Economic Forum about its famous study on “The Limits of Growth.” Having never heard of the Club of Rome, I found their book “The Global Revolution” (259 loose leaf pages unbound) to learn of perspectives that may have influenced Schwab’s thinking.
Then in Alex Jones’ book The Great Reset I learned of Yuval Noah Harari, Schwab’s top advisor.
You will find excerpts from all three sources which are primarily globalist ideas which most probably influenced Schwab to some degree. Among the themes included are:
- Among the globalists/technocrats/elites is the belief they are the bright ones, so they have a leg up on everyone else in deciding what is good and bad for the world. You will find the gulf between the elite thinking versus at the popular level is enormous.
- The elite will not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using modern techniques for influencing behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control.
- Increasingly global warming is a threat to the planet (albeit its genesis may have been to advance a common enemy for the world to rally around). Read the two paragraphs on this toward the end of the text or on page 9 of the PDF and make your own determination. It’s heading is “Need for a Common Enemy.”
- Democracy, as practiced today, is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead.
Happy Learning,
Harley
THE GREAT RESET: IS DEMOCRACY (worldwide) IN DANGER?
WHO CAME UP WITH THESE IDEAS? – EXCERPTS: SEGMENT 5
THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION: The Trilateral Commission was founded in 1973. That was the beginning of modern globalization. It was created by David Rockefeller, the chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and from the Rockefeller oil dynasty. The other founder was a political scientist from Columbia University named Zbigniew Brzezinski. Henry Kissinger also had a big hand in that and was also a founding member. The objective to create what they called “A New International Economic Order.”
The significance of Brzezinski being at Columbia University is that he was aware of what Technocracy was because that’s where it was developed in the early 1930s. This Technocracy ideal, a world run by engineers and scientists, was essentially developed in the late 19th century and found an academic home at Columbia. The philosophy did not sway Franklin Roosevelt but did sway Adolf Hitler, who depended not on politicians, but scientists and engineers to run his Third Reich. Technocracy can’t accurately be called communism or democracy. It is best understood as a monopoly on power, held jointly by Big Business and Big Government. And in all honesty, while Big Government may hold the club, the real power lies with the financial strength of Big Business.
The Technocrats finally reached the center of American power in the 1970s, after more than forty years of effort, and could begin putting their plans into action, starting with a test case for their ambitions. Their choice? Not the United States, where they knew they’d run into opposition. Instead, the Technocrats chose China.
WHO CAME UP WITH THESE IDEAS? – EXCERPTS: SEGMENT 5
THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION: The Trilateral Commission was founded in 1973. That was the beginning of modern globalization. It was created by David Rockefeller, the chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and from the Rockefeller oil dynasty. The other founder was a political scientist from Columbia University named Zbigniew Brzezinski. Henry Kissinger also had a big hand in that and was also a founding member. The objective to create what they called “A New International Economic Order.”
The significance of Brzezinski being at Columbia University is that he was aware of what Technocracy was because that’s where it was developed in the early 1930s. This Technocracy ideal, a world run by engineers and scientists, was essentially developed in the late 19th century and found an academic home at Columbia. The philosophy did not sway Franklin Roosevelt but did sway Adolf Hitler, who depended not on politicians, but scientists and engineers to run his Third Reich. Technocracy can’t accurately be called communism or democracy. It is best understood as a monopoly on power, held jointly by Big Business and Big Government. And in all honesty, while Big Government may hold the club, the real power lies with the financial strength of Big Business.
The Technocrats finally reached the center of American power in the 1970s, after more than forty years of effort, and could begin putting their plans into action, starting with a test case for their ambitions. Their choice? Not the United States, where they knew they’d run into opposition. Instead, the Technocrats chose China.
China looked like North Korea does today. They had no economic system, there was starvation, they had no industry, and it was a horrible, oppressive culture. However, it was a blank slate to do anything that the Rockefeller crowd wanted done. When Brzezinski got a hold of Deng Xiaoping, Brzezinski did not teach China about free market economics or capitalism. He taught them about Technocracy. That’s one reason the ascendance of China has been so dramatic. They have excelled at using that, exploiting it, expanding it, and exporting it to the world. China is the poster child for Technocracy. They have perfected surveillance, artificial intelligence, the use of social credit scores to keep their citizens in line and strong-arming the population, forcing them to do whatever they want. If they don’t comply willingly, they just start shooting them. That is basically the story of China and how it came to be where it is today.
The globalists genuinely believed what they were saying. “They figured since they were the bright ones that they had a leg up on everybody else in deciding what was good and what was bad. We repeatedly ran into this attitude where they’d say something like, ‘Well, what we’re doing is for everybody’s good. It’s for the global good. So, why would anybody take exception to it?” They think the rest of us are idiots in need of being saved by them.
Klaus Schwab and the WEF were using issues such as “sustainable development,” “climate change,” and “racism and gender issues” as a way to divide people, making them more vulnerable to the plans of the globalists. He agreed it was a tactic they used but said it was also a strategy to keep people from looking too closely at their plans.
It would be difficult to force these changes upon us. But, if they could somehow get people to acquiesce to their plans, or remain silent, it would greatly increase their chances of success. In other words, they could not succeed by force. However, they could succeed by subterfuge or somehow obtaining our consent. Probably the best example today is the European Union. The EU has taken over virtually every single function of the countries it presides over. You can say on one hand, there’s still a national government in Spain, Switzerland, and Germany. Yes, there is. But do they have the same power today that they had, say thirty years ago? No. The EU is now making all of the significant policy decisions for Europe for those individual countries. This has been the standard operating procedure for Technocracy, to chip away at national sovereignty and eventually remove the political structure altogether. That’s been a goal since the 1930s.
Source: The Great Reset: and the War for the World by Alex Jones (2022)
CLUB OF ROME: The Club of Rome stimulated considerable public attention with the first report to the club, The Limits to Growth. Published in 1972, its computer simulations suggested that economic growth could not continue indefinitely because of resource depletion. The 1973 oil crisis increased public concern about this problem. The report sold 30 million copies, making it the best-selling environmental book in history. Their second report revised the scenarios of the original Limits to Growth and gave a more optimistic prognosis for the future of the environment, noting that many of the factors involved were within human control and therefore that environmental and economic catastrophe were preventable or avoidable. In 1991, the club published The First Global Revolution.
Source: Wikipedia (9/12/2022)
From: The First Global Revolution by the Club of Rome (1991)
The Problematique: Soon after the publication of its first report, The Limits to Growth in 1972, the world was hit by the oil crisis. The crisis was a clear warning to the industrialized countries regarding the vulnerability of their economies to the security of supply of raw materials and energy, dependent on events in distant places largely beyond their control. The oil crisis also brought home to most of the oil-importing developing countries the extent of their reliance upon cheap fuels, with hardly any local energy alternative; it also led these countries to excessive external indebtedness designed not so much to foster development as merely to pay the oil bill. The oil crisis and other factors have led to considerable lowering of economic growth rates from the high levels of the previous decades. Achievements of economic growth, however, still remain the main explicit goal of economic policy, with too little consideration of differential needs.
A Whirlwind of Change:
U.S. Debt: The North American market in which Canada has now joined the United States and which Mexico is expected to join, will inevitably continue to be an industrial and postindustrial group of great power. Its immediate future, however, is clouded by the immense deficit, which, amazingly, the United States has allowed to accumulate in recent years. In spite of repeated efforts and international commitments the national debt approaching U.S. $3 trillion, risen from around U.S. $900 billion in 1981. Interest payments on this debt are now a major item in the budget.
The scale and rate of growth of the U.S. current account deficit in unprecedented. A substantial reorientation of the U.S. economy will be necessary to correct it, and, ultimately, to create a level of surplus needed to service the accumulated international obligations which could exceed U.S. $1 trillion. One of the main elements determining the balance of the U.S. budget is defense expenditure. A substantial part of this expenditure serves to support the strategic objectives of the U.S. and its allies throughout the world. Now that the U.S. is facing economic difficulties, and competing head-on with countries whose security it guarantees, major questions have arisen. [NOTE: the U.S. debt is now in excess of U.S. $31 trillion]
The Awakening of Minorities and Nationalism: There is a widespread public dislike of what is seen as excessive centralization. The dominance of large, faceless bureaucracies which appear to disregard the needs of individuals and of local communities is generally resented. The situation is particularly acute where such dominance impinges on the identity of ethnic minorities, and we see in an ever-increasing number of places how ethnic groups are becoming vocal and active in their demands for autonomy or independence.
Poor Countries: The poor countries, lacking industrial, technological and scientific structures and trained managerial capacity, have been unable to assimilate much of the technology and know-how available to them. Technology transfer was assumed to be the obvious method of introducing new processes and new industries into the less-developed countries, but it has often failed, sometimes as a result of selecting inappropriate processes or unsuitable industries and sometimes, with key-in-hand transfer, because of insufficient preparation and absence of management, maintenance and marketing skills in receiving country. The grave problem of world poverty, aggravated by population growth, could well give rise to great and disruptive disharmony on a world scale, the consequences of which the industrial countries couldn’t escape.
The Loss of Values: There appears to be a general loss of the values which previously ensured the coherence of society and the conformity of its individuals. In some places this has been the result of a loss of faith in religion and the ethical values it promulgates. In other cases, it stems from a loss of confidence in the political system and those who operate it. Yet again, the welfare state, despite all the social advantages and security it brings, seems to have reduced the sense of responsibility and self-reliance of many individuals. This has led to an increasing rejection by minorities of the decisions of the majority, often reinforced by a sense of social injustice or exploitation.
Areas of Concern:
Global Warming and Its Energy Implications: At the present state of our knowledge of the complex interactions within the planetary system, the greenhouse effect appears to be the most imminent of the constraints to the extension, or perhaps even to the survival, of an economic approach that has served richer countries well for so long. The consequences of heating up the earth’s surface cannot yet be sensed to any degree of precision.
Global Food Security: Production of sufficient food to meet the needs of a rapidly increasing world population is obviously a matter of primary concern. In long-term estimates of food production possibilities, it was assumed that water-shortages could be overcome by desalination of brackish waters or of sea water through technological innovations which demand pressure would conjure up. This took no account of the enormous energy requirements which would be needed for such processes, nor for the availability of energy.
Future scarcity or high cost of oil, or constraints to its use forced by global warming, would inhibit the production of food and greatly raise food prices at a time when continuing high population growth will demand more and more food. It is certainly desirable to reduce the energy intensity of agriculture, but much hard thinking is necessary to ascertain the extent to which “organic farming” could indeed provide the food needs for present and future generations.
Governance: In a strongly technologically based culture, there will always be a dichotomy between those who understand its workings and those who merely press the buttons. We may be faced with a sharp distinction between the few who know and the many who do not know.
Employment: We are likely to see economic growth without substantial job creation. In the industrialized countries, innumerable individuals find little satisfaction in their work, even where they are liberated from the crude struggle for existence by the bounties of the welfare state. These people often give in to a sense of uselessness – uselessness to society and to themselves. Human dignity and a sense of self and purpose are basic human needs which are difficult to provide in the industrial and urban milieu and the lack of them would spread if large-scale structural unemployment were to arise.
Nation-State Limitation: The problems of environment, energy, population, food availability, and development form an interpenetrating complex within the problematique. Because of the importance of the interactions, it would make little sense to tackle each of these elements separately. To do otherwise is beyond the possibilities of the nation-state. The need is for simultaneous attacks on all of them within a coordinated world strategy. Success or failure of the first global revolution depends on this.
The Vacuum: Order in society is determined by the cohesion of its members. Until the middle of our century, this was normally ensured by a natural patriotism, a sense of belonging to the community, reinforced by a moral discipline exerted by religion and respect for the state and its leaders, however remote they might be from the people. Meanwhile, generalized religious faith has evaporated in many countries; respect for the political process has also faded, owing partly to the media, leading to indifference if not hostility. Thus, a vacuum has been created, in which both order and objectives in society are being corroded.
Source: The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome by Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider (1991)
Need for a Common Enemy: The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself – when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for that purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to use religious or ethnic minorities as scapegoats, especially those whose differences from the majority are disturbing. Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbors as friend or foe, that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void to fill. New enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised.
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy we fall into the trap, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
Source: The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome (1991) and The Club of Rome by Wikipedia (9/12/2022)
Limits of Democracy: The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation. Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything, and it is unaware of its own limits. As now practiced, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time. The slowness of decision making in a democratic system is particularly damaging at the international level. When dictators attack and international policing is required, delays of decision can be fatal. Not only have we to find better means of governance at the national and international levels, but we have also to determine the characteristics of a capacity to govern.
The Human Malaise:
The Family: Thanks to modern means of information, young people are being rapidly exposed to more and more facts that give them reason to consider their elders as lacking responsibility and awareness with regard to enormous dangers such as nuclear holocaust, pollution, and the violent destruction of the environment. The younger generation is rejecting traditions and values as a whole and is sketching out new trends. Their parents now have to seek their consent and negotiate their own formerly unquestioned authority. In almost all cultures, the family cell is regarded as a fundamental value. It will probably continue as such, but in new circumstances – a family disjointed and shattered by urban life, rural exodus, emigration and conflicts; modified by our control over reproduction, with the human couple now joined in an uncertain bond; functioning according to a new pattern of relationships that has replaced the hitherto uncontested parental authority; a family within which upholders of tradition are increasingly in conflict with those of an American-style modernity.
Nationalism: Nationalism is double-edged: based on the old concept of the nation-state, it can all too easily become a source of intolerance, conflict and exaggerated racism. The traditional concept of nation is partly disappearing in the wave of internationalism: dependence of some countries for raw materials and energy, dependence of others for food, investments, technology transfer and training are creating new solidarities that are not always accepted or understood.
The International Dimension: The trend towards globality and recognitions that many of the contemporary problems are essentially global and cannot be solved through individual country initiatives gives a greatly enhanced importance to the United Nations and other international systems. Furthermore, recent events suggest that the nations may be at last willing to give the United Nations a considerably bigger role in the peacekeeping process and in environmental survival.
Motivations and Values: “Collective” values are often the outcome of a choice made – or, worse yet, imposed – by those holding the reins of power, who want at all costs to impose their values by showing contempt for those of others, by even attempting to suppress them. “Collective” values can be taken into consideration only when there exists true freedom and a high level of culture. Elites everywhere reconcile easily despite the surface controversy. The general public is not involved, only manipulated, in debates of this type. The gulf between elite thinking and thinking at a popular level is enormous. Here is where we find distortions and tensions difficult or even impossible to resolve.
Source: The Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome by Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider (1991)
YUVAL NOAH HARARI: I believe it’s in understanding how Harari is defining words that it’s made clear what a tyrannical, dystopian world he wants to create. This is how he dismisses the Declaration on Independence:
Klaus Schwab and the WEF were using issues such as “sustainable development,” “climate change,” and “racism and gender issues” as a way to divide people, making them more vulnerable to the plans of the globalists. He agreed it was a tactic they used but said it was also a strategy to keep people from looking too closely at their plans.
It would be difficult to force these changes upon us. But, if they could somehow get people to acquiesce to their plans, or remain silent, it would greatly increase their chances of success. In other words, they could not succeed by force. However, they could succeed by subterfuge or somehow obtaining our consent. Probably the best example today is the European Union. The EU has taken over virtually every single function of the countries it presides over. You can say on one hand, there’s still a national government in Spain, Switzerland, and Germany. Yes, there is. But do they have the same power today that they had, say thirty years ago? No. The EU is now making all of the significant policy decisions for Europe for those individual countries. This has been the standard operating procedure for Technocracy, to chip away at national sovereignty and eventually remove the political structure altogether. That’s been a goal since the 1930s.
Source: The Great Reset: and the War for the World by Alex Jones (2022)
CLUB OF ROME: The Club of Rome stimulated considerable public attention with the first report to the club, The Limits to Growth. Published in 1972, its computer simulations suggested that economic growth could not continue indefinitely because of resource depletion. The 1973 oil crisis increased public concern about this problem. The report sold 30 million copies, making it the best-selling environmental book in history. Their second report revised the scenarios of the original Limits to Growth and gave a more optimistic prognosis for the future of the environment, noting that many of the factors involved were within human control and therefore that environmental and economic catastrophe were preventable or avoidable. In 1991, the club published The First Global Revolution.
Source: Wikipedia (9/12/2022)
From: The First Global Revolution by the Club of Rome (1991)
The Problematique: Soon after the publication of its first report, The Limits to Growth in 1972, the world was hit by the oil crisis. The crisis was a clear warning to the industrialized countries regarding the vulnerability of their economies to the security of supply of raw materials and energy, dependent on events in distant places largely beyond their control. The oil crisis also brought home to most of the oil-importing developing countries the extent of their reliance upon cheap fuels, with hardly any local energy alternative; it also led these countries to excessive external indebtedness designed not so much to foster development as merely to pay the oil bill. The oil crisis and other factors have led to considerable lowering of economic growth rates from the high levels of the previous decades. Achievements of economic growth, however, still remain the main explicit goal of economic policy, with too little consideration of differential needs.
A Whirlwind of Change:
U.S. Debt: The North American market in which Canada has now joined the United States and which Mexico is expected to join, will inevitably continue to be an industrial and postindustrial group of great power. Its immediate future, however, is clouded by the immense deficit, which, amazingly, the United States has allowed to accumulate in recent years. In spite of repeated efforts and international commitments the national debt approaching U.S. $3 trillion, risen from around U.S. $900 billion in 1981. Interest payments on this debt are now a major item in the budget.
The scale and rate of growth of the U.S. current account deficit in unprecedented. A substantial reorientation of the U.S. economy will be necessary to correct it, and, ultimately, to create a level of surplus needed to service the accumulated international obligations which could exceed U.S. $1 trillion. One of the main elements determining the balance of the U.S. budget is defense expenditure. A substantial part of this expenditure serves to support the strategic objectives of the U.S. and its allies throughout the world. Now that the U.S. is facing economic difficulties, and competing head-on with countries whose security it guarantees, major questions have arisen. [NOTE: the U.S. debt is now in excess of U.S. $31 trillion]
The Awakening of Minorities and Nationalism: There is a widespread public dislike of what is seen as excessive centralization. The dominance of large, faceless bureaucracies which appear to disregard the needs of individuals and of local communities is generally resented. The situation is particularly acute where such dominance impinges on the identity of ethnic minorities, and we see in an ever-increasing number of places how ethnic groups are becoming vocal and active in their demands for autonomy or independence.
Poor Countries: The poor countries, lacking industrial, technological and scientific structures and trained managerial capacity, have been unable to assimilate much of the technology and know-how available to them. Technology transfer was assumed to be the obvious method of introducing new processes and new industries into the less-developed countries, but it has often failed, sometimes as a result of selecting inappropriate processes or unsuitable industries and sometimes, with key-in-hand transfer, because of insufficient preparation and absence of management, maintenance and marketing skills in receiving country. The grave problem of world poverty, aggravated by population growth, could well give rise to great and disruptive disharmony on a world scale, the consequences of which the industrial countries couldn’t escape.
The Loss of Values: There appears to be a general loss of the values which previously ensured the coherence of society and the conformity of its individuals. In some places this has been the result of a loss of faith in religion and the ethical values it promulgates. In other cases, it stems from a loss of confidence in the political system and those who operate it. Yet again, the welfare state, despite all the social advantages and security it brings, seems to have reduced the sense of responsibility and self-reliance of many individuals. This has led to an increasing rejection by minorities of the decisions of the majority, often reinforced by a sense of social injustice or exploitation.
Areas of Concern:
Global Warming and Its Energy Implications: At the present state of our knowledge of the complex interactions within the planetary system, the greenhouse effect appears to be the most imminent of the constraints to the extension, or perhaps even to the survival, of an economic approach that has served richer countries well for so long. The consequences of heating up the earth’s surface cannot yet be sensed to any degree of precision.
Global Food Security: Production of sufficient food to meet the needs of a rapidly increasing world population is obviously a matter of primary concern. In long-term estimates of food production possibilities, it was assumed that water-shortages could be overcome by desalination of brackish waters or of sea water through technological innovations which demand pressure would conjure up. This took no account of the enormous energy requirements which would be needed for such processes, nor for the availability of energy.
Future scarcity or high cost of oil, or constraints to its use forced by global warming, would inhibit the production of food and greatly raise food prices at a time when continuing high population growth will demand more and more food. It is certainly desirable to reduce the energy intensity of agriculture, but much hard thinking is necessary to ascertain the extent to which “organic farming” could indeed provide the food needs for present and future generations.
Governance: In a strongly technologically based culture, there will always be a dichotomy between those who understand its workings and those who merely press the buttons. We may be faced with a sharp distinction between the few who know and the many who do not know.
Employment: We are likely to see economic growth without substantial job creation. In the industrialized countries, innumerable individuals find little satisfaction in their work, even where they are liberated from the crude struggle for existence by the bounties of the welfare state. These people often give in to a sense of uselessness – uselessness to society and to themselves. Human dignity and a sense of self and purpose are basic human needs which are difficult to provide in the industrial and urban milieu and the lack of them would spread if large-scale structural unemployment were to arise.
Nation-State Limitation: The problems of environment, energy, population, food availability, and development form an interpenetrating complex within the problematique. Because of the importance of the interactions, it would make little sense to tackle each of these elements separately. To do otherwise is beyond the possibilities of the nation-state. The need is for simultaneous attacks on all of them within a coordinated world strategy. Success or failure of the first global revolution depends on this.
The Vacuum: Order in society is determined by the cohesion of its members. Until the middle of our century, this was normally ensured by a natural patriotism, a sense of belonging to the community, reinforced by a moral discipline exerted by religion and respect for the state and its leaders, however remote they might be from the people. Meanwhile, generalized religious faith has evaporated in many countries; respect for the political process has also faded, owing partly to the media, leading to indifference if not hostility. Thus, a vacuum has been created, in which both order and objectives in society are being corroded.
Source: The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome by Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider (1991)
Need for a Common Enemy: The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself – when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for that purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to use religious or ethnic minorities as scapegoats, especially those whose differences from the majority are disturbing. Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbors as friend or foe, that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void to fill. New enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised.
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy we fall into the trap, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
Source: The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome (1991) and The Club of Rome by Wikipedia (9/12/2022)
Limits of Democracy: The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation. Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything, and it is unaware of its own limits. As now practiced, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time. The slowness of decision making in a democratic system is particularly damaging at the international level. When dictators attack and international policing is required, delays of decision can be fatal. Not only have we to find better means of governance at the national and international levels, but we have also to determine the characteristics of a capacity to govern.
The Human Malaise:
The Family: Thanks to modern means of information, young people are being rapidly exposed to more and more facts that give them reason to consider their elders as lacking responsibility and awareness with regard to enormous dangers such as nuclear holocaust, pollution, and the violent destruction of the environment. The younger generation is rejecting traditions and values as a whole and is sketching out new trends. Their parents now have to seek their consent and negotiate their own formerly unquestioned authority. In almost all cultures, the family cell is regarded as a fundamental value. It will probably continue as such, but in new circumstances – a family disjointed and shattered by urban life, rural exodus, emigration and conflicts; modified by our control over reproduction, with the human couple now joined in an uncertain bond; functioning according to a new pattern of relationships that has replaced the hitherto uncontested parental authority; a family within which upholders of tradition are increasingly in conflict with those of an American-style modernity.
Nationalism: Nationalism is double-edged: based on the old concept of the nation-state, it can all too easily become a source of intolerance, conflict and exaggerated racism. The traditional concept of nation is partly disappearing in the wave of internationalism: dependence of some countries for raw materials and energy, dependence of others for food, investments, technology transfer and training are creating new solidarities that are not always accepted or understood.
The International Dimension: The trend towards globality and recognitions that many of the contemporary problems are essentially global and cannot be solved through individual country initiatives gives a greatly enhanced importance to the United Nations and other international systems. Furthermore, recent events suggest that the nations may be at last willing to give the United Nations a considerably bigger role in the peacekeeping process and in environmental survival.
Motivations and Values: “Collective” values are often the outcome of a choice made – or, worse yet, imposed – by those holding the reins of power, who want at all costs to impose their values by showing contempt for those of others, by even attempting to suppress them. “Collective” values can be taken into consideration only when there exists true freedom and a high level of culture. Elites everywhere reconcile easily despite the surface controversy. The general public is not involved, only manipulated, in debates of this type. The gulf between elite thinking and thinking at a popular level is enormous. Here is where we find distortions and tensions difficult or even impossible to resolve.
Source: The Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of Rome by Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider (1991)
YUVAL NOAH HARARI: I believe it’s in understanding how Harari is defining words that it’s made clear what a tyrannical, dystopian world he wants to create. This is how he dismisses the Declaration on Independence:
According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all souls are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference not on equality.
It's a paragraph such as this that we can see the true danger of Harari and his fellow globalists. Harari appears to believe the idea of equality sprang from some mystical religious vision of Christianity, rather than the great thinkers of their time observing the human condition and trying to figure out how to get people to live together as peacefully as possible.
Harari is enamored of the idea that some people will rule, and others will become part of an “inferior caste.” It’s not too much of a leap to wonder if the globalists might decide at some point that this inferior caste no longer warrants continued survival.
These globalists do want to dethrone God from his throne in heaven and place themselves in charge. That is what the globalists are pushing. If there is one thing that religion has done, it is to cause people to consider things outside of themselves. It is religion that caused people to worry about feeding the poor, educating the young, removing people from slavery, and making sure that all enjoy equal opportunity. At its best, religion breaks down walls, requiring people to see others as fellow children of God, all equally valuable. By agreeing that all people have value, there can be no impulse to harm or rid ourselves of them. The more people embrace equality and freedom, the closer they are to God’s natural order. When one understands the philosophical underpinnings of a belief in God, it becomes clear that these globalists are nothing less than an opposition to that belief.
Globalists believe they know better than the average person how to run their lives. Because they consider themselves to be of a superior caste of human beings, they do not see the value of talking with us. The globalists seem supremely indifferent to the human beings in whose name they are supposedly making their plans.
Source: The Great Reset: and the War for the World by Alex Jones (2022)
The unabbreviated version of the above can be found in the pdf document below.
Harari is enamored of the idea that some people will rule, and others will become part of an “inferior caste.” It’s not too much of a leap to wonder if the globalists might decide at some point that this inferior caste no longer warrants continued survival.
These globalists do want to dethrone God from his throne in heaven and place themselves in charge. That is what the globalists are pushing. If there is one thing that religion has done, it is to cause people to consider things outside of themselves. It is religion that caused people to worry about feeding the poor, educating the young, removing people from slavery, and making sure that all enjoy equal opportunity. At its best, religion breaks down walls, requiring people to see others as fellow children of God, all equally valuable. By agreeing that all people have value, there can be no impulse to harm or rid ourselves of them. The more people embrace equality and freedom, the closer they are to God’s natural order. When one understands the philosophical underpinnings of a belief in God, it becomes clear that these globalists are nothing less than an opposition to that belief.
Globalists believe they know better than the average person how to run their lives. Because they consider themselves to be of a superior caste of human beings, they do not see the value of talking with us. The globalists seem supremely indifferent to the human beings in whose name they are supposedly making their plans.
Source: The Great Reset: and the War for the World by Alex Jones (2022)
The unabbreviated version of the above can be found in the pdf document below.
| democracy_5l_others_ideas_--_segment_5.pdf |