NOTES AND COMMENTS:
(1)>>"GREAT RESET " . The Great Reset mostly refers to a hypothetical: How will the world's economies pick up the pieces and keep working if there is a massive decrease in population? Obviously, things would have to change. May sound grim, but people in high places have been thinking about it, possibly even more since their kids started panicking over climate change and insisting that a lower population would be more sustainable (though to be fair, people have been saying that for years). The fact is, many individuals, corporations, and systems want to be prepared in case it happens, to the point where they can keep running and just flip to the long-standing plans they've been laying once a population drop occurs.Of course there's been something of a veil of secrecy around a thing like this. People on average could easily interpret the very premise as ghoulish. It's certainly fervid contingency planning for a potential series of morbid disasters. Obviously, long-standing economic powerhouses would be interested in this sort of thing.It is important that they not try to hurry this population drop and subsequent Great Reset along, though. That would be unkind. Part of the Great Reset is modeling a world government after the EU, with unelected leaders at the UN making the decisions for all nations. Voting is messy and gets in the way. After they ended up with Trump in 2016 and he got in the way, they won't allow voting anymore after 2024. If you want to know more about the plans for the world check out articles and books by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum about the topic of the Great Reset. There is a book on Amazon called COVID 19, The Great Reset by Klaus Schwab that details all the changes they are trying to make.(1.2)>>Remember later Trump wanted out as soon as he was elected .He didn't take questions from his host, World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab, or the elite audience of leading executives, bankers and politicians. He also rues the lack of a system of global governance to address global problems, such as a pandemic, and pointed to Trump’s decision to withdraw funding from the World Health Organization. (2)>>World Economic Forum. World Economic Forum But the group’s emphasis on global cooperation and reshaping capitalism worry conservatives who promote “America First” and distrust Schwab’s calls for globally shared goals for private enterprise. And proponents of small government and lower taxes recoil at his conclusion in “COVID-19: The Great Reset” that “Irrespective of the details, the role of the state will increase, and in doing so, will materially affect the way business in conducted.” Taxes will necessarily increase, “particularly for the most privileged,” Schwab wrote.(3)>>after the first wave of lockdowns. We can only speculate that Covid would go endemic , but also warn of future lockdowns. Right now ,Omicron BA.2 COVID-19 sub-type may be 1.5 times more contagious than the previous BA.1 type, not least because it was found to be highly transmissible and because the 32 mutations to its spike protein suggested it might be able to resist current vaccines.In those places, COVID was expected to ease into an endemic disease, hopefully with less-severe periodic or seasonal outbreaks.Even after COVID becomes a more endemic disease, new variants will spawn outbreaks and seasonal surges for years to come.(4)>>global authoritarian society that will rise after the artificial “health emergency.” Under the guise of COVID-19 responses, governments have intensified restrictions on civil society. Meanwhile, Twitter feeds, posts in closed Facebook groups, and Telegram messages reveal emotional burnout within civil society, reflecting frustration that both the pandemic and repressive state responses to it prevent activists from helping those in need. Travel restrictions have been a issue.Can exceptionality jeopardise some democratic principles in the long term? Could the epidemic lead to a reduction of individual rights after the peak of the crisis? The first risk is that some exceptional measures adopted in the context of an emergency might eventually fall within the scope of ordinary legislation, if leaders argue that a widespread health threat could resurface at any time. The second risk is that governments might take advantage of the substantial effect of this crisis to administer a so-called shock strategy, aimed at strengthening surveillance politics. In the USA, the Patriot Act has infringed on civil liberties in the long run by allowing security agencies to spy on every American without due process. (4.1)>>authoritarian rule over society. Transparency International has long warned about “worrying signs that the pandemic will leave in its wake increased authoritarianism and weakened rule of law.”World Economic Forum isn’t just thinking in the wrong direction, it isn’t thinking big enough. It’s far too constrained in its goals, which revolve around bringing the world’s regimes into closer conformity with each other and with the United Nations on issues like taxes, regulations, and the bugbear du jour, climate change. Under Trump, the United States backed away from this “globalism.” The populist right have not gone away with Trump’s defeat, and the horror that they feel when confronted with the idea of global government could easily result in multiplying authoritarianisms. If one thinks of the authoritarian populist turn as a nostalgic reaction to globalization, then — as the enormous scale of contemporary problems (in particular, climate change, mass migration and platform capitalism) becomes clearer — we will see ever more reactionary responses to these. We have already seen manifestations of eco-fascism — profoundly pessimistic versions of environmental thinking combined with nationalism — and, in recent protests in France against the new surveillance and security bill, we saw not only progressive forces but also populists such as the gilets jaunes (“yellow vests”) and right-wing COVID-19 conspiracy groups. The Great Reset is about finding ways to make it easier for the same people who’ve been running things for the last 400 years — since the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, when the modern “nation-state” model we live under came into existence — to remain in charge, doing the same things they’ve been doing, with even less inconvenient dissent from uppity serfs, forever and ever, amen.(5)>>world economy completely collapses . As far as the "world economy" , its all the [ collapsing ] Western systems . China by 2030 will take over and lead world economic development , the RESET helped China achieve a post Covid prosperity . Yet, whatever we call it, this is clear: it is much the biggest crisis the world has confronted since the second world war and the biggest economic disaster since the Depression of the 1930s. Covid-19 has dealt a major blow to world’s poorest countries, causing a recession that could push more than 100 million people into extreme poverty, according to the World Bank. The challenges are mounting with the discovery of the omicron variant, which is driving a new wave of infections. The world has come into this moment with divisions among its great powers and incompetence at the highest levels of government of terrifying proportions. (6)>>nation state sovereignty gradually disappears . The process of globalization undoubtedly contributes to the change and reduction of the scope of state sovereign powers. The problems of national sovereignty in political science have always played an essential role since the late 16th century with Jean Bodin's Six Books of the Commonwealth. However, no wonder that in the last two or three decades there appeared new aspects in this field, especially in the context of discussing issues of globalization and the new world order. In the field of political science the subject of change, ‘diffusion’, or the ‘disappearing’ of national sovereignty started to be raised in the late 20th – early 21st century in connection with the problems of globalization and new world order .This is correct. The WEF is still very much capitalist and the thought experiment they're trying to provoke is figuring out how to deal with a future of productivity gains, limited purchasing power of the working class, while still having a robust, diverse economy. They will still be charging real money at point of purchase for the printed heart and the drone delivered rented goods.At a higher level, the question is; how can we stimulate the economy in the near future (to keep from falling too far behind) without over leveraging, while spreading the risk (borrowing from tomorrow) out over a longer period of time. The Communist boogeyman angle that people are trying to shoehorn in does not in any way reflect the reality of these organizations. It's like being suspicious of the IMF promoting worker owned collectivisation. As great as that would be for workers, it does not reflect the interests of the promoting organization. At all. Not even in the same universe.
