Larry Alex Taunton cuts through the World Economic Forum’s noble slogans to explain the history of this sinister organization and the anti-human ideas driving it. He went undercover at the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, as a kind of spy to mingle with the attendees, and explains how their thinking has been infected by the ludicrous need to remove 6 billion people from the earth, “in a humane way” and how only a one world government with a “nice dictatorship” can achieve this end.
At their core, the World Economic Forum is about population control. They want to reduce the global population and I will demonstrate that in this particular podcast, but that’s the part they do say out loud, but they say it amidst a lot of other things that are very feel good and it’s easy to lose that message amidst all the other things that they put out to kind of disguise it.
They use the word “Sustainability“. That is a word you should be very wary of. Anytime you hear sustainability, economic sustainability, development, sustainability, governmental sustainability, agricultural sustainability, nothing good follows on the backside of that. The word sustainability always turns out to be fundamentally anti-human and that is because the World Economic Forum is anti-human. Atheism, take into its logical conclusions, is anti-human. It’s satanic.
This year’s World Economic Forum, there were more than 50 heads of state there—50 heads of state—more than 115 billionaires and more than 600 CEOs of major corporations. If you count me, 601, but the point being that major multi-billion dollar corporations that are involved in this, and then there are peons like me who attended which are another 2700 individuals, and so I decided I needed to be there. I wanted to mingle among the 2700 others. I wanted to see what those people are about. Who are they?
And my strategy was this. I think it’s between 25 to 55 thousand dollars to attend the plenary sessions. I don’t have that. I can’t go to that. Even if I did, I wouldn’t pay it. As I said, I can watch that online.
No, what I wanted to do was to just mingle among the attendees, and so I went to a coffee shop that had about three tables, and exactly what I thought was going to happen, happened, and that is between the sessions, people pour out, and they’re looking for a bite to eat and a cup coffee, and so 50 people pile into this place. No where to sit except the three tables. I’m sitting on table deliberately by myself and not moving. I am not moving for anybody. So people began asking, “Hey, can I sit at your table?” And I said, “Yeah, sure, sit down”.
By the way, attendees of the World Economic Forum, they don’t say the W E F or even the World Economic Forum. They say the “WEF” (like Weff). So I just pretended to be a WEFFER. I was just a WEFer, and the result was people would talk about themselves, and they couldn’t wait to tell me how important they were. Why they were there and with what important personage they were associated.
“I’m the translator for the president of X. I am the bodyguard for Y. I am the chief administrator for thus and such company. I’m CEO of X. I am here as a presenter on Y.”
They love to tell you that, and because they just assume that I’m a WEFer like everybody else, they talk quite openly, and initially they begin by using all the language of the WEF, which is, oh, I’d say, you know, “What brings you here?” “Oh, well, I’m trying to find unity in a fragmented world,” and “We’re trying to improve the world,” and “We’re trying to make things better for humanity,” and then I would push back just slightly because I don’t want to give myself away. I say, “Yeah, but what do you think about the World Economic Forum’s overall goal of reducing the global population?” (…by roughly six billion people…) “Well, we need to do it… we’re moving beyond…,” and you know what the word is?… “sustainability.”
We should take a second here. You know what I want to pull up right now so that people will know that I am not joking. Let’s pull up Dr. Dennis Meadows.
Dennis Meadows, like Bill Gates, he is a World Economic Forum agenda contributor. That’s his title. World Economic Forum agenda contributor. He’s the guy who wrote one of the very influential books that led to kind of the mission of the World Economic Forum.
It’s a book called Limits to Growth—30 million copies—and you’re going, “Oh, wow, that’s like DaVinci Code era”, but it wasn’t normal people; that is to say: it wasn’t your average person who was buying this book. Frankly, I don’t think it sold 30 million copies, that’s the number they give; I think it was distributed to that many people, which is a different thing… but anyway, Dennis Meadows, one of four authors of this book. He’s an MIT PhD University of New Hampshire, I think, systems analyst—not really a scientist, but listen to what this guy says here:
We are so far. So far, globally, we are so far above the population and the consumption levels, which can be supported by this plan that I know in one way or another, it’s going to come back down. So I don’t hope to avoid that.I hope that it can occur in a civil way, and I mean, civil in a special way, peaceful.
So Dennis Meadows is here saying, “Yeah, we need to reduce the global population by billions, but hey, I really hope this can be done in a civil way, in a peaceful way.” It’s astonishing the way these people talk.
Peace doesn’t mean that everybody’s happy, but it means that conflict isn’t solved through violence, through force, but rather, in other ways, and so that’s what I hope for, and that we can, I mean, the planet can support something like a billion people, maybe two billion, depending on how much material consumption you want to have.
If you want more liberty and more consumption, you have to have fewer people and conversely, you can have more people. I mean, we could even have eight or nine billion, probably, if we have a very strong dictatorship, which is smart. Unfortunately, you never have smart dictatorships. They’re always stupid. So, but if you had a smart dictatorship and a low standard living, you can have it, but we want to have freedom and we want to have a high sense. So, we’re going to have a billion people, and we’re now at seven, so, we have to get back down. I hope that this can be slow, relatively slow, and that it can be done in a way, which is relatively equal. So that people share the experience and they don’t have a few rich for everybody else to deal with it. So, those are my hopes. Pretty pessimistic hopes, you know, but that’s what lies ahead.
Share the experience. Like going to Disney. It’s astonishing.
So, here he says, Dennis Meadows comes off as just your regular normal guy who lives next door, who you discover wants to rid the planet of seven billion people. That interview appears to be about a year old, and we have eclipsed the eight billion mark on the planet, and yet there are countries in the world that are facing population implosion: Japan… the United States is facing… Western Europe—the whole of Western Europe—the birth rates are not able to keep up with the death rates.
In other words, the replacements aren’t keeping up, but here’s a guy who says, “Gosh, I sure hope that we can do it in a sustainable way,” and then you hear the absolute contempt for democracy for the will of the people. This is the way these people think. They do not believe that you deserve a voice in this.
Did you hear him voice his preference for dictatorship? “Smart” dictatorship, but it’s preferable. “It’s what we need.” This, you have a glimpse right there, now just so you know, again, this isn’t, I mean, they are lunatic fringe in the sense that this is nuts, but this isn’t the lunatic fringe in terms of its influence.
Dennis Meadows has had extraordinary influence on the thinking of global elitists, and let’s call them elitists. We mean people who think they’re better than you. To call them elites is kind of a compliment. They don’t deserve that. These smug bastards, you need to call them out for what they are. They are elitists.
I said to you early on in this show. I was telling you that something was happening between roughly 65 and 75 that had to do with population. That is a kind of a global hysteria over population, and it began with “The Population Bomb” Paul R. Ehrlich’s book in 1968. Then “The Predicament of Mankind“, which came in 1970. Then in 1972 was Dennis Meadows book, co authored with three others called Limits to Growth.
To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth is obvious but too much neglected or denied.
The Kissinger Report calls for massive depopulation of 3rd world.
NSSM 200 “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests. Declassified Dec, 1980 (01) National Security Study Memorandum | PDF(02)Archive.org Full text of “NSSM 200 by Henry A. Kissinger Report 1974 – Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests – COLLECTION”
Compiled by America’s Nuclear Weapons Guru, Dr Henry Kissinger – the US National Security advisor under Richard Nixon, overseeing CIA, FBI, and Foreign Policy.
Kissinger was tasked with bringing Nazi scientists – not for justice for the Nuremberg trials – but to America to serve in high-level military and industrial positions. (Project PAPERCLIP)
Yeah, it’s the infamous Kissinger report, and in the Kissinger report. This is 1972. This one is the most naked of them all, and it is because it was published as a private memo to the president of the United States. The only reason we see it now is because the Freedom of Information Act brought it out, and now we see it, and Kissinger is writing to the president of the United States saying we have a global population problem and his recommendations are kind of startlingly Nazi.
His recommendations were sterilization, mostly in the third world,
and a planned parenthood like global organization that reduced populations in the third world because he said the freedom in the United States is at stake.
“Our sustainability is at stake because these people are going to start crashing across our borders.”
Predictive Programming: A vaccine that will sterilize humanity Rumble | Twitter
All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class… The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.
Now we are seeing that right now, but that isn’t due to a population explosion. That’s due to the fact that we have Marxist regimes in South America that are destroying economies. I know because I’ve been there. I’ve been in several of them. Just in the last two years, three years maybe we have seen:
Brazil fell to Marxists via dubious means.
Venezuela fell to Marxists.
Peru has fallen to Marxists.
Chile has fallen to Marxists—stunningly the most stable democracy in South America has fallen to Marxist
Honduras. All of those countries have fallen.
Columbia is another one which is also fallen to Marxists.
They’re destroying economies and those people are fleeing.
You know what CNN said the reason was for these millions of people crossing our southern border? They said it was due to climate change. It’s complete nonsense. Complete nonsense. This is nothing to do with climate change. It has everything to do with the very policies that these people are trying to import into the United States that they’re pushing, but Kissinger was pushing this, “We have a population problem and we need to off a lot of people.”
You can read this report online. It’s easily downloadable. Before you say this is conspiracy theory, conspiracies are by definition private. None of this stuff is private. It is out in the open.
Bill Gates is giving lectures on it. Klaus Schwab is talking about it. The World Economic Forum is talking about it. Paul Ehrlich was talking about it. Henry Kissinger was talking about it…
… and guess who Henry Kissinger’s student was, at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government? Klaus Schwab.
Klaus Schwab—Klaus Schwab! So you begin to connect the dots. You see what’s going on.
So all of this hysteria, Nixon, after reading the Kissinger report, created—I forgot the name of it—it was like the Office of Population Sustainability or something like that — it’s still in existence. It’s a government office that still exists. It was created by Nixon or with Nixon’s recommendation and then he fell into water gate and all that stuff. Then it became Gerald Ford who signed off on Kissinger’s recommendations.
The Office of Population Affairs operates under the umbrella of the Department of Health & Human Services, and it might as well be called “The Office of Population Control” because almost everything on the website is about controlling or reducing the size of the population. On the site you can find information and resources about abortion, female sterilization, male sterilization and a vast array of contraceptive choices.
also found: Scientists and Environmentalists for Population Stabilization
Our mission is to improve understanding within the U.S. scientific, educational and environmental communities of the fact of overpopulation and its social, economic and environmental consequences at both national and global levels. We advocate for U.S. population stabilization followed by its gradual reduction to a sustainable level by humane, non-coercive means.
(Wow, just found an Australian one whilst looking for the US office)
Let me give you a clear picture of what was happening in historical context at the time of the creation of the World Economic Forum.
The World Economic Forum itself was founded in 1971. Why? Why was it founded? What was going on at that time? I would say that between about a 10-year period, between about 65 and 75, there was an obsession with the global population. “The population was getting out of control.”
One of the contributors to that was a massive bestseller by Paul Ehrlich, an 1968, called The Population Bomb. Ehrlich has been, he’s still alive and he’s still pushing this crap. He has been demonstrated to be wrong over the decades many times. In fact, he predicted that within the next decade of the publication of that book, so by 1978, that we would see millions of people die from famine. He might have even said billions. He would say that a huge chunk of the global population would die as a result of famine because we had gone beyond—remember the magic word—Sustainability.
…proposed “poisoning drinking water & food supplies to limit human multiplication“ “curb population growth” Nov 25, 1969, NY Times
“To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth is obvious but too much neglected or denied”.2013
“’smog disasters’ in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles” and “By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth’s population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people”. 1969
“Humanely shrink the global population” “Until and unless we can humanely begin to shrink the global population, following the lead of over-consuming and over-populated European nations, the future seems grim.” 2009
VIDEO (2min) – Paul Ehrlich – Lessons for handling the Population Bomb – 2011
VIDEO (20min) – Paul Ehrlich and the Anti-Human Agenda of the Elites – 2023
This ideology, this concern over population control, had infected the thinking of academic elites. So they were buying into this in a big way, and The Club of Rome comes along. This is a group that was established at Rome, which oddly now is based in Zurich. So they should be called the club of Zurich, but anyway, but they were originally founded in Rome and it was a group of about 25 people, the goal of it becoming about 60 people, that I think are north of 100 members now, but they’re mostly individuals who are think-tankish types. They’re academics, they’re business men, they are influential people who gather together for the purpose of bettering mankind. That’s their stated goal, the Club of Rome.
So this is a think tank, a vastly influential think tank, and they produce a little paper, you can read it, you can find it online. I think I downloaded it from Princeton University. It is a paper that they produced in 1970, that’s called The Predicament of Mankind, and I would say the most important part of the paper is about 34 pages long. It’s actually not particularly well written. You would think these think tanks would go and hire someone like me—a social scientist—a professional writer to improve upon the writing of these natural scientists who don’t write particularly well. It has actually has typographical errors in it. They don’t make it easy to read—maybe that’s by design, I don’t know—but The Predicament of Mankind was a proposal in which The Club of Rome was saying, “Look, we have a global crisis, and the global crisis is overpopulation, read what Paul Ehrlich said in The Population Bomb, we’re in trouble! What are we going to do?”
So they said, rather than doing what academics normally do and just producing a paper that’s full of theories and suggestions, let’s actually create an executive committee that acts on their recommendations of the think tank.
Here’s the problem: over population. They stated there were other problems as well, but at the root of them was overpopulation. The root of them all, sustainability, agriculturally, food supply, all this kind of stuff, a drain on resources, the destruction of the environment, all of this dealt with overpopulation, and by that I mean human overpopulation. They weren’t talking about exterminating the roach population.
It was the human population they wanted to reduce. So they said, we need to create basically, an executive arm and we’ll call it The World Forum.
Next year, Klaus Schwab, a German engineer, founded the what he called at the time, The World Forum that he would eventually change the name to the World Economic Forum.
(I cannot verify this statement that he mentioned in video, just found):
In 1971, Schwab founded the European Management Forum, which was renamed the WEF in 1987.
Here’s the official timeline put out by the World Economic forum:
The World Economic Forum at 50: A timeline of highlights from Davos and beyond
The World Economic Forum was created with the intention that it would act upon the think tanks’ recommendations. Now you have to think about this just a little bit. How arrogant must you be to think that it is your job to act on behalf of the whole of humanity without being elected to so much as ‘dog catcher’. These are not elected individuals. At the time of his founding, the World Economic Forum wasn’t particularly influential. Now it is.
I was at this year’s World Economic Forum meeting because I have learned from vast experience that there just simply is no substitute for being there. If you’ve attended any sporting event, soccer game, baseball game, doesn’t matter. You know that being there, there’s a lot you see in that you take in that you missed if you’re on television. When you’re there, you see an awful lot of stuff and some of the stuff you didn’t see you can go watch later because you recorded it on your TV.
The World Economic Forum is like that. More than 70% of the presentations—it’s a World Economic Forum annual meeting which takes place in Davos, Switzerland—it’s a series of presentations by experts in a variety of fields. Those fields might be artificial intelligence, which has become a major theme of the World Economic Forum, it might be agricultural sustainability, population sustainability. This year’s theme was, finding unity in a Fragmented World.
Davos Forum 2023: Cooperation in a fragmented world
It’s boring, actually. It’s meant to bore you. It’s meant to lull you to sleep, so you’re not paying attention to what they’re really about, and they are anti-human to their core.
Another term you should be very wary of is for the common good, and another one that they use is for the environment or for the sake of the planet. Those are all anti-human phrases. That is to say they are freighted with anti-human meaning, if you’ve ever seen the way they’re employed elsewhere.
Bill Gates is a World Economic Forum member, and he has a true believer, by the way, in all this stuff. You can find Bill Gates giving a TED talk on the need to reduce the global population.
Now, to hear these guys talk about population problems, is like listening to a baseball fan talk about batting averages. They never use words like, say, kill. They never say anything as nakedly as that.
Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve read Klaus Schwab’s books. This one published in 2016, The Fourth Industrial Revolution. This one, COVID-19 and the Great Reset, published in June 2020. Didn’t the pandemic begin in 2020? And this one right here, The Great Narrative published by Schwab in 2022.
Schwab never uses that phrase. In fact, if you were reading it, you would think this reads like a TV manual. Looks like a TV manual. I mean, it’s not exactly the most beautiful looking book. It’s self-published. It is published by the World Economic Forum themselves. Looks like you had this done at Kinko’s, and it reads about as interesting.
He’s very careful in the language he uses. The word they use repeatedly is sustainability. “We have moved beyond sustainability.” “The earth is exceeding its sustainability.” “Our population is not sustainable.” This is the way they talk. So people would begin to explain to me like they were explaining to an errant child why the global population needs to be reduced. These are all very real things.
What you end up with with these kind of people, the way I would summarize what the World Economic Forum is, is that the HOA from hell. Homeowners Association from hell. I was talking to a guy yesterday who was complaining about his homeowners association. If you know anything about homeowners association, it is a weird thing that I’ve observed in universities, I have observed in schools, public and private, and I observe in law practices, medical practices, and with HOA.
I don’t care if only 10% of your body, your business, or homeowners, or whatever it is, is made up of radical leftists. They’re going to end up running it, and my theory for that is this: It’s because conservatives by nature don’t want to tell other people what to do.
I have no interest in running an HOA. Zero. But it’s what happens with homeowners associations. They end up in charge.
These are individuals, both in my experience in HOAs, typically, and definitely with World Economic Forum, they are individuals who cannot bear the thought that someone somewhere is free. There’s someone somewhere their grass might be too high. They might be eating beef. They might be watching a program that isn’t approved by the ‘alphabet Mafia’. They might be thinking things and doing things that you didn’t approve of.
Now, the conservative mindset is to say, well, live and let live. You just stay in your lane and I’ll stay in mind. Fine. That was the conservative attitude, by the way, about homosexuality. What you’re doing in your home and in private, don’t care about, but now you bring it into the public space. Now you’re trying to force it on everyone else, and this is what the World Economic Forum is.
The World Economic Forum is the HOA from hell. They are the individuals—not elected. Now, it’s not to say that these 50 heads of state are not elected. Many of them are, but rather, they weren’t elected to be a part of a governing body that then issued policies that were then imposed on people without their approval, and that’s what’s happening.
So what you see happening with the farmers and the Netherlands, where they are being put out of business quite literally because cattle emissions. Same thing. You’re starting to hear those policies. There’s this creeping discussion in this direction.
Bill Gates keeps talking about it. He’s obsessed with it. Cow flatulence. “Cow farts are going to be the end of us all.”
I’m more concerned with the mouth farting that is coming from the World Economic Forum types, which is vomiting out hatred for humanity. I’m sick of it. That’s who these individuals are.
In 1991, ‘The First Global Revolution’ was published by the Club of Rome, and remember, the Club of Rome has ties with the World Economic Forum. They gave rise to the World Economic Forum. Now, I’ve read it. These are books I’ve read. I ordered ‘The First Global Revolution’, which hasn’t been published to my knowledge as an actual book. You can only order it as like loose leaf paper. So I ordered it off of Amazon, and I got it poured through the entire thing through a weekend making a careful note. You know, one of the phrases, like sustainability, that appears there? Social Justice—1991. It started creeping into the American conscience about the last decade, but they were already using it then.
The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.
All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.
That’s kind of my point about atheism, is that what you saw is academic discussions that were not happening in your coffee shop. They weren’t taking place in your church, or at the time in your public schools—maybe not even in your universities. I knew that stuff was going to creep down. It was going to trickle down into all of those spaces, and now it has.
And then, in 2010, on the heels of the recession of 2007-2008, and that period, a guy by the name of Richard Florida, began speaking of how that economic downturn was changing the culture, was changing the way people lived their lives, and he called it the great reset. He referred to the aftermath of that economic catastrophe—he called it the great reset, and Klaus Schwab lifted the phrase, and is used it for his own purposes.
Now, in The First Global Revolution, this is what it says, which is astonishing, and you have to bear in mind, when you hear this, you will know, this wasn’t intended for general audiences. This was intended again to be read, by other academics, by people who shared their world view, and they said, look, you know, we are evaluating where we’ve been since The Predicament of Mankind came out in 1970. Here we are 21 years later. It doesn’t feel like we’re making a lot of progress, and here’s our recommendation.
They say this, and I quote:
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, because they say, look, we have to have a common enemy. The only way we are going to unite humanity, is to get human beings to go along with our recommendations on population in every other area of human life. They’re talking about revamping, not just reducing the global population, but governments. You name it. Food supplies. They want to change it all.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like, would fit the bill.
It’s an incredible statement. They’re acknowledging right there that we are kind of fudging the numbers. We’re exaggerating the threats, and we’re doing it, to try to get people to dance to our tune, and then they say, the real enemy then is humanity itself. Let me repeat that. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like, would fit the bill. The real enemy then is humanity itself.
So I’ve been telling you all along that the world economic forum, and all the ideas that animate it, which come from, things like The Population Bomb, the Club of Rome, The Predicament of Mankind, The First Global Revolution, the Nixon report, all of this stuff, they’re fundamentally anti-human.
And by the way, you know what else happened in the 1970s which was fundamentally anti-human in this period of time? It’s about population control? Roe v. Wade, 1973, right back in the middle of the period that I’m talking about.
This is what they’re pushing, and this idea of uniting humanity around a fake or exaggerated global problem, it is Plato’s Noble Lie.
Come straight out of the republic. Plato’s Republic, where Plato says, or his characters, say, that we need a noble lie. “One that is good enough to fool even the rulers themselves, but if not them, then the population,” that people would believe it, and would unite behind it, it’s called the noble lie.
And behind it all is this idea that the global population needs to be reduced, that part they believe. They don’t believe the exaggeration over environmental concerns. They don’t believe that part. They do believe the global population needs to be reduced right away, and they are fundamentally, in addition to being anti-human, anti-democratic—they don’t think that you deserve a say.
They tell them to ignore the will of the people. In the same way, a lot of people are asking, “How is it that we’re seeing politicians in democratic countries, ignoring the will of their own constituents?”, utterly ignoring them like they don’t even matter? We are now seeing American politicians behave in a way we’ve never seen in our entire history, where you have a president of the United States in Joe Biden, who is so deeply corrupt, but who clearly, in spite of all the unity talk, ignores the will of the people.
They’re ignoring the will of the people, saying we will make you have electric cars. We’re going to get rid of your gas stoves. We’re going to give money to illegal immigrants. We’re going to allow people to vote who shouldn’t be voting. We’re going to impose upon you policies that we know you hate, but it is for your own good. This is World Economic Forum driven.
Joe Biden at the World Economic Forum, before it became president of the United States, he attended the World Economic Forum, and he said that they were on board with the laugh. John Kerry said that the Biden administration is, quote, “Devoted to the World Economic Forum agenda,” and I’ve already told you what that agenda is. That agenda is fundamentally anti-human. It is anti-Christian. It is atheistic to its core.
I want to leave you with this story. Years ago, I was reading the minutes of the Nuremberg trials, you know, the trials of the Nazi war criminals at the end of World War II, which took place in Nuremberg, Germany, and that led me to read the minutes of the interrogations.
The interrogations, of course, weren’t public, but there were American prosecutors who are interviewing these war criminals in taking depositions and this kind of thing, and anyway, there’s one exchange that I found very, very interesting, and it is with Rudolf Höss, not to be confused with the Rudolph Hess, who was a close intimate of Adolf Hitler and flew to Scotland. No, this was the camp commandant of Auschwitz.
Auschwitz, one of the many concentration camps I’ve been there, I’ve been there a couple of times, I think. In Poland, where roughly a million Jews were exterminated, and it’s a conversation at the same time, the interrogations are taking place with Höss, the camp commandant of Auschwitz, and Otto Moll.
Otto Moll was one of the guys who was responsible for the actual executions—overseeing the executions at Auschwitz, and both men in those interrogations see themselves as good guys.
(comparing them to Brave New World characters:)
“They’re the individuals who know the truth, but they keep everyone else kind of happy on Soma while they themselves make the hard choices for humanity, and they’re the ones who bear the burden of it all,” and that’s the way Rudolf Höss sounds, that’s the way Moll sounds. “It’s terrible having to kill these people. It had to be done.”
That’s the way the world economic forum sounds. That’s the way Dennis Meadows, when I hear that interview with Dennis Meadows, I think of Otto Moll. I think of Rudolf Höss and I go, “Oh wow, there are people like that still walking around on planet Earth.” Who say, “I hope it can be done humanely, peacefully, civility.”
You know it’s interesting about all these people? None of them are volunteering to off themselves. Bill Gates is an old guy. He’s in the late 60s, I think. Has he off’ed himself? I don’t think so. He’s still flying around in a private jet telling us all how we need to reduce our carbon footprint.
The carbon they want to reduce is you. You’re the carbon they want to reduce, and that’s why the world economic forum is at core fascists. I hear people say that it’s Marxist. It’s not Marxist. By definition, you cannot be a billionaire and a Marxist. You cannot.
They are fascists. They believe in the strict regimentation of the economy for war against you. That’s what ESG is. ESG is about the weaponizing of the economy against the consumer against populists. Which is just a way of saying “ordinary people”.
Using the power of Governance to change the world.
On the official website of the Prince of Wales, prince Charles commended Paul and Anne Ehrlich’s latest population study published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society on January 9, 2013, calling among other things for globally provided “back-up abortions” to avert overpopulation catastrophe.
“We do, in fact, have all the tools, assets and knowledge to avoid the collapse of which this report warns, but only if we act decisively now.” ~ Prince Charles, 2013
Archive.org Full text of “NSSM 200 by Henry A. Kissinger Report 1974 – Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests – COLLECTION”
Truth-seeker, ever-questioning, ever-learning, ever-researching, ever delving further and deeper, ever trying to 'figure it out'. This site is a legacy of sorts, a place to collect thoughts, notes, book summaries, & random points of interests.