Apparently the Leftist Establishment finds itself threatened by note of the Great Reset by us ordinary dirt people:
We start with the revival of the baseless conspiracy theory, known as the ‘Great Reset’, which claims a group of world leaders orchestrated the pandemic to take control of the global economy.
The conspiracy theory has its origins in a genuine plan entitled ‘The Great Reset’, drawn up by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the organisers of an annual conference for high-profile figures from politics and business. The plan explores how countries might recover from the economic damage caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
But the suggestion that politicians planned the virus, or are using it to destroy capitalism is wholly without evidence.
Politicians took advantage of the virus, namely politicians in China. Politicians in the West took advantage of the pandemic to shut everything down, crash the economy, and force mail-in ballot voting. This keeps the population terrified and needy, perfect for control.
The Great Reset agenda can be described as the desire of our international democratic bureaucracy for world federalist market socialism:
There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable.
To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.
Let us look at that vital line again:
In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.
The herd consists of those who blame external influences for their troubles; in doing so, they need to take over external control so that they no longer must rely on their internal choices to make them rise or fall, as in nature; that in turn creates control systems, which rule by mass shared delusion designed to manipulate, gaslight, and Stockholm Syndrome the population.
We know this from Plato and others who chronicle democracy. Late stage democracy always relies on herding its people, having arisen from herding behavior, so that it can control the herd to do what is convenient for its leaders, namely seize power and steal.
If we can accept that corporations act only to profit, shareholders desire only increase stock value, and ordinary people given power will turn abusive, we can accept also that bureaucrats will do whatever is necessary to advance the bureaucracy, running it like organized crime as a political machine.
The WEF continues:
Clearly, the will to build a better society does exist.
They mean a better society in the sense of more free stuff. Read on.
The Great Reset agenda would have three main components. The first would steer the market toward fairer outcomes. To this end, governments should improve coordination (for example, in tax, regulatory, and fiscal policy), upgrade trade arrangements, and create the conditions for a “stakeholder economy.”
“Stakeholder economy” means socialism; if you are part of a society, you get paid out from the collective wealth, namely that taken from the productive.
Moreover, governments should implement long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes. Depending on the country, these may include changes to wealth taxes, the withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies, and new rules governing intellectual property, trade, and competition.
Translation: we steal more from the productive and, at the same time we are stealing, we reduce the ability to earn wealth. This means that more of the burden falls on the middle class, essentially eliminating normal prosperity and forcing people to be either mass poor or elite rich.
The second component of a Great Reset agenda would ensure that investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability.
Rather than using these funds, as well as investments from private entities and pension funds, to fill cracks in the old system, we should use them to create a new one that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building “green” urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.
Translation: redirect industry toward egalitarian ends, much like the Communist system.
The third and final priority of a Great Reset agenda is to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges. During the COVID-19 crisis, companies, universities, and others have joined forces to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and possible vaccines; establish testing centers; create mechanisms for tracing infections; and deliver telemedicine. Imagine what could be possible if similar concerted efforts were made in every sector.
Translation: all must serve social justice, a.k.a. equality through DEDS (democracy, equality, diversity, and socialism).
They call it the Great Reset because they want to end our previous system and replace it with one that has markets directed toward ideological ends, socialist wealth redistribution through entitlements, and diversity to ensure lots of people keep voting for more stuff taken from the wealthy few.
Every society collapses this way. By organizing, it thrives, but also produces lots of people who are nothing more than labor. They do not understand how anything works, so figure that if they demand free money, nothing will change except that they get more money, whether higher minimum wage, welfare, or socialized medicine. In the process, they kill the goose that laid the golden eggs, which is the productive segment of higher-IQ people who make the most sane and logical choices in leadership, and therefore produce stability and consistency, causing the production of wealth because we are doing the same things that we always do, only more efficiently. Doing this requires eliminating corruption, or people taking for themselves what would give back tenfold to the system.
Each third world society on Earth functions the same way: government gives out free stuff, but there is too little to have any effect, and the citizens constantly vote hard for more free stuff, at which point most of it is stolen and there is too little to have any effect. The rich get rich by hiding income, using it well, and then buying off politicians so they can keep some of what they have. You end up with a giant herd of genetically-broken masses consuming everything they touch like a plague of locusts, and nasty selfish rich people who hoard wealth and kill off their opposition. This is how human societies self-destruct, and it takes many centuries, but eventually you get back to people living in huts, farming small properties, foraging, and lying, cheating, stealing, raping, and killing each other with impunity. That is the stage after a “great reset.”
We know this because we can see it happening already in the West. The more we tax and spend, the less productive we are in real terms, and the more paper wealth is created. We get a few ultra-wealthy and many sad proles living in apartments, owning nothing of importance, and demanding free stuff at every election, so we are ruled by cynical bureaucrats who do what is necessary to preserve their power, namely crushing anyone free-spirited by forcing everyone into compliance to increasingly absurd rules.
Ironically, this resembles the Chinese system, which resembles that of Genghis Khan. The government is benevolent, so long as you obey. It conquers other areas to consume their wealth. In the end, it collapses from amotivation of its citizens and infighting in its power structure, since when you create something that powerful, it becomes a target for all of the Joe Bidens and Hillary Clintons of the world who want to steal all that they can and gain all the power that they can.
We should ask, instead of criticizing capitalism, whether our present-day rich people are good, or whether they gained wealth by gaming the system and then paying bribes. Since most of our billionaires seem to be Leftist, we wonder if this is not the new method of paying bribes: donate directly to the bureaucrat class.
Unfortunately, most who oppose the Great Reset do not know their history, as in this otherwise solid Mises piece:
About twenty-four hundred years ago, the Greek philosopher Plato came up with the idea constructing the state and society according to an elaborate plan. Plato wanted “wise men” (philosophers) at the helm of the government, but he made it also clear that his kind of state would need a transformation of the humans.
This was read backward: in actuality, Plato used the “ideal Republic” to analyze what would be necessary to make a republic work, and used this to criticize the notion of republic — a replacement for the organic civilization of aristocrats and people seeking moral clarity — itself.
In the Republic, which in my view is nothing more than a thought experiment, he conceived of an ideal state ruled by a small number of people selected, after close observation and rigorous testing, from a highly educated elite.
Burton correctly reads the civilization cycle from Plato:
The ideal state is an aristocracy in which rule is exercised by one or more distinguished people. Unfortunately, owing to human nature, the ideal state is unstable and liable to degenerate into timocracy (government by property owners), oligarchy, democracy, and, finally, tyranny. States are not made of oak and rock, but of people, and so come to resemble the people of which they are made. Aristocracies are made of just and good people; timocracies of proud and honour-loving people; oligarchies of misers and money-makers; democracies of people who are overcome by unnecessary desires; and tyrannies of people who are overcome by harmful desires.
In other words, every form of government is transformative of its people, but some encourage us upward in the ways of natural selection, while others drive us inward, toward neurosis, narcissism, and selfishness.
Back to Mises, we must correct another error before moving on. This concerns the League of Nations:
The first modern attempts to create a global institution with a governmental function was launched by the government of Woodrow Wilson who acted as US president from 1913 to 1921. Under the inspiration of Colonel Mandell House, the president’s prime advisor and best friend, Wilson wanted to establish a world forum for the period after World War I. Yet the plan of American participation in the League of Nations failed and the drive toward internationalism and establishing a new world order receded during the Roaring Twenties.
Ironically, the point of the League of Nations was the opposite of the United Nations: to preserve ethnic self-determination, or nationalism, since the union of different ethnic groups into nation-states (following the disastrous Napoleonic Wars) had created the fertile ground for the first world war.
The idea was that if an international body was established with the goal of protecting ethnic self-determination, causes for wars could get addressed before they detonated into conflict. The UN, on the other hand, wanted “world federalism” or a global control body to take over from national leadership.
However, here the vital distinction emerges:
Under the leadership of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt, twenty-six nations agreed in January 1942 to the initiative of establishing a United Nations Organization (UNO), which came into existence on October 24, 1945. Since its inception, the United Nations and its branches, such as the World Bank Group and the World Health Organization (WHO), have prepared the countries of the world to comply with the goals that were announced at its foundation.
Yet the unctuous pronouncements of promoting “international peace and security,” “developing friendly relations among nations,” and working for “social progress, better living standards, and human rights” hides the agenda of establishing a world government with executive powers whose task would not be promoting liberty and free markets but greater interventionism and control through cultural and scientific organizations. This became clear with the creation of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1945.
The world federalist notion consists of the idea that those who are friends of “science” and “human rights” (civil rights in an international context) would rule the world for the benefit of those methods, in theory improving the lives of all humanity, but really, enabling the bureaucrat-class to dominate every free nation and enforce control in the method satirized in Plato’s Republic.
In other words, this completely inverts the League of Nations ideal from a collaboration of free states to an abolition of free states and their replacement with a one-size-fits-all way of life to which all of humanity will have to conform.
In other words: the Genghis Khan method, globally.
With the pronouncement of a pandemic, the goal of comprehensive government control of the economy and society has taken another leap toward transforming the economy and society. Freedom faces a new enemy. The tyranny comes under the disguise of expert rule and benevolent dictatorship. The new rulers do not justify their right to dominance because of divine providence but now claim the right to rule the people in the name of universal health and safety based on presumed scientific evidence.
Let us translate this freely: “in your best interests.” As happens with every tyranny, the dictator begins life as a protector of the masses, giving out free stuff and guarding them against wealth. Since people seek external scapegoats for their internal problems, this always proves massively popular and proportionately destructive. This time, however, it is happening globally.
Plato saw a singular goal: get back to the starting point of civilization, which required inner and not outer control:
In the succeeding generation rulers will be appointed who have lost the guardian power of testing the metal of your different races, which, like Hesiod’s, are of gold and silver and brass and iron. And so iron will be mingled with silver, and brass with gold, and hence there will arise dissimilarity and inequality and irregularity, which always and in all places are causes of hatred and war.
…When discord arose, then the two races were drawn different ways: the iron and brass fell to acquiring money and land and houses and gold and silver; but the gold and silver races, not wanting money but having the true riches in their own nature, inclined towards virtue and the ancient order of things. There was a battle between them, and at last they agreed to distribute their land and houses among individual owners; and they enslaved their friends and maintainers, whom they had formerly protected in the condition of freemen, and made of them subjects and servants; and they themselves were engaged in war and in keeping a watch against them.
This shows us human civilization at the opposite end from the Genghis Khan method: instead of using external control to force conformity in unison, this relies on inner motivations, namly a motivation toward some achievement instead of in reaction to or against some external scapegoat.
If we have any kind of future in humanity, it lies in the Great Awakening, which means the mental defection from modernity, the system of individualism enforced by collective obedience to social appearance, a mental state which implements itself through DEDS (democracy, equality, diversity, and socialism).
Those who awaken find themselves suddenly snapping to the realization that government, media, science, academia, bureaucracy, and other people are motivated by an interest in power as much as any tyrant, and they become tyrannical no matter what level of authority they have.
A teacher, for example, keeps order in the class so that she looks good and gets promoted. A parking attendant writes as many tickets as possible so his metrics look good and he gets promoted. A dogcatcher wants to catch as many dogs as possible, so he rounds up lost suburban mutts instead of going after the dangerous and aggressive dog packs at the outer edge of the wrong side of town.
This means that the motivations of government involve control, and use rationalizations or excuses to get to that point. They invoke ideas like anti-poverty, class warfare, civil rights, feminism, legal weed, homosexuality, and transgenderism not because they believe in those things, but because those things are popular with the “proles” — the unspecialized, analytically-inept, and perpetually scapegoating masses. These people want a simple answer: their life conditions are not their fault, but were done to them, and therefore, can be fixed with external intervention, Genghis Khan style.
This means that the Great Awakening completes a part of the puzzle of the twentieth century. We assumed that, per the French Revolution narrative that guides all democracies, our problem was tyrannical government.
We did not yet know that it was tyrannical conspiracy, and that this occurs in human social groups, and so whether it manifests in government, industry, or even just as a cultural event, the result will be the same: individualists will band together in groups to form collectivized individualism, in which the individual demands freedom from standards but also subsidies from the rest of society, so that they get the benefits of civilization without the costs.
The calls for “freedom” and imposition of control are two sides of the same coin, and humans have a psychological weakness for this like we do to addiction, obesity, gambling, or “manias” which periodically cause spontaneous mass conformity to the absurd. We have to fear not just the USSR, but the hep cat at the local dive bar who realizes that by blaming the rich, he can form a group of weaponized losers demanding that civilization deconstruct itself so individualism can reign, and as soon as they have enough power, they will invent anew the government of Mao, Khan, or Stalin: totalitarian tolerance that in defense against intolerance, will commit any degree of atrocity it views as necessary because it sees its goal as the singular moral good possible for humanity.
Once one awakens to this, reality inverts — or re-inverts, since it was already inverted — and the focus changes from forcing equality and liberalization onto nature, to looking toward nature, specifically biology, genetics, and the Machiavellian mechanics of power. With this Nietzschean outlook, we can see how modernity since the Enlightenment has been nothing but a con. We see that biology and morality converge at some point, and provide a better option than human desires, emotions, and social impulses.
The Great Awakening consists of the idea that we need organic civilization back, complete with un-PC things like a homogenous ethnic profile, social hierarchy including caste, reward-based systems instead of subsidies, a strong culture including faith or faiths, reliance on family including nation, and a hostility to anything but “good for the good, bad for the bad,” which is where morality and natural selection overlap.
We do not need a Great Reset; the “Great Reset” consists of more of the things that they have been doing for the past seventy-five years that have failed so gracelessly. We do not need to get rid of capitalism, since unlike all other options it works, but a society does not consist of an economic system alone. Nor can race, religion, selective breeding, or culture alone save us, but these are all elements of the nuanced and complex approach that occurs naturally to the most intelligent among us.
Our Great Awakening forms part of the sea change that is occurring as we leave behind Leftism, then Modernity, then the Enlightenment,™ and finally the vicious narcissism/individualism which has steadily been eating away our civilization since it first got really successful during Greco-Roman times. We can have a glorious future, if we just reach out our hands to grasp it.