Copyright © 2026 Michael A. Brown
The deceptiveness of incremental change
slowly over time
Cultural change across generations always
occurs in any society. It is perfectly
normal, and, although change can sometimes be sudden, unexpected and even
traumatic, it more often happens incrementally in small steps. And because it happens incrementally, we do
not normally feel its impact in a traumatic way. We get used to incremental changes, and we
adjust to and flow with them.
Furthermore, change can sometimes be
planned and deliberate, even on an incremental level, and there is much
evidence of this happening in westernised countries over the last few
decades. As the saying goes, the only
constant we know is constant change.
However, when incremental change happens
continually in a negative or deconstructive way, it is like the proverbial frog
being boiled in water. If we throw the
frog into a pan of boiling water, it will react to the significant change in
temperature by immediately jumping out again.
However, if we put it into a pan of cold water and then heat the water
up slowly, the frog will remain there until it eventually dies, because the
changes taking place in the temperature of the water surrounding it are slow
and incremental. It never understands
that it is being slowly boiled to death.
A ministry colleague recently wrote a post
on Facebook, bewailing the deconstructionism that has been taking place in
Europe over the last few decades, and the new authoritarianism which has
emerged. Readers will recognise the
truth of what he says. It has left our
societies without much of the mooring which we were used to in life, which gave
us tradition and security, and which we considered to be normal. And having succeeded in placing a straitjacket
of political correctness on us all, we are now constantly being subjected to
the often unspoken but very real expectation of having to submit to and comply
with the demands of the minority over the majority, which are encouraged and
stoked up by ‘cancel culture,’ the liberal left, and censorship by the media.
Someone who were to have been
hypothetically placed into suspended animation for the last few decades, and
who was then woken up and found themself in our present society, would be
shocked to be suddenly faced with the many changes that have occurred since
s/he were put to sleep. The accumulation
over the longer term of a series of successive incremental changes has resulted
in significant and profound change in our society from the foundations up. It is only over a longer period of time that
we can truly see the accumulative effects of successive incremental change, and
it is only then that we can understand where these incremental changes are
truly taking us. But by then, of course,
it is often difficult if not impossible to go back to where we once were. Whether we understood it or not, we have been
– and we are still being – slowly boiled like the proverbial frog. Most people have been deceived by this
NWO strategy of incremental change over decades. The NWO’s values are already being introduced
slowly and peacefully, all over the world, often without people realising what
is really going on. As A.R. Epperson put
it, the ‘old world order’ is being destroyed piece by piece, by a series of
planned ‘nibbles’ at the established format.[1]
This ministry colleague’s words translate
into English as follows:
‘What is happening with people and
families in twenty-first century Europe?
People without gender, without religious symbols and feasts, without a
father, without a mother, without a traditional family, and without
community. In the place of these we have
numbers, passports, gender-neutral toiletry, [and so on...]. We can no longer address people as ‘he’ or ‘she,’
[but in some other preferred way].
This is the project of the
dictatorship of the minority which is being forced on the majority through the
removal of the core [of society]: the shifting of people away from the
spiritual world; away from family culture; away from [religious] symbols; away
from the love of their father and mother; away from gratefulness; away from
much-loved religious feasts; and into a place of emptiness resulting from
deconstruction, into a laboratory in which the ‘new man’ is being built with a
different kind of language, a different [sexual] orientation, a different kind
of family, different morals, different ways of behaving, and different
aspirations…
What is happening in
twenty-first century Europe is that the masses are being placed under the
regime of a repressive dictatorship in an organised way. Helped by the worldwide pandemic, the [moral]
anaemia of society, the indifference of the masses, the compromise of whole
communities, the public silence of people of faith, the relativising of evil,
and by the fear of the agenda of deconstruction, of depopulation, of being
lynched [by the media], this project has now taken the visible form of an
absolute and repressive dictatorship.’
Change is in the air: the
Great Reset
Furthermore, and compounding this concept
of successive incremental change, significant changes in society sometimes
happen on a macro or even a global level.
In their book Covid-19: The Great Reset, the globalists Schwab[2] and Malleret
present the thesis that existential crises and major events in history (for
example world wars, political and industrial revolutions, pandemics, the
invention of the internet, etc.) have each invariably led to significant and
permanent changes taking place in human life and society. These are thereby reset in new directions in
various ways, bringing about what becomes a ‘new normal’ after the crisis /
event.
Schwab and Malleret argue that the worldwide
Covid-19 pandemic ought to be taken advantage of, in order to bring about such
a shift and reset of human society on a global scale: politically, socially,
economically and geopolitically. They
believe that we ought not to go back to the ‘normal’ that we knew prior to the
pandemic, but that we should think radically and seize the opportunity to make
the kind of institutional changes and policy decisions which are needed to put
us on a path to the new world that they hope will emerge afterwards. Indeed, to avoid what they believe is the
catastrophe which is awaiting this world in different ways due to its diverse
deep-rooted ills, we must set this great global reset into motion without
delay. It is an absolute necessity that
we collaborate to address the global challenges that we face collectively, so
we must boldly take the bull by the horns and make this great global reset
happen.[3]
Many observers would confirm that the
globalist elites of the NWO, being aware of this historical principle, have
consciously and deliberately managed their response to the pandemic in such a
way as to engineer and bring about such a global reset. This conscious response has been expressed
repeatedly by politicians all over the world since around mid-2020 through
their widespread use of the phrase ‘build back better,’ particularly in the
context of governments giving loans and bailouts contingent on the development
of a greener policy response to climate change and environmental sustainability
on the part of industry and employers.
Four major areas of
coming change
Schwab and Malleret discuss many areas of
change which they believe will and must take place in the world consequent to
the pandemic, be they on a macro-, micro- or individual level, and be they in
the geopolitical, economic, societal, environmental or technological fields. As they correctly point out, some of these
changes were already in the process of taking place prior to the pandemic, and
the pandemic has simply accelerated this process of change.
It is impossible in this chapter to look
at all the areas of coming change which Schwab and Malleret discuss; there are
simply too many of them. However, in the
sections below, and synthesising reliable information gleaned from both Schwab
and Malleret and other sources, I have briefly summarised four major areas of
change which are coming soon, probably over the next ten years or so. Although different countries will obviously
proceed at different paces with these changes, yet people everywhere in
the world need to prepare themselves for what is ahead.
1. The
fourth industrial revolution
Along with many other observers worldwide,
Schwab believes that humanity is now on the cusp of the so-called ‘fourth
industrial revolution.’ He defines this
as a period of fundamental technological change which will profoundly and
systemically affect human life and society in many different ways. We are living in momentous times.
For example, he enumerates the development
of autonomous vehicles (including drones), 3D printing, advanced robotics, the
production and use of nanomaterials, the digital transformation of human life,
implantable technologies, holograms, the internet of things, and advances and
breakthroughs in the world of genetics.[4] I touched on some of these things in the
previous chapter. What was once just
science fiction is now becoming daily reality before our eyes! Any observer would agree that these changes –
and the rate at which they continue to occur – have been truly astonishing and
breathtaking. However, we are yet to see
and experience the full effects of these changes in daily life.
Along with an increase in digitisation
(see below), the use of artificial intelligence (AI) was accelerated by the
pandemic (whether domestically with Alexa, industrially in the development of
robots, medically in the use of neural interfaces implanted in the brain, or
militarily in drone swarms). We are also
now seeing the development of contactless robotic and drone delivery, the
development of quantum computing, digital AI assistants, and the widening use
of platforms such as DeepSeek and Chat GPT.[5] Schwab and Malleret believe that the
potential of AI will radically affect every area of human life. Perhaps the most obvious example is in the
area of employment, where many jobs that can be done more efficiently using
robotic machines will be lost to human beings.
We are already well familiar with this in the automotive industry.
However, these developments in the area of
technology also bring with them a downside.
Schwab and Malleret underline the simple truth that gains that
have been made in the area of technology will not be put aside. We have developed the technology needed for
mass surveillance to monitor people’s movements, and we are developing
technology that can even anticipate people’s behaviour. The open use of mass surveillance in China is
a clear example. During the pandemic,
apps were developed which can track people’s movements and trace to whom they
have been near physically.
Furthermore, through our incessant use of
social media and through the increasing use of cookies on our pc and gadgets,
those who control the social media giants have become familiar with our
personal habits; our photographs; they know our likes and dislikes, our
feelings and the comments we have made; they know who our friends are, and the
people we relate to; and they know where we live, where we go, what we do, and
what sites we interact with, etc. Almost a continuous record of our daily life,
in fact. For the sake of our
online social interactions, we have willingly given up our personal privacy. All this personal data has been harvested,
and it is now being fed into AI to further increase its development, its
knowledge base, and its understanding of human nature and interactions, etc.
Experience during the Covid-19 pandemic showed
that both the mainstream media and the leading social media platforms became
willing tools in the propagation of official narratives. The suppression of free expression, by
censoring out views which ran counter to officially promoted narratives,
together with the related phenomenon of ‘cancel culture,’ became the new
normal.
The fact that knowledge is power means
that gains in technological development will not be put aside, since there is
no incentive to do this. In fact, since
governments like to control their population, things invariably go in the
opposite direction. So these gains will
be used, and further gains and developments will be made. Schwab and Malleret therefore believe that
surveillance will increase in the post-pandemic period. The potential in all this for moving
towards a dystopian society is clear.
The weakening (if not the removal altogether) of the concept of personal
privacy, through constant data harvesting and its use, and the increasing
surveillance of society, have greatly empowered the media and governments
against the individual citizen. So the
potential to move in a sinister direction towards totalitarianism is there, and
in this regard Schwab and Malleret fear that the genie may already be out of
the bottle!
2. The
introduction of digital identity and digital currency
As I said above, during the Covid-19
pandemic there was a massive acceleration of digitisation worldwide in the
lives of billions of people. We were
forced unexpectedly into upgrading our digital skills and learning new ones for
use in everyday life, be it for shopping or banking online, doing school
lessons online, consulting our doctor online, or using Zoom for work meetings
or simply chatting with friends, and so on.
This new dependence was forced into being by extended and repeated
lockdowns, as many of us can testify.
Schwab and Malleret therefore believe that
there can be no return to what was considered the pre-pandemic ‘digital normal.’ Learning to adapt to the increased use of
digital resources in almost every walk of life, will demand flexibility and the
need to find a new balance between what worked before the pandemic and the
different ways some things are already being done since then. Our digital life will become more and more
linked up with our physical life (as in the examples cited in the previous
paragraph).
People who expect to simply revert of
their ‘old ways’ will increasingly find themselves left behind, whereas those
who are willing to adapt to the digital transformation of daily life will
thrive and go forward. The simple
truth is that we now live in an online world, and we must therefore become
willing to digitise. We will
need to learn to use new digital resources, and to develop both an offline
presence and an online presence. Digital
life and ‘e-everything’ will increasingly become the ‘new normal’ for
everyone. And, of course, this is and
will be related in many ways to the increasing and pervasive use of AI which is
now taking place, as I said above.
However, there are two areas in particular
in which the development of digitisation will affect our daily life in more significant
ways.
Firstly, central banks in many different
countries are planning to develop a digital form of their respective national
currency within the next few years (so-called CBDCs). Not only will this help to combat fraud and
money laundering, it is also intended to disempower and therefore nullify the
growth and use of other independent digital crypto-currencies such as Bitcoin,
thereby keeping ultimate financial power within central banks around the world.[6]
This will also mean that physical cash is
then phased out, and our dependency on it will come to an end. So, in our future cashless society, all
financial transactions and payments will become digital. China has already developed a digital yuan
and is experimenting with it in some major cities, in order to refine its
use. The important point that we all
need to grasp is that moving to a cashless society is crossing a rubicon. It means that we will no longer have
physical access to or own our own money. Given the proclivity of human nature to evil,
greed and manipulation, one wonders just how long it will then take for central
banks to start charging negative interest rates, or for governments to abuse
this system in order to coerce their population into submission to particular
expectations or statutes, by limiting or denying access to use of digital
accounts (and therefore access to one’s own personal financial assets to buy
daily necessities or to engage in business) until such submission is forthcoming. Many people fear that it will not be long
before such sinister moves will begin to appear, and in fact there have already
been some well-publicized cases of people being debanked when they ran counter
to official narratives!
Secondly, and furthermore, Schwab and Malleret make the point that the development and use of digital currency would also demand the parallel development of digital identity as proof of personal identity. And this is exactly what we are seeing. In fact, the development and implementation of digital ID is the crucial foundation stone of the digitised 'brave new world' which is envisaged by globalists. Without the pervasive use of digital ID in all areas of human life, it cannot emerge.
Through the merging
of different areas of technology, protagonists of the NWO are aiming to develop
a unique personal digital identity for every person. This digital ID will contain a person’s
personal data, their bank account details and financial records, their medical
record, and their vaccination history.
There are moves by some to develop this in such a way that it can be
lodged securely just under the surface of a person’s skin. Using this digital ID, a person would have
access to and be able to use their financial assets, and it could also be used
as proof of identity and therefore for travel, for access to healthcare
worldwide, as an entrance pass to events, etc.[7]
So ultimately, a person would be able to
access their finances only by using their unique personal digital ID. In chapter 21, I discuss this further in the
context of the introduction of the mark of the Beast during the Great
Tribulation (Rev. 13:8).
3. Environmental
sustainability and climate change
It is clear to everyone that we live in a
finite world which has finite resources.
So, as the world population continues to increase, if we are to live on
this planet without exhausting its natural resources, then we must learn to use
those resources in a way that is sustainable.
Schwab and Malleret emphasise that this implies that we need to change
our underlying socio-economic model and our consumption habits, and to be willing
to put limits on ourselves as to how we use resources. As they put it, we need to re-think our
relationship with the environment.
It is when we come to environmental
concerns that we see the clearest example of the way globalists are trying to
use an issue to unify the global community, in order to act together in a
coordinated way. This screams at us
through the media almost every day that passes.
Whether from the standpoint of political expediency or longer-term
economic policy, whether out of concern of care for the environment and
wildlife, whether from a New Age ‘spiritual’ perspective of nurturing Mother
Earth so as to solicit her longer-term care for us in response, or whether from
a Christian viewpoint of caring responsibly for God’s creation as stewards of
what we have been given, many people are concerned that the global community
should respond to the issue of environmental sustainability in a coordinated
way. The widespread and uncontrolled
dumping of huge amounts of plastic waste into the world’s oceans, and the
damage this has wreaked everywhere to marine environments, is clearly a case in
point.[8]
In terms of climate change and the related
issue of the potential collapse of ecosystems, the global trumpet call has been
going out often and regularly for a long time now, loud and clear, and by many
activists and world leaders. We cannot
afford to wait any longer in terms of enacting sustainable environmental
policies. We are all too familiar with
the reports and images we see repeatedly on our TV screens, and we ignore the
effects of global warming to our peril.
They are already upon us. If
possible, the average rise in the earth’s temperature must be limited to 1.5º
C, by reducing our carbon emissions and air pollution, by reducing our use of
fossil fuels and instead using alternative energy sources, and by reducing our
carbon footprint down to neutral or even negative.
Otherwise, collectively as a global
community, we will all inevitably suffer the destructive consequences: more
extreme and violent weather phenomena; more extreme heatwaves, drought and
wildfires; more destruction of homes and other structures; more polar melting,
and therefore more raising of sea-levels and the consequent erosion of
coastlines; more flooding of low-lying areas; more loss of wildlife and their
habitats; mass human migration away from the world’s hottest and worst affected
places (and therefore mass immigration elsewhere), and so on.
Along with many others, Schwab and
Malleret believe that we must seize the moment to redesign our economies in
terms of greater sustainability for the longer-term good of our societies. In a word, and to use the present globalist
mantra, we must ‘build back better.’ We
are already seeing governments making investments and giving recovery loans to
businesses and industry contingent upon their willingness to make green
commitments, in terms of using cleaner energy and reducing their carbon
footprint to zero, and so on. These kind
of ‘green new deals’ will become the new normal even in the shorter term.[9]
Therefore, it is expected that there will
need to be big changes in the behaviour and habits of consumers. We must aim to live with less self-interest
and instead aim to maximise the common good of all humanity. So we are being told that we will work more
from home, and commute less. We will use
our car less, and we will walk more or use a bicycle instead. We will phase out cars which use petrol and
diesel fuel, and we will use electric cars instead. We will consume fewer dairy products and less
red meat. And, although after the
pandemic restrictions were eased there was a surge in the number of people
wanting to go abroad for holidays, yet in the longer term we will travel less
by air, and instead we will take our vacations in our own country.
4.
The journey towards
global governance
Schwab and Malleret believe that the model
of the hyper-globalisation[10] of our
interconnected and interdependent world, which has been followed in recent
decades, is now redundant. It has given
rise to too much reactionary localised nationalism and protectionism, of which
the UK’s Brexit and President Trump’s protectionist economic policies have
arguably been the most significant examples.
These were clearly and openly counter-productive to the globalist
agenda.
So, if the globalist agenda is to succeed,
Schwab and Malleret suggest that the middle ground of geopolitical global
regionalism should be pursued instead.
Put very simply, in this model the world would eventually be ‘divided
up,’ as it were, into several multi-nation free trade areas or regions, of
which the EU, ASEAN, MERCOSUR, and the North American FTA provide good present
examples. This would lead to greater
regional self-sufficiency, and it would hopefully bring about a more inclusive
and equitable globalisation.
Interestingly, this is very similar to the prototype model of the world
being made up of ten interdependent politico-economic regions suggested in 1974
by the Club of Rome. This is referred to
in more detail in chapter 21, and the reader can see this suggestive model
illustrated on a world map by accessing the link provided in the relevant
footnote in that chapter. However, the
pursuit of such a model of geopolitical global regionalism would imply the need
to also develop the effective global governance of it, otherwise it too would
not succeed.
Furthermore, and humanly speaking, the
biggest problems which we face are global ones which affect us all. These problems need coordinated and
interdependent transnational global responses, rather than the kind of
fragmentary national responses we have seen until now. Such fragmentary responses are inadequate and
do not ultimately solve any global issue.
This was the issue underlying the call to develop global governance,
which was made by both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, two ex-Prime Ministers of
the UK, when the Covid-19 pandemic was growing and spreading. At the present time, global bodies such as
the World Health Organisation (WHO) remain essentially toothless, underfunded
or simply deferential to the donors they are dependent upon, and therefore they
are effectively powerless to address global problems. In order for a coordinated and effective
global response to be possible to any given global issue, for the common good
of everybody, then willing international cooperation under global
authority must be developed, and submission to such cooperation must therefore
be legislated for by individual nation states. Hence the mantra: global solutions for global
problems through global governance.[11]
Therefore, Schwab and Malleret argue that
the present model of the world being made up of independent nation states is
inadequate. In order to effectively
address and solve the world’s global problems, independent nation states need
to be willing to act against the grain of their own short-sighted self-interest
and to willingly submit themselves to transnational global governance (through
the suggested model of global regionalism).
To do this, they would at some point have to become willing to cede
their national sovereignty to such wider regional and global authorities. An example of such regionalism, and
submission to it through the willing surrender of national sovereignty, has
already been developed in the EU. Member
states are legally required to submit to EU laws which in every case take
precedence over their own national laws on any given issue.
And hence we arrive at the concept of
global governance, and willing submission to this for the common good through
the ceding of national sovereignty. This
is the globalists’ route to a one-world government via a model of global
regionalism, justified humanistically by the need to adequately address the
global problems that affect us all. From
both a political and economic point of view, it is a model of worldwide
socialism, of course.
The ongoing globalist agenda therefore
seeks to remove the concept of nationalism and to weaken (and eventually
remove) the sovereignty (and even the borders) of nation states, and to replace
these with the concept of being citizens of a wider global community in which everyone
can participate equitably. The
cultivation of a multicultural global mindset among the younger generation is
presently being used to help to move the world towards this. We are to become pliable ‘world citizens’ in
a global village.
However, as we have seen in the
development of the EU, when the laws of a political empire supersede those of
nation states within it, then citizens of these nation states become powerless
not only to determine their own future, but also to counter the overwhelming
power of the central authorities of that empire. The ceding of national sovereignty simply
means that power to determine one’s destiny is no longer in one’s own
hands. We become servants of the vision
and policies of a supranational political elite, with little or no control over
the longer-term political, economic and social consequences that these have for
our own life.
Towards the emergence of the end-times
one-world system
The rise and establishment of new
political orders and empires always takes place over many years. They do not suddenly appear overnight or out
of nowhere. If we trace the overt rise
of the NWO back to 1920 with the establishment of the League of Nations after
WW1 – and we can certainly trace its conceptual and philosophical development
back even further behind the scenes from many different sources (especially in
Marxism) – then we are already just over a century into its rise. However, its growth and crystallisation into
an overt, visible and global form will still take time yet.
So the NWO is not something that will
arise in the future, it is already here. Make no mistake about it. Anyone who doubts this fact, should think
again. Believers who keep an eye
regularly on news reports know that Christian morals and values, the concept of
family, patriotism, the right to worship, the right to believe in and proclaim
biblical truth, and so on, have already been under attack for decades from many
different directions. So yes, the NWO is
already here. However, it has not yet
reached its fully fledged overt form. It
will continue to emerge and grow in the coming years.
Therefore, I am certainly not saying that
the NWO will emerge and take shape in its ultimate form in the aftermath of the
Covid-19 pandemic. But I am saying that
globalists are going to direct and manage the systemic macro-level changes that
will take place on a worldwide scale consequent to the pandemic – the so-called
Great Reset – and they will do this in such a way that the NWO takes further
major steps forward towards the realisation of its longer-term aims and goals.
Of course, as believers we know the end
from the beginning: we know that the ultimate prophetic form that the NWO will
take, will be the one-world system over which Antichrist will reign and rule
after he arises, the so-called ‘ten-toed kingdom’ (see chapter 21). So the developments and changes outlined
above of which we are even now aware, and which are planned to take place in
the world during the coming years, and other further changes of which we are
not yet aware, will all build and fit together to channel humankind more and
more into the emergence of this one-world system. The overt establishment of this humanistic
worldwide system is the goal of the globalists, but it is also revealed in the
prophetic scriptures of the word of God as the end-times worldwide system which
will ultimately be headed up by Antichrist.
This is the end-times trap which Jesus referred to which will come upon
the whole world, and from which, after the rapture, people will not be able to
escape. It is even now encroaching upon
us (Luke 21:34-36). The
foundations and the basic structure and functioning of this one-world system
will all have been put into place before Antichrist arises after the rapture. He will arise to take over and head up this
one-world system.
Furthermore, the twin principles of good
and evil, the fruit of the fall of humankind into sin and spiritual death, are
the two inseparable sides of the coin of human life. They are common to the life experience of all
people and of political movements, because they are deeply ingrained within the
roots of human nature. It will be no
different with the end-times NWO.
People, and especially believers, should not be deceived by the
globalists’ desire to address and solve the global problems of human life and
existence for the common good of all people, laudable though this might seem. In the woop and warf of human life, such
desires can never be separated out from the self-centred craving for material
gain; the self-ambition, position seeking and corruption; and the
authoritarianism and ungodly exercise of power over other people, which are all
inevitably at the heart of such movements.
Any humanistic apparent good brought about by the NWO will be
accompanied, and ultimately overcome, by evil.
As I also say in chapter 19, the twentieth century in particular was replete with examples of political movements whose tenets and beliefs were grounded in godless humanism. They proclaimed hope and solutions to human problems, but they ultimately led untold millions of human beings into an abyss of darkness, ruin and despair. Similarly, the NWO’s hopes of solving the world’s global problems and crises through building our world on apparent human wisdom, but without reference to the living God and without anchoring ourselves in Christ, are vain. Ultimately, they will only lead humanity on into further problems and crises. In fact, according to the word of God, they will lead ultimately into the reign of Antichrist. The only true hope for humankind lies in relating rightly to God through Jesus Christ, and by learning to live by the principles of his kingdom. Indeed, this is what the future millennial reign on earth of Christ will prove: only then will there be the true peace, equity and security that all people search for in life (see chapter 24).
[2] Klaus Schwab is the Founder of the
World Economic Forum which organises the annual meeting of leading globalists
in Davos, Switzerland.
[3] Schwab, K. and Malleret, T., Covid-19:
The Great Reset, Forum Publishing: Switzerland, 2020, e-version.
[4] Schwab, K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution,
Chapter 2, Portfolio Penguin: UK, 2017, pp.14-27.
[5] The announcement by President
Trump of USA in January 2025 that his government would commit $500 billion to
build a large AI data infrastructure in the USA (the so-called Stargate
Initiative), plus the commitments of some other western governments to ‘unleash
AI and mainline it into the nation’s veins’ (as Keir Starmer of UK put it),
together with the simultaneous emergence of China’s advanced DeepSeek AI
platform, has plunged the world into what many are calling an AI ‘arms
race.’ This will accelerate the further
development of this already very fast-moving area of technology, and can only lead
to the increasing domination and control of AI over human life worldwide. See www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-sets-out-blueprint-to-turbocharge-ai, https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20250207-uae-to-invest-up-to-%E2%82%AC50-billion-in-massive-ai-data-centre-in-france, and https://www.forbes.com/sites/garthfriesen/2025/01/23/trumps-ai-push-understanding-the-500-billion-stargate-initiative/, each accessed on 07.02.2025.
[6] See the relevant footnote in
chapter 21 regarding the alternative of ‘tokenised’ digital currencies.
[7] It was reported in December 2025
that the WHO had recently outlined its proposal for an interoperable global
digital identity infrastructure that permanently tracks every individual’s
vaccination record from birth. It would
track a person’s socioeconomic data such as household income, ethnicity and
religion. It would deploy artificial
intelligence for identifying and targeting the “unreached” (i.e. those whose
vaccination record is not up-to-date) and combating “misinformation” (i.e.
anything that conflicts with official narratives). It would allow governments to use people’s vaccination
records as prerequisites for education, travel and other services. See https://rumble.com/v72xxsg-blueprint-who-and-gates-make-shocking-admission-on-digital-id-daily-pulse-e.html, accessed 16.12.2025. See also the relevant footnote references in
chapter 21.
[8] Readers can peruse the UN’s
planned response towards the need for coordinated global environmental
sustainability in “Agenda 21” which was endorsed by the word’s governments at
the International Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro in 1992, available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21 (accessed 26.01.2022), and also
their more recent 17 goals for sustainable development contained in their 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development which was adopted in 2015 by all UN member
states, available at https://sdgs.un.org/goals (accessed 26.01.2022).
[9] The concept of an ESG score or
report is already being widely implemented.
This is the measure of a business company’s attractiveness to both
customers and investors. It is compiled
from data concerning its collective consciousness towards, and therefore its
response to environmental issues (E); its care for and treatment of its
workers, and its relationships with the wider social community (S), and various
specific factors concerning its corporate governance (G).
However, some people would consider
ESG rating to be a form of corporate social credit score, since, to attract
custom or investment from ‘socially responsible’ people, the company is
effectively coerced into implementing specific factors and values, in order to
attract their custom or investment, and/or to avoid their censure.
‘Socially responsible’ investors
are defined as people who consider it important for such values and concerns to
be addressed and implemented by the company as a basis or condition for their
investment, rather than simply focusing on the potential for financial
profit. Similarly, ‘socially
responsible’ customers are defined as people who choose not to do business with
a company which does not have a reasonably good ESG score, or which, for them,
fails on any given value or concern.
The recent open censure in the
media of some companies on the grounds of their preferred area for charitable
giving, or their defence of or lobbying for particular conservative values, has
become a contentious issue. It
demonstrates just how much influence or even control can be wielded over companies
by potential investors or customers (or indeed by any other stakeholder), and
the disastrous effects that negative exposure in the media can have on a
company’s livelihood.
The concept of an ESG score is
permeated by the kind of values discussed by Schwab and Malleret, many of which
reflect a significant shift in the direction of the implementation of globalist
values.
[10] ‘Hyper-globalisation’ refers to
the dramatic change in the size, scope and speed of globalisation that began in
the late 1990s and continued into the twenty-first century. It covers all three dimensions of economic
globalisation, cultural globalisation, and political globalisation. Its impact has created deep tension and
conflict between the working of nation states and the free flow through open
borders of economic globalisation. Its
impracticability has been clearly revealed, for example, through the principle
of ‘freedom of movement’ which is enshrined within the EU’s single market. This was one of several major areas of
tension between the UK and the EU which eventually led to Brexit.
[11] In the light of
the piecemeal and uncoordinated response to the Covid-19 pandemic, negotiations
were opened to develop an international pandemic treaty (together with
complementary amendments to existing International Health Regulations). This treaty, which would be housed under the
constitution of the WHO, reflects an agreement for global multilateral
cooperation to fight pandemics and PHEICs.
The text of the treaty was agreed upon in May 2025, but further
discussions are still needed on the PABS annex.
So final ratification of the treaty by WHO member nations is not
expected until after May 2026. See https://www.consilium.europa.eu, accessed
12.05.2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment