Ep. 235 Behind Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum, and the Great Reset: Part 5
Bob completes his series on the elites who are literally trying to take over the world. He first explains Schwab’s connection to the Global Government Summit, and then finishes reading key excerpts from Schwab’s book on Covid-19 and the Great Reset.
Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest:
- Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3, and Part 4 of this series.
- Bob and Carlos Lara’s presentation, “How to Weather the Coming Economic Storms.”
- Bob’s book Common Sense: The Case for an Independent Texas.
- Bob and Carlos’ book The Case for IBC. Their book How Privatized Banking Really Works.
- The WEF’s bio for its founder, Klaus Schwab.
- Schwab’s books The Fourth Industrial Revolution and Covid-19 and the Great Reset. #Commissions Earned (As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.)
- Schwab’s address to Global Government Summit.
- Forbes’ article on Schwab the power broker.
- Help support the Bob Murphy Show.
The audio production for this episode was provided by Podsworth Media.
About the author, Robert
Christian and economist, Chief Economist at infineo, and Senior Fellow with the Mises Institute.
With the alleged impending red wave in November of 2020, and maybe with an eye on President DeSantis in 2024, do you think we should try embracing that and steering the whole country while it lasts? Or still go full separation of states ASAP? Are you optimistic about the red wave or no?
The more I hear about what Schwab says in his book, the more I picture it being written by Philip Dru.
Thank you, Bob!
It’s important to know our enemy, as Sun Tzu advised. Are we dealing with a bunch of incompetent fools who simply don’t understand opportunity costs and the unintended consequences of government intervention? Or do they really know better, the people at the top, that is?
Sure, most of the leg work of policy implementation is done by lower-level functionaries and yes-men who perhaps really are clueless. But the people at the top formulating the policies (like, say, an Alan Greenspan) these people “in the know,” I believe, do know better.
As you pointed out earlier, we got it straight from the horse’s mouth, the horse being David Rockefeller, who confessed (proudly) in his memoirs that he had been conspiring to undermine national sovereignty in order to bring about a “one world” system of governance.
Also, recall Ron Paul’s anecdote (I believe in End the Fed) about meeting Alan Greenspan and asking him to sign his copy of that Ayn Rand-edited volume to which Greenspan had contributed a chapter on the importance of gold as money, long before he had become chairman of the Fed. As Greenspan signed (what a sport!), Paul asked him (my paraphrase), “Do you still believe what you wrote back then is true?” And Greenspan replied (my paraphrase), “I disagree with nothing I wrote.”
So, Greenspan did know better, and he continued to know better throughout his tenure as Fed chair.
And here’s a juicy one I stumbled on recently.
In 1996 the Council on Foreign Relations sponsored an in-house history of the organization written by Peter Grose, the former executive editor of that CFR rag Foreign Affairs. Talking about the precursor to the CFR, another group by the same name headed by former Sec. of War Elihu Root, Grose quotes Whitney Shepardson, a Rhodes scholar and aid to Col. House who was instrumental in setting up the CFR. Grose writes: “Despite growing opposition to Wilson’s internationalism, the early Council members supported the League of Nations, but not necessarily on Wilson’s [idealistic] rationale. As Shepardson put it, they ‘were concerned primarily with the effect that the war and the treaty of peace might have on postwar business.’ At an early meeting [circa summer of 1918], for instance, several members stressed economic advantages that could flow from the League; others hastened to register on the record the argument that worlds peace was surely more important than immediate profits” (see Grose, Continuing the Inquiry, pp. 7-8).
So, “world peace” was, at best, an afterthought, though more likely conceived as a pretext for promoting a viable world government in the League of Nations, from which many benefits could “flow.” Now, if these were honest bankers and businessmen, they would think of the advantages flowing from peace and free trade uninterrupted by war and wartime blockades.
But, apparently, in their view, free trade and free competition must mean the “law of the jungle,” and they really prefer the “rule of law” (written by them, of course) to be enforced by a League of Nations or some other world-governing organization (controlled by them).
So, now we know the esoteric double-meaning of H.W. Bush’s cryptic NWO speeches, where he talks about the “law of the jungle” being supplanted by the “rule of law.” Sounds nice to an outsider, but the CFR-Davos crowd knows what it really means. Just think of the economic advantages, the power we might have!
Thanks, Bob, for bringing more attention to this dangerous nonsense. You should talk to James Corbett of the Corbett Report (https://www.corbettreport.com/greatreset/).
Also, I think C.S Lewis tried to expose these people in The Abolition of Man and That Hideous Strength. I mention this in my book review of Tragedy and Hope 101
(https://areamanonfire.com/?p=469). Thanks and cheers!
Thanks Rod, really interesting stuff!
When Klaus says “the public will demand more and more from MMT”, he’s not critiquing MMT, he’s saying why MMT is useful for him as a praxis to implement scientific socialism/technocracy.