Copyright
© 2024 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 recent 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, are consciously and deliberately managing 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) has also been 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, and the widening use of
Chat GPT. 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 physically near.
Furthermore,
through our incessant use of social media and through the increasing use of
cookies on our pc, 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, and
what we do. 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.
Experience
during the Covid-19 pandemic has also shown that both the mainstream media and
the leading social media platforms have become willing tools in the propagation
of official narratives. The suppression
of free expression, by censoring out views which run counter to officially
promoted narratives, together with the related phenomenon of ‘cancel culture,’
has become 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 has been a massive
acceleration of digitisation worldwide in the lives of billions of people. We have been 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 has been
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 will
be done afterwards. 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
will also be 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 currencies
such as Bitcoin, thereby keeping ultimate financial power within central banks
around the world.
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…
Secondly, and furthermore, Schwab
and Malleret make the point that the development and use of digital currency
would presumably also demand the parallel development of digital identity as
proof of personal identity. And this is
exactly what we are seeing. 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.[5] 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.[6]
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, as we slowly emerge from
the pandemic, 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.[7]
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 eat less red meat. And, although after the pandemic restrictions
are eased there may well be 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[8]
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 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.[9]
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 and Executive Chairman 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] See the relevant
footnote references in chapter 21.
[6] 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).
[7] 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.
[8]
‘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.
[9] In the light of
the piecemeal and uncoordinated response to the Covid-19 pandemic, negotiations
have been opened in recent months 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 global multilateral cooperation to fight
global health threats, and it will give the WHO the authority it needs to act. The aim is for the treaty to be adopted
internationally in 2024. See https://www.consilium.europa.eu, accessed
12.05.2022. As well as ensuring
equitable worldwide access to vaccines, and overseeing the global coordination
of vaccine stockpiling, many observers believe that, through this treaty, the
WHO will be invested with the power to decide what constitutes a pandemic; what
quarantine measures are needed on a global scale; to decide who develops the
new treatments and whether these treatments are considered to be safe; the
authority to determine who gets locked down; and to decide over vaccine mandates
for each country. This treaty, housed
within the WHO constitution, would supersede the sovereignty of nation states,
and it would therefore open the way into the exercise of global governance.
No comments:
Post a Comment