Davos Man Seeks To Take Over The US
For the last few days I've been harping on the role of "Big Money" in the ongoing crisis in our constitutional order. Yesterday witnessed a remarkably brazen attempt by two prime exemplars of Big Money to muscle the rest of the country: Twitter and Facebook are currently attempting to conduct a nearly total blackout of information regarding the Biden Crime Family's dealings in Ukraine, with the obvious goal of foisting their choice of president on the rest of the country by keeping the country in the dark about this important story.
Also yesterday, commenter Tom S. offered a fascinating comment on the means by which Big Money hopes to take over the governance of the US and transform it into something quite different that the constitutional order we were born into. Tom didn't use that term, Big Money, but I think it communicates his thinking. Another term, and one that points to an organization that may well be behind this takeover attempt, is "Davos man."
In fact, Tom started his comment with a series of links to various articles. The first link is to an article at Breitbart that highlights the goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF), best known to the general public for its annual confab at Davos--thus the moniker "Davos Man." Since the goals of the WEF appear to dovetail quite closely with those of the Dem party, it works quite well for our purposes. It designates the collective of hyper wealthy individuals, organizations, and governing officials who control wealth--Big Money--who are on board with the WEF's plan to take over and transform the world.
Here is the beginning to the article at Breitbart. It describes the use that the WEF hopes to make of the Covid pandemic to force on the Western world a "Great Reset". Does that concept seem familiar, does it resonate with the use of Covid to shut down large parts of the US in an attempt to take control of the government and force Trump out? It should.
The coronavirus crisis presents an opportunity for a “new kind of capitalism” and “great reset” of global economies, politics, and societies, according to World Economic Forum (WEF) founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab.
In an article published Monday by the WEF, an impatient Schwab claims neo-liberalism is dead and with it traditional notions of economic capitalism.
In their place is a set of “Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics” the WEF says enables the world to progress under one set of overarching rules as drawn up by it, with “social justice” a key component of this brave new world.
Grandiose enough for you? We're clearly talking about a world government, operating under rules drawn up by Davos Man.
This restructure of the way we do business is the new model for the “great reset” Schwab argues, adding he foresees the coronavirus crisis as too good an opportunity not to “re-evaluate sacred cows of the pre-pandemic system.”
He outlines his argument by pointing to just how serious the epidemic has been to the way we live now: Schwab writes:
The only acceptable response to such a crisis is to pursue a “Great Reset” of our economies, politics, and societies.
Schwab believes that if the Chinese coronavirus crisis has shown us anything, it is “that governments, businesses, or civil-society groups acting alone cannot meet systemic global challenges.”
In their stead, the WEF says the world should adopt more socialistic policies, such as wealth taxes, additional regulations and massive Green New Deal-like government programs.
Who and what is the WEF? You can read about it at Wikipedia. What you'll notice immediately is that the WEF is an openly elitist organization that is seeking to transform the world over the heads of the subject populations. It hopes to do this by coopting "business, political, academic, and other leaders of society":
The World Economic Forum (WEF), based in Cologny, Geneva Canton, Switzerland, is an international NGO, founded in 1971. The WEF's mission is cited as "committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic, and other leaders of society to shape global, regional, and industry agendas".
The foundation is funded by its 1,000 member companies, typically global enterprises with more than five billion dollars in turnover (varying by industry and region). These enterprises rank among the top companies within their industry and/or country and play a leading role in shaping the future of their industry and/or region. Membership is stratified by the level of engagement with forum activities, with the level of membership fees increasing as participation in meetings, projects, and initiatives rises. In 2011 an annual membership cost $52,000 for an individual member, $263,000 for "Industry Partner" and $527,000 for "Strategic Partner". An admission fee cost $19,000 per person. In 2014, WEF raised annual fees by 20 percent, bringing the cost for "Strategic Partner" from CHF 500,000 ($523,000) to CHF 600,000 ($628,000).
In other words, membership is composed of precisely those leaders who feel that their ox is being gored by The Donald--and they're also the people in the best positions to steer money to those who are most actively working to influence the US election--by whatever means are available. These are also the people most able to control the flow of information to the subject populations--us.
I'm not arguing that their is a central guiding hand behind the plot to overthrow the US constitutional order. All I want to do here is point out that the concept of Big Money corresponds to actual organizational realities, and that the progressive agenda also corresponds to organizational realities. Davos Man is an excellent example of both.
So, with all that in mind, here's what Tom S. wrote (with some very light editing). What Tom is getting at is the magnitude of the conspiracy and the odds that Trump--and we--are facing:
1) The U.S. has never experienced a full on civil war, with the exception of western Missouri, circa 1860 – 1866.
2) The controlling Agenda has been in progress for a very long time. The sudden balking of the American people, manifested in Trump’s election, has caused a disruption in timeline and procession, but has in no way deterred the Executive Agenda. They have adapted and are nowhere near defeat.
3) “…the 'normies' are underprepared... .“ It isn’t that their unprepared as much as unaware. The Agenda, generally, is to have the gov’t handed over intact. The Antifa/BLM tools in the streets only think that they are part of a movement to throw down the established order when in reality they are being used as leverage to cement the established order. Trump is the only real revolutionary on the field.
My view is that the political establishment that Trump has taken on was, in reality, the globalist order in America--the Uniparty, as sundance likes to say. This explains the bipartisan nature of the opposition Trump has faced. However, given the reality that the US, since WWII, has been transformed for many purposes into a global American Empire, the corruption of our constitutional order has gone correspondingly global. The development of multinational corporations has led to the rise of interest groups with no traditional loyalties but with unprecedent influence and the means to shape and bend to their will governments that are now mostly representative only in theory or in form.
4) Short term there will be a simulacrum of normalcy, but with enough violence and chaos to keep the population on edge and feeling the need for more stability.
5) There will be no civil war, certainly not in the sense that aNanyMouse indicates. The Executive will only allow Antifa/BLM so much leash. An occasional one-on-one shooting perhaps, but nothing that requires or justifies total collapse in trust in gov’t. If some Deplorable leaning militia does something dumb and allows itself to be maneuvered into a mass shooting incident then that will be very very good for the Agenda. Obviously Deplorables must be disarmed and many Deplorables, probably a majority, will agree, depending on how outrageous the media can paint the incident to be. They very nearly got their dream in WI but it turned out to be only one kid, not a discernible militia, and there weren’t enough casualties, particularly women and children, to give the narrative the inertia it required to be self-perpetuating. The FBI may have tried to add fuel to the narrative in MI.
6) I believe what the Antifa orcs are saying. As far as they are concerned there will never be peace, ever.
7) The Executive wants absolute control, not the mess that will ensue if there is complete collapse, much less a civil war. They don’t want to turn things upside-down: they just want to own it all. They will boil the frog until the Deplorables get tired of resisting, forget what they were resisting for, or are marginalized to the point or irrelevance. Once they own it all they will deal with their tools in due course.
Maybe right, maybe wrong; that’s how I see the immediate situation. My long term prognostication is much grimmer.
A longer and more detailed version of this type of speculation appeared yesterday at American Thinker: The Revolution the US is Experiencing – and What if it Succeeds. Again, just some excerpts. The idea is that we're in the midst of a revolution that most people are only vaguely aware of--if at all:
... Virtually all the opinion molding organs of American society are in the hands of the revolutionaries: the entire educational establishment, the media, the law schools, the libraries, big corporation boards, the entertainment industry and the Democratic Party. Moreover, they are winning. The youth of America have been brainwashed for at least the last 50 years. The average youngster has no idea who John Marshall or Edmund Burke or Adam Smith were or what they said, or how their ideas shaped the political, economic and social systems of our country. But he or she can tell you with certainty that capitalist America has polluted the oceans, fouled the atmosphere, oppressed people of color all over the world, demeaned women and hoarded the wealth. Alas, the cultural revolution these folks have engineered is essentially complete; now we are on the cusp of the completion of its political counterpart.
This eventuality represents the success of an idea that is generally attributed to Antonio Gramsci – that is, politics runs downstream from culture. The Progressive Movement began its ongoing revolution 125 years ago with the express goal of destroying the classic American culture and overthrowing the established political system. They have succeeded at the former. But the political revolution has not quite yet come to fruition. There have been times when it looked like it might: the Wilsonian 1910s; the 1930s under Roosevelt’s New Deal; the mid/late 1960s when riots ruled the land and we were catapulted into The Great Society. Now we are apparently in a fourth great upheaval. Will the radicals triumph politically this time? ...
... a common and critical reason that the Progressive political revolution did not succeed in any of the three periods discussed is that the cultural revolution was not yet complete. Not anywhere close in 1920 or 1940; advanced, but not far enough in 1965; however, by 2020….
The widely-predicted triumph of the Democratic Party via a newly elected president and control of both houses of Congress may well herald the arrival of the political revolution toward which the children of Gramsci (from Wilson to Sanders) have been driving us.
Perhaps all this is too pessimistic. Nevertheless, the country has come to such a pass that complacency in the face of such scenarios is not an option. Consider this--the military is a center of resistance to Trump and the constitutional order, and a center of loyalty to globalist progressivism: US Army Wants To Make COVID Social Distancing 'Permanent' Even After Pandemic Ends.