The Revolution In Progress

The December issue of Imprimis (a publication of Hillsdale College) contains an article titled, “What is the Great Reset?” The article relates the history of the Great Reset and what we can expect from future moves to create the Great Reset. Please follow the link to read the entire article, but I will post a few highlights here.

The article notes:

But the idea of the Great Reset goes back much further. It can be traced at least as far back as the inception of the WEF (World Economic Forum), originally founded as the European Management Forum, in 1971. In that same year, Schwab (Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum), an engineer and economist by training, published his first book, Modern Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering. It was in this book that Schwab first introduced the concept he would later call “stakeholder capitalism,” arguing “that the management of a modern enterprise must serve not only shareholders but all stakeholders to achieve long-term growth and prosperity.” Schwab and the WEF have promoted the idea of stakeholder capitalism ever since. They can take credit for the stakeholder and public-private partnership rhetoric and policies embraced by governments, corporations, non-governmental organizations, and international governance bodies worldwide.

The specific phrase “Great Reset” came into general circulation over a decade ago, with the publication of a 2010 book, The Great Reset, by American urban studies scholar Richard Florida. Written in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, Florida’s book argued that the 2008 economic crash was the latest in a series of Great Resets—including the Long Depression of the 1870s and the Great Depression of the 1930s—which he defined as periods of paradigm-shifting systemic innovation.

The article concludes:

In my recent book, Google Archipelago, I argued that leftist authoritarianism is the political ideology and modus operandi of what I call Big Digital, which is on the leading edge of a nascent world system. Big Digital is the communications, ideological, and technological arm of an emerging corporate-socialist totalitarianism. The Great Reset is the name that has since been given to the project of establishing this world system.

Just as Schwab and the WEF predicted, the COVID crisis has accelerated the Great Reset. Monopolistic corporations have consolidated their grip on the economy from above, while socialism continues to advance for the rest of us below. In partnership with Big Digital, Big Pharma, the mainstream media, national and international health agencies, and compliant populations, hitherto democratic Western states—think especially of Australia, New Zealand, and Austria—are being transformed into totalitarian regimes modeled after China.

But let me end on a note of hope. Because the goals of the Great Reset depend on the obliteration not only of free markets, but of individual liberty and free will, it is, perhaps ironically, unsustainable. Like earlier attempts at totalitarianism, the Great Reset is doomed to ultimate failure. That doesn’t mean, however, that it won’t, again like those earlier attempts, leave a lot of destruction in its wake­—which is all the more reason to oppose it now and with all our might. 

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Although the conclusion of the article is optimistic, all Americans need to know what some of those currently in power are planning.

What Is The Goal Of This Man?

The Washington Free Beacon reported the following yesterday:

Liberal billionaire George Soros has funneled nearly $70 million into the 2020 elections, tripling his previous record, new filings show.

The Democracy PAC, a super PAC created by Soros to fund left-wing groups working to defeat Republicans, has poured $68.5 million into electoral efforts this cycle, according to the Federal Election Commission. That sum is $46 million more than Soros’s previous high of $22 million, which came during the last presidential cycle.

The billionaire has amplified his election spending as deep-pocketed donors attempt to oust Trump from office and flip control of the Senate to Democrats. Soros’s cash is part of a spending blitz that has primarily benefited Joe Biden. So far this cycle, outside spending has exceeded $1 billion and is on track to shatter previous records.

Soros’s largest donations include $3 million to the Strategic Victory Fund, a super PAC tied to the Democracy Alliance donor club, of which Soros is a founding member; $1.5 million to both the Chuck Schumer-aligned Senate Majority PAC and progressive women’s group SuperMajority, which is primarily bankrolled by the financier; and $1 million to the Working Families Organization. Soros’s PAC disbursed $23 million to left-wing groups from the beginning of July to late September.

The cash is part of a $275 million spending plan set forth by the Democracy Alliance, according to confidential documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon last year. Members of the donor network are pushing large sums into increasing voter turnout, targeting women and rural voters, and flooding battleground state efforts, among other initiatives.

The Democracy PAC is primarily funded by tens of millions of dollars transferred over from the Fund for Policy Reform, a nonprofit in Soros’s sprawling Open Society Foundations network. The fund reported $3 billion in assets on its most recent tax forms. This set up allows Soros to keep his name off the top of donor lists. The Democracy PAC is currently sitting on $6.4 million.

During a speech to the World Economic Forum earlier this year, Soros said the “fate of the world” is at stake in the 2020 elections. He also referred to Trump as a “con man” and “authoritarian.”

That’s an awful lot of money to throw into political campaigns. I would like to point out the George Soros was responsible for funding many of the candidates who won in the 2018 election in Virginia. I highly doubt that the residents of Virginia are happy with the legislation that followed that election. Money is important in elections, although if it were truly the deciding factor, we would have either President Jeb Bush or President Hillary Clinton. At any rate, voters need to know the type of person who is funding their candidates.