Royal seal of approval for return to Davos: Prince Charles unveils theme of 2021 event named 'The Great Reset'
By LUCY WHITE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 21:51, 3 June 2020 | UPDATED: 22:36, 3 June 2020
The meeting of the world's self-styled elite in the Swiss town of Davos will go ahead next January despite the pandemic.
Prince Charles, a long-time supporter of organiser the World Economic Forum (WEF), yesterday unveiled the lofty theme of the summit – 'The Great Reset'.
However, Standard Life Aberdeen, which usually spends around £3million on sending executives to Davos each year, and hosts a cafe renowned among delegates for its malt whisky – has ruled out attending.
Prince Charles, a long-time supporter of organiser the World Economic Forum, yesterday unveiled the lofty theme of the 2021 Davos summit – 'The Great Reset'
Chief executive, Keith Skeoch, told the Mail in April that it was 'divisive' at a time when the world was being ravaged by the coronavirus, and that the money could be better-spent.
Founder Klaus Schwab said 'a great reset' was needed, and insisted the meeting could 'build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being'.
He added: 'The global health crisis has laid bare the unsustainability of our old system in terms of social cohesion, the lack of equal opportunities and inclusiveness. Nor can we turn our backs on the evils of racism and discrimination.'
Davos has gained a reputation for missing some of the most important issues of the day.
The 2021 Davos summit will be held both in-person and online, and will focus on reducing humans' impact on the planet and how to move past the pandemic +2
The 2021 Davos summit will be held both in-person and online, and will focus on reducing humans' impact on the planet and how to move past the pandemic
This year's summit at the end of January, when coronavirus was beginning to spread, saw very little time dedicated to discussing the possible ramifications.
Teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg was the star guest. In February, as the world began to pay more attention to virus, JP Morgan boss Jamie Dimon joked it may have spread the virus.
He said: 'The only good news from that is that it might just have killed the elite.'
For those wondering what will come after the COVID-19 pandemic has successfully all but shut down the entire world economy, spreading the worst depression since the 1930s, the leaders of the premier globalization NGO, Davos World Economic Forum, have just unveiled the outlines of what we can expect next. These people have decided to use this crisis as an opportunity.
On June 3 via their website, the Davos World Economic Forum (WEF) unveiled the outlines of their upcoming January 2021 forum. They call it “The Great Reset.” It entails taking advantage of the staggering impact of the coronavirus to advance a very specific agenda. Notably enough, that agenda dovetails perfectly with another specific agenda, namely the 2015 UN Agenda 2030. The irony of the world’s leading big business forum, the one that has advanced the corporate globalization agenda since the 1990s, now embracing what they call sustainable development ,is huge. That gives us a hint that this agenda is not quite about what WEF and partners claim.
The Great Reset
On June 3 WEF chairman Klaus Schwab released a video announcing the annual theme for 2021, The Great Reset. It seems to be nothing less than promoting a global agenda of restructuring the world economy along very specific lines, not surprisingly much like that advocated by the IPCC, by Greta from Sweden and her corporate friends such as Al Gore or Blackwater’s Larry Fink.
Interesting is that WEF spokespeople frame the “reset” of the world economy in the context of the coronavirus and the ensuing collapse of the world industrial economy. The WEF website states, “There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset, but the most urgent is COVID-19.” So the Great Reset of the global economy flows from covid19 and the “opportunity” it presents.
In announcing the 2021 theme, WEF founder Schwab then said, cleverly shifting the agenda: “We only have one planet and we know that climate change could be the next global disaster with even more dramatic consequences for humankind.” The implication is that climate change is the underlying reason for the coronavirus pandemic catastrophe.
To underscore their green “sustainable” agenda, WEF then has an appearance by the would-be King of England, Prince Charles. Referring to the global covid19 catastrophe, the Prince of Wales says, “If there is one critical lesson to learn from this crisis, it is that we need to put nature at the heart of how we operate. We simply can’t waste more time.” On board with Schwab and the Prince is the Secretary-General of the UN, Antonio Guterres. He states, “We must build more equal, inclusive and sustainable economies and societies that are more resilient in the face of pandemics, climate change and the many other global changes we face.” Note his talk of “sustainable economies and societies”—more on that later. The new head of the IMF, Kristalina Georgieva, also endorsed The Great Reset. Other WEF resetters included Ma Jun, the chairman of the Green Finance Committee at the China Society for Finance and Banking and a member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the People’s Bank of China; Bernard Looney, CEO of BP; Ajay Banga, CEO of Mastercard; Bradford Smith, president of Microsoft.
Make no mistake, the Great Reset is no spur-of-the moment idea of Schwab and friends. The WEF website states, “COVID-19 lockdowns may be gradually easing, but anxiety about the world’s social and economic prospects is only intensifying. There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable.” The WEF sponsors have big plans:”…the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.” This is big stuff.
Radical changes
Schwab reveals more of the coming agenda: “…one silver lining of the pandemic is that it has shown how quickly we can make radical changes to our lifestyles. Almost instantly, the crisis forced businesses and individuals to abandon practices long claimed to be essential, from frequent air travel to working in an office.” These are supposed to be silver linings?
He suggests that those radical changes be extended: “The Great Reset agenda would have three main components. The first would steer the market toward fairer outcomes. To this end, governments should improve coordination… and create the conditions for a “stakeholder economy…” It would include “changes to wealth taxes, the withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies, and new rules governing intellectual property, trade, and competition.”
The second component of the Great Reset agenda would ensure that, “investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability.” Here the WEF head states that the recent huge economic stimulus budgets from the EU, USA, China and elsewhere be used to create a new economy, “more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building ‘green’ urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.”
Finally the third leg of this Great Reset will be implementing one of Schwab’s pet projects, the Fourth Industrial Revolution: “The third and final priority of a Great Reset agenda is to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges. During the COVID-19 crisis, companies, universities, and others have joined forces to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and possible vaccines; establish testing centers; create mechanisms for tracing infections; and deliver telemedicine. Imagine what could be possible if similar concerted efforts were made in every sector.” The Fourth Industrial Revolution includes gene-editing biotech, 5G telecommunications, Artificial Intelligence and the like.
UN Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset
If we compare the details of the 2015 UN Agenda 2030 with the WEF Great Reset we find both dovetail very neatly. The theme of Agenda2030 is a “sustainable world” which is defined as one with income equality, gender equality, vaccines for all under the WHO and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) which was launched in 2017 by the WEF along with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
In 2015 the UN issued a document, “Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” The Obama Administration never submitted it to the Senate for ratification knowing it would fail. Yet it is being advanced globally. It includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals, extending an earlier Agenda21. The 17 include “to end poverty and hunger, in all their forms and dimensions… to protect the planet from degradation, including through sustainable consumption and production, sustainably managing its natural resources and taking urgent action on climate change…“ It calls for sustainable economic growth, sustainable agriculture (GMO), sustainable and modern energy (wind, solar), sustainable cities, sustainable industrialization… The word sustainable is the key word. If we dig deeper it is clear it is code-word for a reorganization of world wealth via means such as punitive carbon taxes that will dramatically reduce air and vehicle travel. The less-developed world will not rise to the developed, rather the other way, the advanced civilizations must go down in their living standards to become “sustainable.”
Maurice Strong
To understand the double-speak use of sustainable, we need to go back to Maurice Strong, a billionaire Canadian oilman and close friend of David Rockefeller, the man who played a central role back in the 1970s for the idea that man-made CO2 emissions were making the world unsustainable. Strong created the UN Environment Program, and in 1988, the UN Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) to exclusively study manmade CO2.
In 1992 Strong stated, “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” At the Rio Earth Summit Strong that same year he added, “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
The decision to demonize CO2, one of the most essential compounds to sustain all life, human and plant, is not random. As Prof. Richard Lindzen an MIT atmospheric physicist puts it, “CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.”
Lest we forget, the curiously well-timed New York pandemic exercise, Event 201 on October 18, 2019 was co-sponsored by the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation. It was based on the idea that, ”it is only a matter of time before one of these epidemics becomes global—a pandemic with potentially catastrophic consequences. A severe pandemic, which becomes “Event 201,” would require reliable cooperation among several industries, national governments, and key international institutions.” The Event201 Scenario posited, “outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.”
The declaration by the World Economic Forum to make a Great Reset is to all indications a thinly-veiled attempt to advance the Agenda 2030 “sustainable” dystopian model, a global “Green New Deal” in the wake of the covid19 pandemic measures. Their close ties with Gates Foundation projects, with the WHO, and with the UN suggest we may soon face a far more sinister world after the covid19 pandemic fades.
http://projectavalon.net/lang/en/angl... _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c6sj0YUJBGs _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Like everyone, I would love to live in a pollution-free world. I would love to see human civilization strike a balance with nature and at the risk of sounding like a naïve idealist, I sincerely do believe that this is ultimately our destiny as a species.
My personal experience has led me to the conclusion that we have only failed to achieve this paradigm as a species due to the system (and cultural influence) of oligarchism which has managed to stubbornly sink its claws parasitically onto its host for a few too many generations- corrupting and perverting everything that it dominates.
Due to the pervasiveness of oligarchism, mass exploitation, wars and pollution have lain waste to ecosystems and countless human lives alike, and as the neo-liberal order continues to careen towards the inevitable breakdown of a 2 quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble which our un-repentant decades of decadence has caused, very serious choices will need to be made.
FALSE REMEDIES TO THE ONCOMING MELTDOWN
Many false solutions will be presented as society wakes up to the burning building it is trapped in, and unless our minds have become aware of those false solutions, (not to mention those arsonists managing this fire from the top), then many well-intentioned souls from all walks of life may sign onto their own death warrants and accidentally usher in a solution far worse than the disease they sought to remedy.
Before you, dear reader, accuse me of being overly dramatic in my claims, let me bring your attention to a June 3rd event sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) entitled The Great Reset featuring impassioned calls by leaders of the IMF, World Bank, UK, USA, corporate and banking sector to take advantage of COVID-19 to shut down and “reset” the world economy under a new operating system entitled the Green New Deal.
WEF founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab said:
“the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions… Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.”
Schwab’s message was amplified by Prince Charles who gushed over this golden opportunity to radically modify human behaviour in ways that decades of environmentalism have failed to accomplish when he said:
“We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this [COVID-19] crisis. Its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change,”
While the World Economic Forum is usually known as a forum of global corporate elites, this organization branched out in recent years to become a leader in global pandemic coordination as a co-sponsor of the creepy October 2019 Event 201 and has embraced leaders of typically “anti-capitalist” resistance groups like Greenpeace who now speak regularly at their events.
Jennifer Morgan (current head of Greenpeace) stated at the event:
We set up a new world order after World War II… We’re now in a different world than we were then. We need to ask, what can we be doing differently? The World Economic Forum has a big responsibility in that as well—to be pushing the reset button and looking at how to create well-being for people and for the Earth.”
So is this definition of international wellbeing truly what it appears? Or does something more nefarious lurk under the surface? How can we know?
Those who are ignorant to their history will easily believe the cover story they are being fed by the players managing the World Economic Forum. The cover story is as follows: A new system was shaped during a two-week conference in Bretton Woods New Hampshire 1944 under the leadership of Franklin Roosevelt and this was designed to export the New Deal program which reconstructed America after the Great Depression to the rest of the world. Since our current crisis demands a new system in a similar manner as the world needed a reset in 1932 and again in 1945, so too must we do so again.
On the surface this is all true. But here’s the rub…
FDR’s New Deal was premised around:
Stopping a bankers’ dictatorship in 1933 when he singlehandedly torpedoed the Bank of England/League of Nations’ London Conference
imposing mass regulation on Wall Street speculators under Glass-Steagall laws and the broad bank acts that broke up megabanks, created the SEC, protected legitimate savings and put hundreds of elite bankers on trial under the Pecora Commission
launched vast infrastructure projects under the Tennessee Valley Authority, Rural Electrification projects, Grand Coulee Dam, Hoover Dams etc which increased the national productive powers of labor turning America into a FULL SPECTRUM agro-industrial economy capable of constant growth, and
fought valiantly to guarantee those same capabilities to all nations of the world in total opposition to the British Empire.
Today’s Green New Dealers use the form and name of FDR’s historic precedents but are totally committed to the opposing goals.
Under the global response mechanisms being proposed by the oligarchs running the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset strategy, green energy grids designed to lower the world temperature by two degrees within 30 years by de-carbonizing society will have the effect of reducing the productive powers of labor of all nations rather than increasing those powers as the original New Deal had done.
Meanwhile, Cap and Trade/Carbon pricing mechanisms designed by the Bank of England and the Carney/Bloomberg Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures promise to create financial incentives to reduce the world population potential by deconstructing the industrial economic order needed to sustain the nearly 8 billion souls on the surface of earth currently.
In a recent speech to the City of London the former head of the Bank of England who now leads Boris Johnson’s Climate Finance team said:
Achieving net zero emissions will require a whole economy transition – every company, every bank, every insurer and investor will have to adjust their business models. This could turn an existential risk into the greatest commercial opportunity of our time.”
Carney, who also happens to be the architect of the Central Bankers Climate Compact, has previously threatened destruction on all businesses that refuse to conform to the new green standards which he and his controllers wish be imposed upon the world saying:
the firms that anticipate these developments will be rewarded handsomely. Those that don’t will cease to exist”.
While the new reset green system promises to feature more regulations onto finance, will those regulations be controlled by sovereign nation states in the interests of the general welfare of their people or by private central banks in the interests of an oligarchical elite obsessed with control, balance, and keeping nations gullible, confused, divided, depopulated and impoverished?
I think you can figure this out for yourself.
The only form of a legitimate Great Reset that will protect people, nations and reduce the influence of the financial oligarchy WHILE actually protecting the environment in the long-run is tied to the modern International New Deal known as the Belt and Road Initiative. By creating a new system of finance tied to long-term development, agro-industrial growth of full-spectrum economies across the world, China and its allies have taken up the torch which was dropped by Franklin Roosevelt’s early death on April 12, 1945. Any arrangement for a new economic reset would have to adhere to the proven principles of anti-fascist political economy that have been proven to work in the past and continue to work in the present.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 12:27 am Post subject:
'COVID19, The Great Reset & The New Normal':
https://www.activistpost.com/2020/07/covid19-the-great-reset-the-new-n ormal.html
'...In March, the WEF launched the COVID Action Platform which is essentially a call for global government in response to COVID-19. The answer, WEF believes, is to have greater global cooperation, move away from the nation-state, and tackle the world’s problems as one international community.
Along with the launch of the Action Platform, the WEF released an impressive graphic as part of their “Strategic Intelligence” platform, which outlines the wide ranging ways their plans will effect and shape the world of the 21st century and beyond. From the media’s role in the pandemic to finding a vaccine, the graphic attempts to provide details on this centrally planned future being promoted by the WEF. I encourage all readers to spend an evening going down the rabbit hole that is the COVID Action Platform for a better understanding of where we are headed...' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Here is the Project Avalon site with the same video, but also a full transcript:
'The Anglo-Saxon Mission: Bill Ryan's Presentation transcript':
http://projectavalon.net/lang/en/anglo_saxon_mission_presentation_tran script_en.html
Here is a very important section. Note that the alleged meeting took place in 2005, and Bill Ryan made the video in 2010 - over nine years before the Covid - 19 'Pandemic' struck China and the world:
'...And then the next thing that happens in this chess game that’s being played is that biological weapons are released on China. He heard this being discussed in this meeting.
They will release a flu-like virus that will be genetically targeted against the Chinese population. It’s racially targeted against the Chinese people. It’s designed to spread like wildfire and to knock out a large number of the Chinese people. And these people in this meeting were LAUGHING about this.
They said: China will catch a cold. Those were their words: China will catch a cold. And they were laughing about the fact that these biological weapons will wreak havoc among the Chinese population.
After that, then what effectively will be a kind of plague will actually spread right across the world to the West as well. Our source was not clear whether this was a Chinese retaliation, or whether the thing would just spread out of control in the way that it would be very understandable if it did, whether it’s racially targeted or not. These things actually mutate...' _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2020 1:53 pm Post subject:
I have now been in touch with Bill Ryan of Project Avalon, asking if he can provide proof his article was posted first in 2010, and he sent me this reply:
'Paul, Hi there — well, here's the page:
http://projectavalon.net/anglo_saxon_mission.html
And here it is on Archive.org, the earliest capture (11 March, 2010):
https://web.archive.org/web/20100311162202/projectavalon.net/anglo_sax on_mission.html
I've attached a screenshot showing all the captures over the years...'
https://web.archive.org/web/*/projectavalon.net/anglo_saxon_mission.ht ml _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:31 pm Post subject:
In summary, if we are to take the authors at their word, then they see a rise in nationalism and protectionism off the back of Covid-19 as a detriment to the quest for a Great Reset. The much coveted Sustainable Development Goals could even be at risk should nations turn inward. IMF Managing Director has said the world has a choice between the Great Reset or the Great Reversal (the Great Reversal being ‘more poverty, more fragmentation, and less trade‘) I would argue that there is another way of looking at it.
In the book Schwab and Malleret describe how in an interdependent world – which is precisely the kind of world that global planners have been championing since at least the end of World War Two – ‘risks conflate with each other, amplifying their reciprocal effects and magnifying their consequences‘. When nations are interdependent, ‘the systemic connectivity between risks, issues, challenges determines the future.’ It is the old cliche of dominoes falling. Once one falters it sets off a chain reaction, which was evidenced back in 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed.
The scale of change that globalists are calling for through the vehicle of a Great Reset, which by definition is global in nature, will in my view require the implosion of the current world order to lay the foundations for a new world order. The old must make way for the new. And the one method for how that could be achieved is through increased kickback against interdependence. Sustained crises offer many opportunities for global planners. The potential for a contested U.S. election, an upcoming no deal Brexit and warnings of ‘vaccine nationalism‘ are three eventualities that if brought to bear could be exploited and used to advance the cause for a Great Reset. I would say that the further the world appears from collaboration and cooperation, the more people are going to call for those very same things if they become increasingly desperate.
The authors say that there is only a narrow window of opportunity for the Great Reset. Let’s keep in mind though that so far it is only global institutions like the WEF that are promoting the initiative, not national administrations. When it starts to permeate politics is when you know the agenda is advancing. But what exactly will the economic and societal conditions be when the Great Reset becomes part of the global conversation? Has what we have seen up to now been enough to compel people to call for change on a global scale? Has there yet been enough degradation and material change to living standards for citizens to implore global institutions to take action? I would argue not.
Already ‘solutions‘ like Universal Basic Income have been touted. But as yet there is not a widespread clamouring for change. But that time is coming. Whether it be in the name of Agenda 2030 (aka Sustainable Development), The Green New Deal or The Great Reset, it would amount to largely the same outcome – the subjugation once and for all of national sovereignty where the nation state is subordinate to global governance.
A few weeks after the World Economic Forum launched their ‘Great Reset‘ initiative, it was followed up with the release of a new book titled, ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset‘, authored by the executive chairman of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, and Senior Director of the Global Risk Network at the institution, Thierry Malleret.
Having read the book I wanted to share with you some initial thoughts on the potential significance of the publication.
As touched upon in my last article, there are 5 planks to the Great Reset – economic, societal, geopolitical, environmental and technological – all of which the book covers in detail. But I want to focus largely on the conclusion, as it is here where the author’s motivations and rationale for championing a Great Reset, in the wake of Covid-19, become clearer.
Schwab and Malleret characterise the future direction of the world as ‘The Post Pandemic Era‘, a phrase that is repeated ad nauseam throughout. Rather than define it to a particular outcome, the authors opt instead to ask whether this new era will be marked by more or less cooperation between nations. Will countries turn inward resulting in the growth of nationalism and protectionism, or will they sacrifice their own interests for greater interdependence?
No firm prediction is made either way, but we do manage to gain a degree of insight into the authors’ way of thinking when they discuss what they call ‘the direction of the trend.’ They write that concerns over the environment (primarily through the prism of climate change) and the advancement of technology (integral to the Fourth Industrial Revolution) were pervasive long before Covid-19 entered the picture. With the economic and health implications of the lockdowns now ingrained within society, Schwab and Malleret contend that long established worries amongst citizens ‘have been laid bare for all to see‘ and ‘amplified‘ because of the pandemic. In other words, if minds were not concentrated on the problems and threats the world faced before Covid-19, then they certainly are now.
And whilst the direction of these trends on the environment and technology may not have changed, with the onset of Covid-19 it ‘got a lot faster.’ It is why Schwab and Malleret believe that these two issues in particular ‘will force their way onto the political agenda‘ due to increasing public pressure. A movement such as Extinction Rebellion is one example. Another is the rapid growth of the Fintech community which is leading people to question what constitutes money ‘in the digital age.’
As for where they see things going in the future, the suggestion is that current trends are pointing towards a world that will be ‘less open and less cooperative than before the pandemic.’
Effectively, the WEF have presented the world with two potential outcomes. The first is that the Great Reset can be achieved relatively peacefully with nations acquiescing to the objectives being pushed by global planners. The second outcome, they warn, would be far more disruptive and damaging. It would come about through countries failing to address the ‘deep rooted ills of economies and societies‘, which could see a reset being ‘imposed by violent shocks like conflicts and even revolutions.’
And, apparently, we do not have much time to decide our fate. What we have now, according to the authors, is ‘a rare and narrow window of opportunity to reflect, re-imagine and reset our world‘. If a ‘proper reset‘ is to be realised, it can only occur through an increased level of collaboration and cooperation between nations. As Schwab and Malleret see it, the alternative is a world entrenched in perpetual crisis which would eventually lead to the disintegration of the post World War Two ‘rules based global order‘ and a global power vacuum.
There is, therefore, a very real risk of the world becoming ‘more divided, nationalistic and prone to conflicts than it is today.’
One thing the authors do write on from a position of clarity is that never can the world return to normal. Or more to the point, be allowed to return to normal. Their view is that before Covid-19 took hold, a ‘broken sense of normalcy prevailed‘. The situation now is that the virus ‘marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.’ In a very short space of time it ‘magnified the fault lines that beset our economies and societies‘.
If it was not already obvious, then the authors confirm over the last few pages of the book that the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development programme is intertwined with the Great Reset. This is evident when studying the WEF’s Strategic Intelligence unit. Sustainable Development and the Great Reset go hand in hand.
For Agenda 2030 to be implemented successfully, Schwab and Malleret offer an alternative to the possibility of countries failing to come together. As you might expect, it revolves around collaboration and cooperation. In their eyes no progress can otherwise be made. Covid-19 offers the opportunity to ‘embed greater societal equality and sustainability into the recovery‘. And, crucially, this would ‘accelerate rather than delay progress towards 2030 Sustainable Development Goals‘.
But it does not end simply with the full implementation of Agenda 2030. Schwab and Malleret want to go further. Their aim is that the open exposure of weaknesses within existing global infrastructure ‘may compel us to act faster by replacing failed institutions, processes and rules with new ones that are better suited to current and future needs.’ To convey the importance of this statement, the authors state that this alone is ‘the essence of the Great Reset’. What they appear to be seeking is global transformation where systems and the age of the algorithm take precedent over political institutions. We are already beginning to see moves by major global institutions like the Trilateral Commission, the World Trade Organisation and the European Union to ‘reform‘ and ‘rejuvenate‘ both their work and membership. Covid-19 has undoubtedly straightened the hand of global planners and their quest for reformation.
As ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ was published, it was accompanied by an article written by Schwab and Malleret. Called, ‘COVID-19’s legacy: This is how to get the Great Reset right‘, they stated plainly that not only will a lot of things change forever, ‘the worst of the pandemic is yet to come’:
We will be dealing with its fallout for years, and many things will change forever. It has wrought (and will continue to do so) economic disruption of monumental proportions.
Indeed, no industry or business will be able to avoid the impact of the changes ahead. Either they adapt to fit in with the Great Reset agenda (assuming they have the resources to do so), or they will not survive. According to Schwab and Malleret, ‘millions of companies risk disappearing‘, whilst only ‘a few‘ e.g. corporate monoliths, will be strong enough to withstand the disruption. It is your smaller companies and independent run businesses that are faced with ruin, opening the door to a new era of mergers and acquisitions that will further erode consumer choice and competition.
Schwab and Malleret tell us that the worst of the pandemic is yet to come, and from an economic standpoint I would not doubt them. But let’s look at the health aspect for a moment. Global media coverage of Covid-19 has characterised it as a deadly virus that kills with impunity, and without the antidote of a vaccine could devour communities whole.
Perhaps surprisingly, the authors offer up a little fact based logic. They admit that Covid-19 is ‘one of the least deadly pandemics in the last 2000 years‘, and barring something unforeseen ‘the consequences of the virus will be mild compared to previous pandemics.’ At the time the book was published, 0.006% of the global population were reported to have died from Covid-19. But even this low figure is not altogether accurate.
In the UK for instance the way the death rate has been calculated has meant that people who have been diagnosed with the virus and then succumbed to an accident within 28 days of being tested will have their cause of death marked as Covid-19.
To quote Professor Yoon Loke, from the University of East Anglia, and Professor Carl Heneghan, from Oxford University:
Anyone who has tested COVID positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE COVID death figures.
Schwab and Malleret could not be clearer when they write that Covid-19 ‘does not constitute an existential threat or a shock that will leave its imprint on the world’s population for decades‘. As it stands the Spanish Flu and HIV/AIDS have a larger mortality rate.
It was not an uncontrollable spread of Covid-19 that caused governments around the world to shut down their national economies, but the data modelling of unaccountable technocrats like Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London that predicted hundreds of thousands of people were at immediate risk of dying without the imposition of social restrictions, which we now know to be a combination of social distancing and lockdown measures.
When Schwab and Malleret talk about Covid-19 leaving it’s imprint on the world, the truth of the matter is that it is the measures imposed in the name of Covid-19 that have caused widespread economic destruction, not the virus itself. That distinction is one that mainstream outlets in particular refuse to engage with.
In summary, if we are to take the authors at their word, then they see a rise in nationalism and protectionism off the back of Covid-19 as a detriment to the quest for a Great Reset. The much coveted Sustainable Development Goals could even be at risk should nations turn inward. IMF Managing Director has said the world has a choice between the Great Reset or the Great Reversal (the Great Reversal being ‘more poverty, more fragmentation, and less trade‘) I would argue that there is another way of looking at it.
In the book Schwab and Malleret describe how in an interdependent world – which is precisely the kind of world that global planners have been championing since at least the end of World War Two – ‘risks conflate with each other, amplifying their reciprocal effects and magnifying their consequences‘. When nations are interdependent, ‘the systemic connectivity between risks, issues, challenges determines the future.’ It is the old cliche of dominoes falling. Once one falters it sets off a chain reaction, which was evidenced back in 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed.
The scale of change that globalists are calling for through the vehicle of a Great Reset, which by definition is global in nature, will in my view require the implosion of the current world order to lay the foundations for a new world order. The old must make way for the new. And the one method for how that could be achieved is through increased kickback against interdependence. Sustained crises offer many opportunities for global planners. The potential for a contested U.S. election, an upcoming no deal Brexit and warnings of ‘vaccine nationalism‘ are three eventualities that if brought to bear could be exploited and used to advance the cause for a Great Reset. I would say that the further the world appears from collaboration and cooperation, the more people are going to call for those very same things if they become increasingly desperate.
The authors say that there is only a narrow window of opportunity for the Great Reset. Let’s keep in mind though that so far it is only global institutions like the WEF that are promoting the initiative, not national administrations. When it starts to permeate politics is when you know the agenda is advancing. But what exactly will the economic and societal conditions be when the Great Reset becomes part of the global conversation? Has what we have seen up to now been enough to compel people to call for change on a global scale? Has there yet been enough degradation and material change to living standards for citizens to implore global institutions to take action? I would argue not.
For months we have seen our way of life change dramatically. We have been told time and time again things will never be the same and we must accept the new normal.
Now the social engineers have revealed their hand and officially launched their solution to this crisis. The proposed solution is the Great Reset.
In this report we examine what exactly is the great reset and who is involved. We also explore what the Great Reset means for humanity as face unprecedented times.
Press Release
Hundreds of civil society organizations worldwide denounce World Economic Forum´s takeover of the UN
September 26, 2019
Hundreds of civil society organizations worldwide denounce World Economic Forum´s takeover of the UN
The call, made in an open letter, denounces attempts to ‘delegitimiz[ing] the United Nations and weaken(ing) the role of states in global decision-making.
240 civil society organizations and 40 international networks have called on the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General to end the recently signed UN’s Strategic Partnership Agreement with the World Economic Forum (WEF). The call, made in an open letter, condemned the agreement for ‘delegitimiz[ing] the United Nations and weaken(ing) the role of states in global decision-making.
Signed in June, the agreement promises to “accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” by deepening institutional coordination and collaboration between the UN and the WEF. Furthermore, the agreement grants transnational corporations preferential and deferential access to the UN System at the expense of States and public interest actors.
This “preferential access,” would undermine the mandate of the UN as well as its independence, impartiality, and effectiveness when holding businesses to account. “This agreement between the UN and WEF formalises a disturbing corporate capture of the UN. It moves the world dangerously towards a privatized and undemocratic global governance” said Gonzalo Berrón of Transnational Institute in presenting the letter.
Although corporate meddling is not unheard of in the UN system, under the new terms of the UN-WEF partnership, the UN will be permanently associated with transnational corporations. In the long-term, this would allow corporate leaders to become ‘whisper advisors’ to the heads of UN system departments.
The UN system is already under a significant threat from the US Government and those who question a democratic multilateral world. Additionally, this ongoing corporatization will reduce public support for the UN system in the South and the North, leaving the system, as a whole, even more vulnerable.
To prevent a complete downfall, the UN must adopt effective mechanisms that prevent conflicts of interest consistently. Moreover, it should strengthen peoples and communities which are the real human rights holders, while at the same time build a stronger, independent, and democratic international governance system.
According to Sofia Monsalve, FIAN International Secretary-General “Any policy on this subject should bear in mind the different roles of private interest and of rights-holders that look after common goods and benefits.”
In this regard, all the organizations and movements endorsing the letter, pledge to continue fighting against the privatization of democracy in the world.
13 October the regalia of honorary doctor of Kaunas University of Technology (KTU) were awarded to Professor Klaus Schwab, the Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, the international organisation, which is encouraging the collaboration between public and business organisations. Professor Klaus Schwab is the 45th Honorary Doctor of KTU.
KTU Chairman of the Senate Rytis Krušinskas introducing Professor Schwab to the University community stated that this exceptional event was one step forward to the revolution in Lithuanian educational system.
“It is a great pleasure to stand here and to be bestowed a title of honorary doctor of KTU. Although it is not the first honorary degree in my life, but the one I will especially treasure”, said Professor Schwab during his acceptance speech in the Ceremony.
The renowned thinker and scientist regards Lithuania as a country of great potential, which is putting a lot of emphasis on education.
Ambassador for the University and Lithuania
Professor Schwab, who has extensively studied the concept of the fourth industrial revolution said: “Usually the fourth industrial revolution is characterised as the fight between robots and humans. We will win this fight if we remember our roots and these aspects which make us human. One of those aspects is creativity, which I saw in the University today”.
Professor Schwab said he was especially pleased to have been able to contribute into integrating Lithuania in the global activities through the efforts of the World Economic Forum since 1990.
“This day I will never forget, and I will go home reinforced. To be awarded the title of Honorary Doctor of KTU is both great honour and great responsibility. I hope that I will become good ambassador for Lithuania and KTU”, said the 45th honorary doctor of the University.
KTU Chairman of the Senate Professor Krušinskas emphasised the importance of this day to KTU.
“We live in a very dynamic environment; the fourth industrial revolution is affecting our lives. However, the revolution in the educational system is also taking place. I hope that by implementing changes we will win the fight for the better future of Lithuania”, said Krušinskas.
Fig. 1—Sir Klaus Martin Schwab, KCMG (British Knight Commander [of the Order] of St Michael and St George, 2006). Founder and only chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF) that first met Feb. 04-07, 1971 in Davos, Switzerland. It’s original name was the European Management Forum until 1987. It was founded under the “supervision of the Swiss Federal Department of the Interior” by Klaus and the soon-to-be Mrs. (Hilde) Schwab (née Stoll). They were married within weeks of that first conference.
Since inception WEF has been a British-American Pilgrims Society new world order League of Nations cum United Nations cum Marshall Plan hustle, under the direction of Rockefeller Foundation operatives Otto von Habsburg, IBM, Henry Alfred Kissinger, John Kenneth Galbraith, Paul Adolph Volcker and other “new world order” globalist hucksters from Harvard, Yale, Oxford, Cambridge and the London School of Economics (communism central).
Sir Klaus Martin Schwab. (Compiled Feb. 15, 2021). Biography and Timeline. Anonymous Patriots. communists
A barker is a person who stands in front of a theater, sideshow, etc., and calls out to passersby to attract customers
In 1971, Klaus Schwab, under British Pilgrims Society direction, chose Otto von Habsburg, the would-be Fourth Reich king, to keynote the first World Economic Forum (then named the European Management Forum)
Schwab’s hometown—Ravensburg, Germany—was the first German city to practice eugenics (killing “useless eaters”)
Ravensburg was a transport hub for stolen Nazi gold to the Swiss Bank for International Settlements run by Pilgrims Society spies Allan W. Dulles (later C.I.A. director, 1953-61), Edwin W. Pauley (Allied reparations) and William J. Donovan, director of the OSS (MI6-controlled precursor to the C.I.A.—Dulles’ boss)
Until 2003, the British Pilgrims Society in America operated under Donovan’s New York non-profit. Henry Kissinger and Paul Volcker became Pilgrims Society vice-presidents 2007-09 during the “bank bailout”
Schwab’s family company, Escher Wyss, exploited slave labor and Allied POWs, manufactured key nuclear bomb-making technologies for Adolf Hitler and South Africa, sold Swiss flame throwers to the Nazis, and was named a National Socialist Model Company by Adolf Hitler
Schwab’s Escher Wyss company was protected not only by Hitler, but by Switzerland, Britain and America—making Schwab a criminal foreign meddler in every sense
.
Fig. 2—Douglas Gabriel, Michael McKibben. (Mar. 10, 2021). Klaus Schwab and the Fourth Reich. America Intelligence Media, Americans for Innovation. | (Raw *.mp4 video file).
.
.
Fig. 3—Sir Klaus Martin Schwab. (Compiled Mar. 11, 2021). Biography and Timeline. Anonymous Patriots.
.
Mar. 15, 2021—To read his voluminous public biographies and books, Klaus Schwab is a boy scout. We have discovered that the opposite is the truth. He is a deceiving, evil man, we believe.
Schwab’s World Economic Forum byline is “Committed to Improving the State of the World.”
As strategized by whom?
Well, by Klaus Schwab of course, as well as his family and his murder of Pilgrims Society 1%-ers. They are now pressing to replace human liberty with a pagan, techno-economic enslavement. They decided this for you while you were at work paying off the debt they have saddled you with.
Case in point, Klaus’ daughter Nicole (who has never had a real job) is promoting climate-change neo paganism and “a spiritual parable of Earth-centered wisdom.” As an individual, she is free to explore, but as a well-funded child of the great reset, her immaturity is a toxic brew.
KLAUS PROMOTES “QUEERIOUS CONVERSATIONS” IN INDIA
The well-funded Schwab “reset” agenda has gotten so absurd that in 2011 they partnered with the World Health Organization to pitch “Queerious Conversations in India . . . to promote LGBTQ+ visibility in the Rajasthan region” of India.
Evidently, the Schwab agenda is to destroy sexual morality and replace it with hedonism as a way to undermine humanity’s pursuit of God’s Wisdom and one’s higher self that is made in the image and after the likeness of God. The Book of Genesis 1:26.
KLAUS-HILDE PILGRIMS SWISS-GERMAN INTERLOCKS
Klaus married Hilde Stoll in Feb. 1971—just weeks after the first Davos conference. This marriage cemented interlocking Swiss-German corporate families that were a murder of Swiss banking and engineering industries, among them Escher-Wyss, Sulzer, Andritz, Stoll, Festo, Bank for International Settlements, MI6, CIA, Rahn and Bodmer.
The Schwab-Stoll families were steeped in the Jesuit, Habsburg and Merovingian controversies about blood lineage (“divine right of kings”) and papal control of banking, the Templars and the Knights of Malta.
The satanist British Pilgrims Society finally gained control of Europe by funding two world wars and a Bolshevik “Revolution” to subdue or destroy the monarchies of Russia, Germany, Austria (Hapsburg), Japan, Italy, France and Spain, to be replaced by their corporatist new world order in which Stalin and Hitler cooperated in their experiments at societal reconstruction through a satanic communist corporatism.
PILGRIM LENIN’S BEDFELLOWS
Indeed, in 1917 Vladimir Lenin lived in Zurich, Switzerland just a ten minute taxi ride from Escher-Wyss’s manufacturing campus before he was packed up in a train bound for St. Petersburg and the so-called Bolshevik “Revolution.”
Today those Bolsheviks are repackaged as ANIFA and Black Lives Matter. Note that Klaus’ Escher-Wyss father Eugen Wilhelm’s second wife, Erika Epprecht, also lived 10-min. from the Escher-Wyss manufacturing campus in Zurich.
As we have exposed previously, the British Pilgrims Society trained Lenin and Stalin in London starting shortly after the Pilgrims’ formation in 1902.
* * *
WEF IS A INSIDER TRADING FRAUD CIRCUS BARKED BY SCHWAB
Our discoveries about Klaus Schwab should prove beyond question that WEF is utterly fraudulent and an enemy of all humanity.
WEF meets every year in early February in Davos, Switzerland to map out their dystopic plans. We will show below that they are criminal, inhuman frauds. We will also show that Klaus Schwab is a sociopath with pathological mommy issues.
We have learned with these corruptocrat biographies that the information they hide is always highly instructive to their true characters.
.
KLAUS’ HIDDEN NAZI PAST
Klaus’ mainstream media and academia propagandists have hidden his Nazi past in a blizzard of awards, WEF programs, ghost-written books, speeches, interviews, honorary professorships and doctorates from all over the world.
AFI researchers have dubbed Klaus “old sourpuss” because he almost never smiles. Now we know why. He knows he is a fraud—a circus barker who grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth whose heart has nothing good to share with the world.
Klaus also hides that his biological mother was Jewish.
In his just-published propaganda Stakeholder Capitalism (Wiley, NY: 2021), Klaus wrote on the dedication page that his mother was Erika Epprecht. (“To my parents, Eugen Wilhelm Schwab and Erika Epprecht who taught me firsthand the value of education, collaboration, and the stakeholder principle”). This is a boldface lie.
KLAUS’S BIRTH MOTHER WAS JEWESS EMMA GISELA TEKELIUS SCHWAB (NÉE KILIAN)
Klaus and his older brother, Hans Ernst, were born to Eugen Wilhelm Schwab and Emma Gisela Tekelius Schwab (née Kilian) in Ravensburg (Mar. 30, 1938) and Karlsruhe (Oct. 13, 1927) respectively.
Hans Ernst did not disown their Jewish mother Emma like his brother Klaus has. On Dec. 09, 1938, Emma Schwab emigrated to the United States as Gisela Schwab, leaving her suckling infant Klaus, presumably forever. Was she fleeing Hitler’s Jewish persecution? Possibly. Was Klaus’ 50% Jewish blood being buried and replaced by a pure Aryan persona? Probably, especially considering his and his father’s life-long silence about her.
By contrast, wife Erika was of sturdy Aryan stock—acceptable to the Nazis. She was from Zurich, born Dec. 31, 1906, and like Vladimir Lenin, Erika lived just a ten-minute taxi ride from the Escher-Wyss turbine manufacturing campus in Zurich, according to the 1935 city directory.
Klaus’ pretend-mother Erika worked in personnel recruiting in Zurich. Ravensburg registry officials were unhelpful with birth, marriage and divorce records for Eugen Wilhelm Schwab, so no records of a divorce from Emma or re-marriage to Erika were discovered.
However, we do see Eugen and Erika traveling to Brazil in 1960, presumably to visit Hans Ernst and Escher-Wyss that Hans managed. Escher-Wyss, now Sulzer AG and Andritz AG, as well as Hilde’s Festo AG, all have large footprints in Brazilian industry, then and today.
Since Klaus hides his Jewish mother Emma—never speaking of her—we can only surmise that he suffers deep-seated abandonment issues, even now. This begs the question how this life-long maternal abandonment has affected his moral and spiritual priorities. Evidently badly.
EUGEN W. SCHWAB WAS A NUCLEAR-HAWKING RAVENSBURG CITY FATHER
Klaus’ father, Eugen Wilhelm Schwab, was the managing director of Escher-Wyss & Co. in 1938 when Klaus was born in Ravensburg, Germany, and continued with the company as President Emeritus until his death in 1982.
Escher-Wyss was founded in 1805, and developed unique engineering, manufacturing and high-strength materials capabilities focused on gas turbines, compressors, power generation, heat pumps, hydraulics, ships, thermal and hydroelectric power, and related automation controls.
Klaus has hidden Escher-Wyss Nazi sins his entire career. They are only now emerging. A few other researchers seem to have unearthed this evidence just recently as well. Much of it has been suppressed behind Top Secret archives in Switzerland, Germany, Britain and the United States—only recently released after 90+ years of in-human, diabolical suppression.
First, at the time of Klaus’ birth in 1938, Escher-Wyss had already been helping the German government build compressors, turbines and other critical elements for an emerging nuclear industry (since 1929). So, it stands to reason that as Hitler came to power, he coddled Escher-Wyss and the Schwabs.
The British 1965 propaganda film The Heroes of Telemark is about the Nazi heavy water manufacturing plant in Norway. That plant was built by Escher-Wyss.
Second, as Klaus grew into the Escher-Wyss Schwab family business, he watched his father Eugen make top secret deals with South Africa to supply key components for a nuclear bomb.
Then, when Klaus graduated from university in Zurich, funded by Escher-Wyss, he was immediately assigned to handle a 10,000-employee merger between Escher-Wyss and Sulzer AG. The merged company continued to supply nuclear bomb capabilities to South Africa with Klaus leading the effort, right up to 1971 when he started the European Management, and very probably afterwards.
FINALLY, THE BILL CLINTON PARDON OF MARC RICH ON JAN. 20, 2001 & HILLARY’S URANIUM ONE (2009) COME INTO FOCUS: RICH WAS BUSTING NUCLEAR SANCTIONS FOR KLAUS SCHWAB’S WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM CRONIES
South Africa was busting U.S. nuclear armament sanctions (clearly a ruse to fool the world public) for Sulzer-Escher-Wyss using Marc Rich, the notorious Swiss fugitive who was famously pardoned by Bill Clinton on Jan. 20, 2001. This fact alone places Klaus Schwab on the list of aiding and abetting convicted criminals like Marc Rich.
KLAUS SCHWAB: A TRIPLE AGENT DRIVING HUMANITY HELTER SKELTER INTO A GREAT RESET OF EVIL?
C.I.A. archive documents show that Escher-Wyss and Sulzer were being directed by the U.S. Department of Energy and the State Department. This would logically mean that Klaus Schwab was a triple-agent, working simultaneously for: (1) the CIA-MI6-UN British-Americans Pilgrims Society, (2) Nazis (now Germany) and (3) Switzerland.
Do we really want a triple-agent lying spy running the “Great Reset” and “Build Back Better?”
Third, Escher-Wyss was one of the largest employers in Ravensburg, Germany.
Fourth, Escher-Wyss was the first city in Nazi German to practice eugenics principles to murder “useless eaters” emerging from the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute (something like the National Institute of Health in the US, or Tavistock Institute in the UK).
Fifth, contrary to the propaganda stories about Ravensburg’s lack of war-making industries (as the reason why the Allies did not bomb the city and its Escher-Wyss industry), we discovered many Ravensburg unconfessed sins surrounding the Schwab’s and Escher-Wyss.
Besides parts for ships, airplanes, submarines and power plants, Escher-Wyss brokered flame throwers built in their Zurich plant and sold to the Nazis. This information comes from the U.S. Archives. This would have been handled by Eugen Schwab with a then about 5-year old Klaus at his side. They also supplied turbines, compressors and propellers for Nazi ships and submarines, as well as gas turbines for powering the war machine, in addition to their nuclear technology.
Escher-Wyss exploited slave labor (Jewish, Russian, Gypsy, homosexual, Hungarian, Romanian, Polish ), as well as Allied POWs. Being a National Socialists Model Company, this would certainly have included Dr. Josef Mengele’s biological war crimes (“The Angel of Death”).
KLAUS & HILDE’S INTERLOCKING COMPANIES EMPLOY OVER 50,000 TODAY—ALL FED BY WEF INSIDER TRADING
Escher Wyss today operates under numerous re branded names including Andritz AG and Sulzer AG. These companies are poised to profit enormously from the priorities reflected in Klaus Schwab’s so-called “Great Reset,” including hydropower, plasma turbines, nuclear power, materials science, nuclear weapons, oil and gas, coal, bio fuel, paper, food, robotics, artificial intelligence, financing, patents, pharmaceuticals and more.
Historically, the first (IBM) punch card machine readers, sometimes called Hollerith machines, were first manufactured by companies like Escher-Wyss and Sulzer who specialized in textile machines in the 1880s. Punched cards were used to created different patters on textile machines, as well as in player pianos. Other names in this business were Semyon Korsakov (ca. 1805); Charles Babbage (ca. 1855); Herman Hollerith (ca. 1880); The Tabulating Machine Company (ca. 1910), including Dehomag (Deutsche Hollerith-Maschinen GmbH, IBM Germany); and Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company (1911, renamed IBM).
Note: IBM International president Jacques G. Maisongroung was a feature speaker at Klaus M. Schwab’s first European Management Forum on Feb. 04-07, 1971, along with the black monarch and Fourth Reich heir apparent Otto von Habsburg.
Klaus’s married Hilde Stoll in the weeks following the first Forum in 1971. This was an evident corporate marriage. Hilde’s family, to this day, owns an engineering, robotics, artificial intelligence and process controls manufacturer name FESTO with over 20,000 employees.
It should be noted that the Escher and Sulzer families are interlocked with the Stolls, Schwabs and Bodmar families. The Bodmar family property in Cologny, Geneva Canton, Switzerland is the current site of The World Economic Forum headquarters as well as the Schwab residence—like a ritzy WACO-like compound.
The Bodmar family is a 15th-century silk manufacturing family who purchased the WEF land from Fanny Moser-Sulzer (Sulzer AG). Hans von Schulthess-Bodmar was a director of Escher-Wyss & Co. and those interlocked engineering firms and exclusive private banks are still in operation today (Escher & Rahn renamed Rahn Bodmer).
Indeed, none of these family businesses have lack funding. Given their close proximity to untold amounts of stolen Nazi-Japanese gold at the Bank for International Settlements, their “success” comes into focus. In fact, it was during the Marshall Plan that the British Pilgrims Society took control of these Second-Reich family corporate empires to serve their secular new world order scheme.
Martin Bodmar was born the same year as Klaus’ father Eugen (1899). Martin was a vice-president of the International Red Cross (1940-71). Klaus is believed to have attended grade school in the Au suburb of Zurich (1945-47, ages 7-9) and lived in Bodmar castle during that posh primary schooling.
PILGRIMS INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CREATED A GOLD-LAUNDERING BEACHHEAD IN RAVENSBURG & FUNDED ESCHER-WYSS, SULZER, STOLL AND FESTO PERPETUALLY
Klaus had all of his schooling bankrolled by Escher-Wyss financiers in Zurich just as his father Eugen Schwab, as managing director of Escher-Wyss & Cie. (Co.) in Ravensburg was forming the Ravensburg Chamber of Commerce and Industry as vice-president (1945-46).
Eugen formed the Ravensburg Chamber of Commerce at the behest of Sir Winthrop W. Aldrich (Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger’s and Paul Volcker’s boss), Allan W. Dulles (OSS/CIA Bern, Switzerland), and the Bank for International Settlements set up by MI6 and the CIA.
The British Pilgrims Society had already begun to funnel dirty Marshall Plan funds to insider companies like Escher-Wyss and Festo and their interlocked private Swiss banking family companies, even before the war ended, in exchange for Ravensburg’s help in transporting the Nazi gold to Bill J. Donovan, Allan W. Dulles and Edwin Pauley (OSS cum MI6—the rogue C.I.A.), the British Pilgrims Society required Schwab fealty to the new world order being fronted by their newly-forming United Nations.
Note: Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, the current Pilgrims Society chairman of SGO Smartmatic (with its masked OpTech ballot scanning software running in Dominion, ES&S, Hart InterCivic, Sequoia, Diebold, Premier), has served in almost every senior post at the United Nations: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Thailand, Africa, Central America and Geneva; Reform of UN communications; UN Development Program (UNDP); London International Model UN; UN Millennium Summit; and Deputy Secretary-General.
Note also: Sir Nigel Graham Knowles is Malloch-Brown’s fellow Pilgrim in SGO Smartmatic where he is director, chief trustee of Prince’s Trust America, and employed Kamala Harris newly-minted husband Doug Emhoff at DLA Piper LLP law.
Starting even before the Germans surrendered on May 07, 1945—just two weeks after the famous “Link-Up” (Apr. 25, 1945) of the American 69th Infantry Division with the Soviet 58th Guards in Torgau—Ravensburg was a staging ground for shipping stolen Nazi gold to Switzerland. It has also been a processing hub for Allied POWs as evident cover for Ravensburg duplicities discussed herein.
The looted Nazi gold was routed through Ravensburg, near the Swiss-Lichtenstein border, and sent to the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Bern and Zurich. Allen W. Dulles was the OSS spy director in Bern in charge of the Nazi gold for the Allies (Read: Pilgrims Society).
After the war, Dulles became the first director of the C.I.A. and was the man who later covered up the Kennedy Assassination in the Warren Commission, after, many believe, he ordered President Kennedy’s assassination to protect his emerging Pilgrims Society global enterprise founded on the stolen Nazi and Japanese gold—the banking system that operates today, still named the Bank for International Settlements, Zurich that handles inter banking special drawing rights.
President Kennedy was assassinated not long after he told a colleague: “I will splinter the CIA [Dulles’ creature] into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds.” (New York Times, Apr. 25, 1966).
A particular Scripture comes to mind when considering the depraved moral foundations of the Bank for International Settlements:
THE WISE AND FOOLISH BUILDERS
.
THE PILGRIMS SOCIETY EVIL OF THE MARSHALL PLAN
President Kennedy, as did President Eisenhower, surely knew about the criminal Pilgrims Society banking of fascist industries paying their tribute behind the smokescreen of the Marshall Plan “helping” Europe recover… from a war that these bâtards just funded! (Please excuse the French.)
Escher-Wyss hosted numerous Sir Winthrop’s Chamber meetings in Zurich and Ravensburg sponsored by their father-son city fathers team of Eugen and Klaus Schwab.
As the Escher-Wyss managing director, Eugen was a man whose favor was sought in both Germany, Switzerland, and the Pilgrims Society, and who was grooming son Klaus to take over their Escher-Wyss dynasty, now 216 years old.
ELECTION RIGGING LEADERSHIP EMERGES FROM WEF & THEIR PILGRIMS SOCIETY OVERLORDS
Today, Klaus Schwab’s Andritz AG auditor is KPMG who also audits SERCO (controlled by the British Crown) and SGO Smartmatic (aka Dominion etc.) Voting Systems (controlled by Lord Mark Malloch-Brown and Sir Nigel Knowles, Kamala Harris’ British handler.
Klaus received a bachelor and PhD in engineering from Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH Zürich, Switzerland, co-founded by Alfred Escher (1855).
Klaus also received overlapping masters and PhD degrees from the Jesuit University of Fribourg, Switzerland (1962-67). These Jesuits boast numerous Pilgrims Society globalists like British Zionist Chaim Azriel Weizmann; Basil Hume, archbishop of Canterbury; and, Juan Carlos, King of Spain.
Weizmann developed acetone used in cordite explosives for the British war industry in WWI, along with fellow British Zionist Sir Alfred M. Mond, chairman of Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) and gunpowder—a founding member of the Pilgrims Society (1902). He also founded the Weizmann Institute, funded by Lord Victor Rothschild, that coordinated biological research closely tied to the Coronavirus patent developer (U.S. Pat. No. No. 10,130,701, awarded Nov. 20, 2018)—The Pirbright Institute (UK). In fact, Pirbright tested many of biotechnology trials in Israel, according to newly-released Dr. Sydney Brenner Victor Rothschild correspondence.
In 1966-67, Klaus was shuffled off to Boston for his Harvard grooming. He received a master’s in public administration from the John F. Kennedy School of Government. There he admits collaborating with Pilgrims Society inner circle gadabouts Henry Kissinger and John K. Galbraith. Galbraith and Kissinger came to play leading rolls in the World Economic Forum strategies and tactics.
On the wings of Kissinger’s Pilgrims Society instructions, Klaus Schwab was assigned to organize the Europe Management Forum starting in 1971.
Starting in 1965, the U.S. Department of Energy began funding the development of nuclear weapons capability in apartheid South Africa (read: British-controlled).
Newly-discovered information for this most top secret program reveal that Sulzer-Escher-Wyss supplied critical components to the enrichment of triggering of a nuclear bomb, ostensibly for the South Africans. Apparently their prized elephant herds needed protecting.
NUCLEAR WARMONGERS (KLAUS SCHWAB & HIS GOLD-DIGGING INTERLOCKED FAMILIES) ARE RUNNING THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM
Klaus’s first job after university was managing a 10,000-employee merger of Escher-Wyss AG and Sulzer AG. Now we know that these companies and their families were interlocked and this was merely window dressing. This occurred just as Sulzer was shipping specialize compressor and turbine seals to South Africa. Later, Swiss fugitive Marc Rich ran sanctions against South Africa for this secret Pilgrims Society nuclear cabal.
SOCIAL NETWORKING WAS STOLEN TO HELP WEF INSIDERS COORDINATE GLOBALLY
Nuclear sanctions-buster Marc Rich was pardoned by Bill Clinton as he left office on Jan. 20, 2001. Notably, at the same time, Clinton pardoned his former C.I.A. Director John M. Deutch (1995-96), and appointed Leader Technologies’ patent attorney Professor James P. Chandler, III and Microsoft’s Bill Gates to an organization euphemistically named “National Infrastructure Assurance Council (NIAC)” that still exists to this day and is overseeing the weaponization of patents for the DoD Office of Net Assessment.
For those of you who follow this blog, Leader Technologies, Inc. is the patent holder of the invention of social networking. James P. Chandler, III was their patent attorney who secreted a copy of Leader’s invaluable source code and gave it to a newly-forming IBM Eclipse Foundation on Nov. 29, 2001, just after the 9/11 false flag diversion that drove Congress to approve sweeping sacrifices of liberty, privacy and security, ironically in the name of security. Leader Technologies has filed a lien on the U.S. Government and wants its shareholders paid for the risks they took and the government stole.
Bono obsequiously promotes the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab and George Soros. Evidently acting on insider tips in 2009, he “invested” $56 million in Facebook private stock sold corruptly by Goldman Sachs.* Those shares rose to $1 billion at the Facebook IPO on May 18, 2012, along with other Pilgrims/WEF insiders, including James W. Breyer, Accel Partners, Peter A. Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, Yuri Milner, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft and Meritech Management (Ann Huntress Lamont) who cashed in $13.26 billion on Day 3, much to the outrage of CNBC’s Jim Cramer.
* Bono corruptly invested in Facebook during the Leader v. Facebook social networking patent infringement trial 2008-2010. He invested concurrently with Hillary Clinton’s secret State Department contract with Facebook to build “an election winning template” to rig elections. Hillary’s contract was blatant obstruction of justice, not to mention criminal conspiracy, espionage, treason and sedition.
And yet, she walks free.
For now.
CRIMINAL WEF SYCHOPANT SIRS—DO YOU THINK BONO KNOWS KLAUS IS A NUCLEAR NAZI WHOSE COMPANIES CAN MAKE A CINDER OUT OF PLANET EARTH?
Fig. 5—Sir Klaus Martin Schwab, KCMG, and Sir Bono, KBE (Paul David Hewson) relish the psycophantic adulation of their self-anointed fellow insider trading criminals at the 2016 World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland. Photo: World Economic Forum.
CONCLUSION
There is a reason that Klaus Schwab has been the only leader of the World Economic Forum since 1971—50 years.
He is doing the bidding of his masters at the British Pilgrims Society. His children Nicole and Olivier have joined him and Hilde to carry on the fascist thefts into the next generation of their carefully crafted criminal enterprise.
Klaus Schwab’s perfidy demands that he and the World Economic Forum cease operations.
WEF is nothing more than a organized crime guild for the Pilgrims Society. They have co opted the deposed monarchies of Europe to support the “Great Reset.” In return, those deposed monarchs get insider financial trading information so that they can continue to fund their lavish lifestyles.
Klaus uses Jesuit tactics of secrecy, just like Cecil J. Rhodes dictated some 118 years earlier, to keep the average citizen ignorant of their criminal doings.
They use the media to tell lies to fool and pacify the public, as well as haughtily “create public opinion.”
Klaus’s Fourth Reich will invigorate many of the deposed royal families with new life.
The difference this time is that they will be taking orders from the corporate and banking criminals of the British Pilgrims Society, while the Pilgrims in turn hide their organized crime behind the fascination of a naive public with royalty, while these bureaucrats interlock into the closed loop of a 1%-ers club, like Escher-Wyss’ closed-cycle gas turbines that can run on any kind of fuel, including nuclear.
The insider trading of the WEF members, including his Escher-Wyss-Sulzer-Andritz-Stoll-Festo interlocking criminal enterprises, must be dismantled so that a free market can emerge, for the first time in human history.
The “Great Reset” insider trading criminal syndicate that is the World Economic Forum must be dismantled and their conspirators prosecuted worldwide for the great harm they have done to human civilization.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2021 1:35 am Post subject:
Schwab Family Values
Is the real Klaus Schwab a kindly old uncle figure wishing to do good for humanity, or is he really the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labour and aided Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb? Johnny Vedmore investigates.
Art by Hal Hefner, for Unlimited Hangout
On the morning of 11 September 2001, Klaus Schwab sat having breakfast in the Park East Synagogue in New York City with Rabbi Arthur Schneier, former Vice President for the World Jewish Congress and close associate of the Bronfman and Lauder families. Together, the two men watched one of the most impactful events of the next twenty years unfold as planes struck the World Trade Center buildings. Now, two decades on, Klaus Schwab again sits in a front row seat of yet another generation-defining moment in modern human history.
Always seeming to have a front row seat when tragedy approaches, Schwab’s proximity to world-altering events likely owes to his being one of the most well-connected men on Earth. As the driving force behind the World Economic Forum, “the international organization for public-private cooperation,” Schwab has courted heads of state, leading business executives, and the elite of academic and scientific circles into the Davos fold for over 50 years. More recently, he has also courted the ire of many due to his more recent role as the frontman of the Great Reset, a sweeping effort to remake civilization globally for the express benefit of the elite of the World Economic Forum and their allies.
Schwab, during the Forum’s annual meeting in January 2021, stressed that the building of trust would be integral to the success of the Great Reset, signalling a subsequent expansion of the initiative’s already massive public relations campaign. Though Schwab called for the building of trust through unspecified “progress,” trust is normally facilitated through transparency. Perhaps that is why so many have declined to trust Mr. Schwab and his motives, as so little is known about the man’s history and background prior to his founding of the World Economic Forum in the early 1970s.
Like many prominent frontmen for elite-sponsored agendas, the online record of Schwab has been well-sanitized, making it difficult to come across information on his early history as well as information on his family. Yet, having been born in Ravensburg, Germany in 1938, many have speculated in recent months that Schwab’s family may have had some tie to Axis war efforts, ties that, if exposed, could threaten the reputation of the World Economic Forum and bring unwanted scrutiny to its professed missions and motives.
In this Unlimited Hangout investigation, the past that Klaus Schwab has worked to hide is explored in detail, revealing the involvement of the Schwab family, not only in the Nazi quest for an atomic bomb, but apartheid South Africa’s illegal nuclear programme. Especially revealing is the history of Klaus’ father, Eugen Schwab, who led the Nazi-supported German branch of a Swiss engineering firm into the war as a prominent military contractor. That company, Escher-Wyss, would use slave labor to produce machinery critical to the Nazi war effort as well as the Nazi’s effort to produce heavy water for its nuclear program. Years later, at the same company, a young Klaus Schwab served on the board of directors when the decision was made to furnish the racist apartheid regime of South Africa with the necessary equipment to further its quest to become a nuclear power.
With the World Economic Forum now a prominent advocate for nuclear non-proliferation and “clean” nuclear energy, Klaus Schwab’s past makes him a poor spokesperson for his professed agenda for the present and the future. Yet, digging even deeper into his activities, it becomes clear that Schwab’s real role has long been to “shape global, regional and industry agendas” of the present in order to ensure the continuity of larger, much older agendas that came into disrepute after World War II, not just nuclear technology, but also eugenics-influenced population control policies.
A Swabian Story
On 10 July 1870, Klaus Schwab’s grandfather Jakob Wilhelm Gottfried Schwab, referred to later as simply Gottfried, was born in a Germany at war with its French neighbours. Karlsruhe, the town where Gottfried Schwab was born, was located in the Grand Duchy of Baden, ruled in 1870 by the 43 year old Grand Duke of Baden, Frederick I. The following year, the aforementioned Duke would be present at the proclamation of the German Empire which took place in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles. He was the only son-in-law of the incumbent Emperor Wilhelm I and, as Frederick I, was one of the reigning sovereigns of Germany. By the time Gottfried Schwab turned 18 years old, Germany would see Wilhelm II take the throne upon the death of his father, Frederick III.
In 1893, a 23 year old Gottfried Schwab would officially depart from Germany giving up his German citizenship and leaving Karlsruhe in order to emigrate to Switzerland. At the time, his occupation was noted as being that of a simple baker. Here, Gottfried would meet Marie Lappert who was from Kirchberg near Bern, Switzerland and who was five years his junior. They would marry in Roggwil, Bern, on 27 May 1898 and the following year, on 27 April 1899, their child Eugen Schwab was born. At the time of his birth, Gottfried Schwab had moved up in the world, having become a Machine Engineer. When Eugen was around one year old, Gottfried and Marie Schwab decided to return to live in Karlsruhe and Gottfried reapplied for German citizenship again.
Eugen Schwab would follow in the footsteps of his father and also become a Machine Engineer and in future years, he would advise his children to do the same. Eugen Schwab would eventually begin working at a factory in a town in Upper Swabia in Southern Germany, capital of the district of Ravensburg, Baden-Württemberg.
The factory where he would forge his career was the German branch of a Swiss company named Escher Wyss. Switzerland had many long standing economic ties to the Ravensburg area, with Swiss traders in the early 19th century bringing in yarn and weaving products. In the same period, Ravensburg delivered grain to Rorschach until 1870, alongside breeding animals and various cheeses, deep within the Swiss Alps. Between 1809 and 1837, there were 375 Swiss people living in Ravensburg, though the Swiss population had dropped to 133 by 1910.
In the 1830s, skilled Swiss workers set up a cotton factory with an incorporated bleaching and finishing plant owned and maintained by the Erpf brothers. The Ravensburg horse market, created in around 1840, also attracted many people from Switzerland, especially after the 1847 opening of the railway line from Ravensburg to Friedrichshafen, a town situated on nearby Lake Constance on the borderlands of Switzerland and Germany.
Rorsach grain traders would make regular visits to the Ravensburger Kornhaus and eventually this cross-border cooperation and trade also led to a branch of the Zurich machine factory, Escher-Wyss & Cie, opening in the city. This feat was made plausible once a train line connecting the Swiss to the German route network was completed between 1850 and 1853. The factory was set up by Walter Zuppinger between 1856 to 1859 and would begin production in 1860. In 1861, we can see the first official patent of the manufacturers Escher-Wyss in Ravensburg of “peculiar facilities on mechanical looms for ribbon weaving”. At this time, the Ravensburg branch of Escher Wyss would be directed by Walter Zuppinger, and would be where he developed his tangential turbine and where he gained a number of additional patents. In 1870, Zuppinger along with others would also founded a paper mill works in Baienfurt close to Ravensburg. He retired in 1875 and devoted all his energies to the further advance of turbines.
Founding Document of the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg Factory, dated 1860.
At the turn of the new century, Escher-Wyss had put the ribbon weaving to one side and begun to concentrate on much bigger projects like the production of large industrial turbines and, in 1907, they sought an “approval and concession procedure” for the construction of a hydropower plant near Dogern am Rhein, which was reported in a Basel brochure from 1925.
By 1920, Escher-Wyss found themselves embroiled in serious financial difficulties. The treaty of Versailles had restricted the military and economic growth of Germany following the Great War, and the Swiss Company found the downturn in neighbouring national civil engineering projects too much to bear. The parent branch of Escher-Wyss was located in Zurich and dated back to 1805 and the company, which still benefited from a good reputation and a history lasting more than a century, was deemed too important to lose. In December 1920, a reorganization was carried out by writing down the share capital from 11.5 to 4.015 million French Francs and which was later increased again to 5.515 million Swiss Francs. By the end of the financial year of 1931, Escher-Wyss was still losing money.
Yet, the plucky company continued to deliver large scale civil engineering contracts throughout the 1920s as noted in the official correspondence written in 1924 from Wilhelm III Prince of Urach to the company Escher-Wyss and to the asset manager of the House of Urach, accountant Julius Heller. This document discusses the “General Terms and Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Delivery of Machines and Other Equipment for Hydropower Plants”. This is also confirmed in a brochure on the “Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Installation of Turbines and Machine Parts within the German Reich”, printed on March 20, 1923 in an advertising brochure from Escher-Wyss for a universal oil pressure regulator.
After the Great Depression in the early 1930s had laid waste to the global economy, Escher-Wyss announced, “as the catastrophic development of the economic situation in connection with the currency declines; The company [Escher-Wyss] is temporarily unable to continue its current liabilities in various customer countries.” The company also revealed that they would apply for a court deferral to the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Nachrichten, which reported on 1 December 1931 that, “the company Escher-Wyss has been granted a stay of bankruptcy until the end of March 1932 and, acting as curator in Switzerland, a trust company has been appointed.” The article stated optimistically that, “there should be a prospect of continuing operations.” In 1931, Escher-Wyss employed around 1,300 non-contracted workers and 550 salaried employees.
By the mid-1930s, Escher-Wyss had again found itself in financial trouble. In order to rescue the company this time, a consortium was brought on board to save the ailing engineering firm. The consortium was partly formed by the Federal Bank of Switzerland (which was coincidently headed by a Max Schwab, who is of no relation to Klaus Schwab) and further restructuring took place. In 1938, it was announced that an engineer at the firm, Colonel Jacob Schmidheiny would become the new President of the Board of Directors at Escher-Wyss. Soon after the outbreak of war in 1939, Schmidheiny was quoted as saying, “The outbreak of war does not necessarily mean unemployment for the machine industry in a neutral country, on the contrary.” Escher-Wyss, and its new management, were apparently looking forward to profiting off the war, paving the way for their transformation into a major Nazi military contractor.
A Brief History of Jewish Persecution in Ravensburg
When Adolf Hitler came to power, many things changed in Germany, and the story of the Jewish population of Ravensburg during that era is a sad one to tell. Yet, it was hardly the first time that anti-Semitism had first been recorded as having reared its ugly head in the region.
In the Middle Ages, a synagogue, mentioned as far back as 1345 was located at the centre of Ravensburg, serving a small Jewish community which can be traced from 1330 to 1429. At the end of 1429 and through 1430, the Jews of Ravensburg were targeted and a horrific massacre ensued. In the nearby settlements of Lindau, Überlingen, Buchhorn (later renamed Friedrichshafen), Meersburg and Konstanz, there were mass arrests of Jewish residents. The Jews of Lindau were burnt alive during the 1429/1430 Ravensburg blood libel, in which members of the Jewish community were accused of ritually sacrificing babies. In August 1430, in Überlingen, the Jewish community was forced to convert, 11 of them did so and the 12 who refused were killed. The massacres which took place in Lindau, Überlingen and Ravensburg happened with the direct approval of the ruling King Sigmund and any remaining Jews were soon expelled from the region.
Ravensburg had this ban confirmed by Emperor Ferdinand I in 1559 and it was upheld, for example, in an 1804 instruction issued for the city guard, which read: “Since the Jews are not allowed to engage in any trade or business here, no one else is allowed to enter the city by post or by carriage, The rest, however, if they have not received a permit for a longer or shorter stay from the police office, are to be removed from the city by the police station.”
Not until the 19th century were Jews able to settle legally in Ravensburg again and, even by then, their number remained so small that a synagogue was not rebuilt. In 1858, there were only 3 Jews recorded in Ravensburg and, in 1895, this number peaked at 57. From the turn of the century until 1933, the numbers of Jews living in Ravensburg had steadily decreased until the community was only made up of 23 people.
By the start of the 1930s, there were seven main Jewish families living in Ravensburg, including the Adler, Erlanger, Harburger, Herrmann, Landauer, Rose and Sondermann families. After the National Socialists seized power, some of the Ravensburg Jews were initially forced to emigrate, while others would later be murdered in Nazi concentration camps. Leading up to World War II, there were many public displays of hatred towards the small community of Jews in and around Ravensburg.
As early as March 13, 1933, about three weeks before the nationwide Nazi boycott of all Jewish shops in Germany, SA guards posted themselves in front of two of the five Jewish shops in Ravensburg and tried to prevent potential buyers from entering, putting up signs on one shop stating “Wohlwert closed until Aryanization”. Wohlwert’s would soon become “Aryanised” and would be the only Jewish-owned shop to survive the Nazi pogrom. The other owners of the four large Jewish department stores in Ravensburg; Knopf; Merkur; Landauer and Wallersteiner were all forced to sell their properties to non-Jewish merchants between 1935 and 1938. During this period, many of the Ravensburg Jews were able to flee abroad before the worst of the National Socialist persecution began. While at least eight died violently, it was reported that three Jewish citizens who lived in Ravensburg survived because of their “Aryan” spouses. Some of the Jews who were arrested in Ravensburg during Kristallnacht were forced to march through the streets of Baden-Baden under SS guard supervision the following day and were later deported to Sachsenhausen concentration camp.
Horrific Nazi crimes against humanity took place in Ravensburg. On 1 January 1934, the “Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseases” came into force in Nazi Germany, meaning people with diagnosed illnesses such as dementia, schizophrenia, epilepsy, hereditary deafness, and various other mental disorders, could be legally forcibly sterilised. In the Ravensburg City Hospital, today called Heilig-Geist Hospital, forced sterilisations were carried out beginning in April 1934. By 1936, sterilisation was the most performed medical procedure in the municipal hospital.
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Escher-Wyss Ravensburg and the War
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
Nazi officials in front of the Ravensburg Town Hall in 1938, Source: Haus der Stadtgeschichte Ravensburg
Western military intelligence were already aware of Escher-Wyss’ complicity and collaboration with the Nazis. There are records available from western military intelligence at the time, specifically Record Group 226 (RG 226) from the data compiled by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which shows the Allied forces were aware of some of the Escher-Wyss’ business dealings with the Nazis.
Within RG 226, there are three specific mentions of Escher-Wyss including:
File number 47178 which reads: Escher-Wyss of Switzerland is working on a large order for Germany. Flame-throwers are despatched from Switzerland under the name Brennstoffbehaelter. Dated Sept. 1944.
File number 41589 showed that the Swiss were allowing German exports to be stored in their country, a supposedly neutral nation during World War II. The entry reads: Business relations between Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo (ENCASO), Escher Wyss, and Mineral Celbau Gesellschaft. 1 p. July 1944; see also L 42627 Report on collaboration between the Spanish Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo and the German Rheinmetall Borsig, on German exports stored in Switzerland. 1 p. August 1944.
File number 72654 claimed that: Hungary’s bauxite was formerly sent to Germany and Switzerland for refining. Then a government syndicate built an aluminium plant at Dunaalmas on the borders of Hungary. Electric power was provided; Hungary contributed coal mines, and equipment was ordered from the Swiss firm Escher-Wyss. Production began in 1941. 2 pp. May 1944.
Yet, Escher-Wyss were leaders in one blossoming field in particular, the creation of new turbine technology. The company had engineered a 14,500 HP turbine for the Norsk Hydro industrial facility’s strategically important hydroelectric plant at Vemork, near Rjukan in Norway. The Norsk Hydro plant, part powered by Escher Wyss, was the only industrial plant under Nazi control capable of producing heavy water, an ingredient essential for making plutonium for the Nazi atomic bomb program. The Germans had put all possible resources behind the production of heavy water, but the Allied forces were aware of the potentially game-changing tech advances by the increasingly desperate Nazis.
During 1942 and 1943, the hydro plant was the target of partially successful British Commando and Norwegian Resistance raids, although heavy water production continued. The Allied forces would drop more than 400 bombs on the plant, which barely affected the operations at the sprawling facility. In 1944, German ships attempted to transport heavy water back to Germany, but the Norwegian Resistance were able to sink the ship carrying the payload. With help from Escher-Wyss, the Nazis were almost able to change the tides of war and bring about an Axis victory.
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
Eugen Schwab would dutifully maintain the status quo during the war years. After all, with young Klaus Martin Schwab having been born in 1938 and his brother Urs Reiner Schwab born a few years later, Eugen would have wanted to keep his children out of harm’s way.
Klaus Martin Schwab – International Man of Mystery
Born on 30 March 1938 in Ravensburg, Germany, Klaus Schwab was the eldest child in a normal nuclear family. Between 1945 and 1947, Klaus attended primary school in Au, Germany. Klaus Schwab recalls in a 2006 interview with the Irish Times that:”After the war, I chaired the Franco-German regional youth association. My heroes were Adenauer, De Gasperi and De Gaulle.”
Klaus Schwab and his younger brother, Urs Reiner Schwab, were both to follow in the footsteps of their grandfather, Gottfried, and their father, Eugen, and would both initially train as machine engineers. Klaus’s father had told the young Schwab that, if he wanted to make an impact on the world, then he should train as a Machine Engineer. This would only be the beginning of Schwab’s University credentials.
Klaus would begin studying his plethora of degrees at Spohn-Gymnasium Ravensburg between 1949 and 1957, eventually graduating from the Humanistisches Gymnasium in Ravensburg. Between 1958 and 1962, Klaus began working with various engineering companies and, in 1962, Klaus completed his mechanical engineering studies at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich with an engineering diploma. The following year, he also completed an economics course at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. From 1963 until 1966, Klaus worked as Assistant to the Director-General of the German Machine-building Association (VDMA), Frankfurt.
In 1965, Klaus was also working on his doctorate from the ETH Zurich, writing his dissertation on: “The longer-term export credit as a business problem in mechanical engineering”. Then, in 1966, he received his Doctorate in Engineering from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich. At this time, Klaus’s father, Eugen Schwab, was swimming in bigger circles than he had previously swam. After being a well known personality in Ravensburg as the Managing Director of the Escher-Wyss factory from before the war, Eugen would eventually be elected as President of the Ravensburg Chamber of Commerce. In 1966, during the founding of the German committee for Splügen railway tunnel, Eugen Schwab defined the founding of the German committee as a project “that creates a better and faster connection for large circles in our increasingly converging Europe and thus offers new opportunities for cultural, economic and social development”.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab gained a Doctorate in Economics from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland as well as a Master of Public Administration qualification from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard in the United States. While at Harvard, Schwab was taught by Henry Kissinger, who he would later say were among the top 3-4 figures who had most influenced his thinking over the course of his entire life.
Henry Kissinger and his former pupil, Klaus Schwab, welcome former- UK PM Ted Heath at the 1980 WEF annual meeting. Source: World Economic Forum
In the previously mentioned Irish Times article of 2006, Klaus talks about that period as being very important to the formation of his present idealogical thinking, stating: “Years later, when I came back from the US after my studies at Harvard, there were two events that had a decisive triggering event on me. The first was a book by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber, The American Challenge – which said Europe would lose out against the US because of Europe’s inferior management methods. The other event was – and this is relevant to Ireland – the Europe of the six became the Europe of the nine.” These two events would help shape Klaus Schwab into a man who wanted to change the way people went about their business.
That same year, Klaus’s younger brother Urs Reiner Schwab graduated from ETH Zurich as a mechanical engineer, and Klaus Schwab went to work for his father’s old company, Escher-Wyss, soon to become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG, Zurich, as Assistant to the Chairman to aid in the reorganisation of the merging companies. This leads us towards Klaus’s nuclear connections.
The rise of a technocrat
Sulzer, a Swiss company whose origins date back to 1834, had first risen to prominence after starting to build compressors in 1906. By 1914, the family-run firm had become part of “three joint-stock companies,” one of which was the official holding company. In the 1930s, Sulzer’s profits would suffer during the Great Depression and, like many businesses at the time, faced disruption and industrial actions from their workers.
World War II may not have affected Switzerland as much as her neighbours, but the economic boom that was to follow led to Sulzer growing in power and market dominance. In 1966, just before the arrival of Klaus Schwab at Escher-Wyss, the Swiss turbine manufacturers signed a cooperation agreement with the Sulzer brothers in Winterthur. Sulzer and Escher-Wyss would begin to merge in 1966, when Sulzer purchased 53% of the company shares. Escher-Wyss would officially become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG in 1969 when the last of the shares were acquired by the Sulzer brothers.
Once the merger had started, Escher-Wyss would begin to be restructured and two of the existing Board Members would be the first to find their service to Escher-Wyss coming to an end. Dr. H. Schindler and W. Stoffel would resign from the Board of Directors now headed by Georg Sulzer and Alfred Schaffner. Dr. Schindler had been a member of the Escher-Wyss Board of Directors for 28 years and had worked alongside Eugen Schwab throughout much of his service. Peter Schmidheiny would later take over as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Escher-Wyss, continuing the Schmidheiny family rule over the company’s executives.
During the restructuring process, it was decided that Escher-Wyss and Sulzer would concentrate on separate areas of machine engineering with the Escher-Wyss factories primarily work on hydraulic power plant construction, including turbines, storage pumps, reversing machines, closing devices and pipelines, as well as steam turbines, turbo compressors, evaporation systems, centrifuges and machines for the paper and pulp industry. Sulzer would concentrate on the refrigeration industry as well as steam boiler construction and gas turbines.
On 1 January 1968, the freshly reorganised Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG was rolled out publicly and the company had become streamlined, a move deemed necessary because of several large acquisitions. This included a close collaboration with Brown Boveri, a group of Swiss electric engineering companies who had also worked for the Nazis, supplying the Germans with some of their U-boat technology used during World War II. Brown Boveri was also described as “defence-related electrical contractors” and would find the conditions of the Cold War arms race to be beneficial to their business.
The merger and reorganisation of these Swiss mechanical engineering giants saw their collaboration pay off in unique ways. During the 1968 Winter Olympics in Grenoble, Sulzer and Escher-Wyss used 8 refrigeration compressors to create tonnes of artificial ice. In 1969, the two firms combined to help in the building of a new passenger ship named “Hamburg”, the first ship in the world to be fully air-conditioned thanks to the Sulzer Escher-Wyss combination.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab officially burst onto the scene of the Swiss business community and took a lead in the merger between Sulzer and Escher-Wyss, as well as forming profitable alliances with Brown Boveri and others. In December 1967, Klaus would speak at a Zurich event to the top Swiss machine engineering organisations; the Employers Association of Swiss Machine and Metal Manufacturers and the Association of Swiss Machine Manufacturers.
In his talk, he would correctly predict the importance of incorporating computers into modern Swiss machine engineering, stating that:
“In 1971, products that are not even on the market today are likely to account for up to a quarter of sales. This requires companies to systematically research possible developments and identify gaps in the market. Today, 18 of the 20 largest companies in our machine industry have planning departments that are entrusted with such tasks. Of course, everyone has to make use of the latest technological advances, and the computer is one of them. The many small and medium-sized companies in our machine industry take the path of cooperation or use the services of special data processing service providers.”
Computers and data were obviously seen as important to the future, according to Schwab, and this was further projected in the reorganisation of Sulzer Escher-Wyss during their merger. Sulzer’s modern website reflects this noteworthy change in direction, stating that, in 1968: “Material technology activities are intensified [by Sulzer] and form the basis for medical technology products. The fundamental change from a machine-building company to a technology corporation starts to become apparent.”
Klaus Schwab was helping to turn Sulzer Escher-Wyss into something more than just a machine building giant, he was transforming them into a technology corporation driving at high speed into a hi-tech future. It should also be noted that Sulzer Escher-Wyss changed another focus of their business to help them “form the basis for medical technology products,” an area not previously mentioned as a target industry for Sulzer and/or Escher-Wyss.
But technological advancement wasn’t the only upgrade Klaus Schwab wanted to introduce at Sulzer Escher-Wyss, he also wanted to change how the company thought about their business managerial style. Schwab and his close associates were pushing an entirely new business philosophy which would allow “all employees to accept the imperatives of motivation and to ensure at home a sense of flexibility and manoeuvrability.”
It is here in the late 1960s where we see Klaus begin to emerge as a more public figure. At this time, the Sulzer Escher-Wyss company also became more interested in engaging with the press than ever before. In January 1969, the Swiss giants setup a public advisory session entitled the “Press Day of the Machine Industry“, which mainly concerned questions on company management. During the event, Schwab would state that companies using authoritarian styles of business management are “unable to fully activate the ‘human capital’”, an argument he would use on many separate occasions during the late 1960s.
Plutonium and Pretoria
Escher-Wyss were pioneers in some of the most important tech in power generation. As the US Department of Energy points out in their paper on Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle Development (CBC), a device used in hydro and nuclear power plants, “Escher-Wyss was the first company known to develop the turbomachinery for CBC systems starting in 1939.” Going on to state that 24 systems were built, “with Escher-Wyss designing the power conversion cycles and building the turbomachinery for all but 3”. By 1966, just before the entrance of Schwab into Escher-Wyss and the start of the Sulzer merger, the Escher-Wyss helium compressor was designed for the La Fleur Corporation and continued the evolution of the Brayton Cycle Development. This technology was still of importance to the arms industry by 1986, with nuclear powered drones being equipped with a helium-cooled Brayton cycle nuclear reactor.
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh.
In the report, Peter Hug outlined how Sulzer Escher Wyss AG (referred to post-merger as just Sulzer AG) had supplied vital components to the South African government and found evidence of Germany’s role in supporting the racist regime, also revealing that the Swiss government “was aware of illegal deals but ‘tolerated them in silence’ while supporting some of them actively or criticised them only half-heartedly”. Hug’s report was eventually finalised in a work entitled: “Switzerland and South Africa 1948-1994 – Final Report of the NFP 42+ commissioned by the Swiss Federal Council” which was compiled and written by Georg Kreis and published in 2007.
By 1967, South Africa had constructed a reactor as part of a plan to produce plutonium, the SAFARI-2 located at Pelindaba. SAFARI-2 was part of a project to develop a reactor moderated by heavy water which would be fuelled by natural uranium and cooled using sodium. This link to developing heavy water for the creation of uranium, the same technology which had been utilised by the Nazis also with the help of Escher-Wyss, may explain why South Africans initially got Escher-Wyss involved. But by 1969, South Africa abandoned the heavy water reactor project at Pelindaba because it was draining resources from their uranium enrichment program that had first begun in 1967.
A South African nuke in storage
In 1970, Escher-Wyss were definitely deeply involved with nuclear technology, as seen in a record available in the Landesarchivs Baden-Württemberg. The record shows details of a public procurement process and contains information about award talks with specific companies involved in the procurement of nuclear technology and materials. The companies cited include: NUKEM; Uhde; Krantz; Preussag; Escher-Wyss; Siemens; Rheintal; Leybold; Lurgi; and the infamous Transnuklear.
The Swiss and South Africans had a close relationship through this period of history, when it was hardly easy for the brutal South African regime to find close allies. By 4 November 1977, the United Nations Security Council had enacted resolution 418 which imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa, an embargo that wouldn’t be fully lifted until 1994.
Georg Kreis pointed out the following in his detailed assessment of the Hug report:
“The fact that the authorities assumed a laisse-faire attitude even after May 1978 comes to the fore in an exchange of letters between the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the DFMA in October/December 1978. As the study by Hug explicates, the Anti-Apartheid Movement of Switzerland pointed to German reports according to which Sulzer Escher-Wyss and a company called BBC had supplied parts for the South African uranium enrichment plant, and to repeated credits to ESCOM, which also included considerable contributions by Swiss banks. These assertions led to questions of whether the Federal Council – in light of fundamental support of the UN embargo, ought not to instigate the National Bank to stop authorising credits for ESCOM in the future.”
Swiss banks would help to fund the South African race to nukes and, by 1986, Sulzer Escher-Wyss were successfully producing special compressors for uranium enrichment.
The Founding of the World Economic Forum
In 1970, the young upstart, Klaus Schwab wrote to the European Commission and asked for help in setting up a “non-commercial think tank for European business leaders”. The European Commission would sponsor the event as well, sending French politician Raymond Barre to act as the forum’s “intellectual mentor”. Raymond Barre, who was at that time European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, would later go on to become French PM and would be accused of making anti-Semitic comments while in office.
So, in 1970, Schwab left Escher Wyss to organise a two-week business managerial conference. In 1971, the first meeting of the World Economic Forum – then called the European Management Symposium – convened in Davos, Switzerland. Around 450 participants from 31 countries would take part in Schwab’s first European Management Symposium, mostly made up of managers from various European companies, politicians, and US academics. The project was recorded as organised by Klaus Schwab and his secretary Hilde Stoll who, later the same year, would become Klaus Schwab’s wife.
Klaus’s European symposium was not an original idea. As writer Ganga Jey Aratnam stated quite coherently in 2018:
“Klaus Schwab’s “Spirit of Davos” was also the “Spirit of Harvard”. Not only had the business school advocated the idea of a symposium. Prominent Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith championed the affluent society as well as capitalism’s planning needs and the rapprochement of East and West.”
It was also true that, as Aratnam also pointed out, this was not the first time Davos had hosted such events. Between 1928 and 1931, the Davos University Conferences took place at the Hotel Belvédère, events which were co-founded by Albert Einstein and were only halted by the Great Depression and the threat of looming war.
The Club of Rome and the WEF
The most influential group that spurred the creation of Klaus Schwab’s symposium was the Club of Rome, an influential think tank of the scientific and monied elite that mirrors the World Economic Forum in many ways, including in its promotion of a global governance model led by a technocratic elite. The Club had been founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King during a private meeting at a residence owned by the Rockefeller family in Bellagio, Italy.
Among its first accomplishments was a 1972 book entitled “The Limits to Growth” that largely focused on global overpopulation, warning that “if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century.” At the third meeting of the World Economic Forum in 1973, Peccei delivered a speech summarizing the book, which the World Economic Forum website remembers as having been the distinguishing event of this historical meeting. That same year, the Club of Rome would publish a report detailing an “adaptive” model for global governance that would divide the world into ten, inter-connected economic/political regions.
The Club of Rome was long controversial for its obsession with reducing the global population and many of its earlier policies, which critics described as influenced by eugenics and neo-Malthusian. However, in the Club’s infamous 1991 Book, The First Global Revolution, it was argued that such policies could gain popular support if the masses were able to link them with an existential fight against a common enemy.
To that effect, The First Global Revolution contains a passage entitled “The common enemy of humanity is Man”, which states the following:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
In the years since, the elite that populate the Club of Rome and the World Economic Forum have frequently argued that population control methods are essential to protecting the environment. It is thus unsurprising that the World Economic Forum would similarly use the issues of climate and environment as a way to market otherwise unpopular policies, such as those of the Great Reset, as necessary.
The Past is Prologue
Since the founding of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab has become one of the most powerful people in the world and his Great Reset has made it more important than ever to scrutinize the man sitting on the globalist throne.
Given his prominent role in the far-reaching effort to transform every aspect of the existing order, Klaus Schwab’s history was difficult to research. When you start to dig into the history of a man like Schwab, who sits aloft other shadowy elite movers and shakers, you soon find lots of information has been hidden or removed. Klaus is somebody who wants to stay hidden in the shadowy corners of society and who will only allow the average person to see a well-presented construct of their chosen persona.
Is the real Klaus Schwab a kindly old uncle figure wishing to do good for humanity, or is he really the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labour and helped the Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb? Is Klaus the honest business manager who we should trust to create a fairer society and workplace for the common man, or is he the person who helped push Sulzer Escher-Wyss into a technological revolution that led to its role in the illegal creation of nuclear weapons for South Africa’s racist apartheid regime? The evidence I have looked at does not suggest a kindly man, but rather a member of a wealthy, well-connected family that has a history of helping create weapons of mass destruction for aggressive, racist governments.
As Klaus Schwab said in 2006 “Knowledge will soon be available everywhere – I call it the ‘googlisation’ of globalisation. It’s not what you know any more, it’s how you use it. You have to be a pace setter.” Klaus Schwab considers himself to be a pace setter and a top table player, and it must be said that his qualifications and experience are impressive. Yet, when it comes to practising what you preach, Klaus has been found out. One of the three biggest challenges on the priority list for the World Economic Forum is the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, yet neither Klaus Schwab nor his father Eugen lived up to those same principles when they were in business. Quite the opposite.
In January, Klaus Schwab announced that 2021 is the year that the World Economic Forum and its allies must “rebuild trust” with the masses. However, if Schwab continues to hide his history and that of his father’s connections to the “National Socialist Model Company” that was Escher-Wyss during the 1930s and 1940s, then people will have good reason to distrust the underlying motivations of his overreaching, undemocratic Great Reset agenda.
In the case of the Schwabs, the evidence doesn’t point at simply poor business practices or some sort of misunderstanding. The story of the Schwab family instead reveals a habit of working with genocidal dictators for the base motives of profit and power. The Nazis and the South African apartheid regime are two of the worst examples of leadership in modern politics, yet the Schwabs obviously couldn’t or wouldn’t see that at the time.
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The following document was prepared as a briefing paper for a group working in the population health arena. The intention was to revisit the breadth of my research with a specific focus placed on what it means for Black America. A similar document could have been written for the Indigenous peoples of Turtle Island. This material is currently under review pending future distribution in a more digestible format. I am long form, always. Since this document was referenced in a panel discussion I recently participated in and was distributed to a wider audience, I feel comfortable sharing it with you here. Please know that this is a work in progress.
Briefing Document:
We find ourselves in this season of the shortest days and longest nights. Yet in these long nights we are graced with guiding stars and hands to hold in the darkness. I have heavy information to share here. But first I want you to know that we were made for these times.
On a knife’s edge, teetering between sacred and profane, I know in my heart that through fortitude and moral courage humanity will prevail. Black America has lived for generations under this nation’s broken social contract. With the Fourth Industrial Revolution pushing to make natural humans obsolete, many more are awakening to the lived experience of Black and Brown America. This nation grew its power on broken treaties and stolen bodies. Now is a moment of profound reckoning to face off against the threat of artificial intelligence stealing the rights of ALL sovereign beings.
Who better to lead the world towards healing and justice than Black and Brown people? Consider WEB DuBois’ “Black Reconstruction,” the general strike, the power of Black bodies to throw a wrench in the gears of anti-life machines. What does that look in this new arena – the World Economic Forum’s Internet of Bodies? In a future run for billionaires by robots, the rich won’t want the labor of the masses after we’ve created the digital prison and trained our mechanized replacements. Instead, they will demand total compliance as debt instruments navigating their technocratic control grid.
My friends that is NOT our destiny. In the spirit of Marimba Ani, our task is to keep the circle unbroken as the disaster of the Great Reset unfolds. Black America must stand in its full power and recognize the true nature, the magnitude, of this struggle. That struggle is against digital chattel slavery tied to global financial markets, the Internet of Bodies, human capital bonds, and smart cities running on layered digital contractual agreements.
In the decade following the global crash of the housing market, which in no small part laid the foundation for what is rolling out now, investors, academics, and non-profits developed pilots testing outcomes-based government contracts that would enable private interests to invest in social service delivery. This idea goes back at least to the mid 1990s with social entrepreneur Steve Rothschild and economist Arthur Rolnick of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve.
Advances in digital identity, e-wallets, automated data-capture; Ethereum smart contracts, artificial intelligence, behavioral analytics, machine vision, and bipartisan support for “evidence-based” results are allowing new markets in human capital finance to finally come online at scale. The Davos crowd calls it stakeholder capitalism, and it is aligned to New America’s Bretton Woods II impact investing agenda. What it aims to do is pull the global “un-banked” into the marketplace – not as independent economic actors (homo economicus), but rather as commodities, livestock to be managed by emerging Fourth Sector Benefit Corporations.
There will be an alignment with communities of faith, as they will be tasked with processing the stakeholder capitalists’ “assets” with approved digital “solutions” on dashboards. This is consistent with the Vatican’s foray into “inclusive capitalism,” and builds on three social impact investing conferences co-hosted with the University of Notre Dame’s Business School.
You see history isn’t past; it is very present. What the Black community is facing – the plan to feed the poor into AI algorithms to profit those who are hoarding immense wealth – must be understood as a direct extension of the Doctrine of Discovery. Dr. Justin Leroy speaks eloquently to this in a 2017 lecture given at the Whitney Museum of Art for an exhibit on debt that examined social impact bonds, “Race, Finance, and the Afterlife of Slavery.” That papal bull asserted Black and Brown bodies, non-Christians, and their lands were to be viewed as assets and could thus be claimed by “enlightened” white colonists.
The same dynamic is in play with blockchain identity. Rather than double entry book keeping, which under-pinned maritime trade in stolen bodies, the world is shifting to decentralized cryptographic ledgers. It’s the same depravity, but in a shiny, new wrapper. Keep your eye on London. Vinay Gupta says blockchain law will be based in maritime law. We are entering a world structured by unseen digital contracts designed to advantage financiers. What will the jurisdictions be for lives forced into the cloud? What are the rights of digital twins? How does one hold a Decentralized Autonomous Organization accountable to the rule of law? There are so many questions that remain unanswered. These are the things Davos hopes will stay hidden until their plan is locked firmly in place.
Examples of blockchain ID social impact projects include the Amply blockchain identity app for toddlers attending daycare in Cape Town; blockchain babies in Tanzania where compliance with pre-natal appointments can be tracked for “impact;” DAPP blockchain software that uses machine vision and videos to trigger tokenized payments after documentation of proper parenting in poor households is uploaded; and the blockchain birth certificate program the state of Illinois launched with Evernym.
What I am laying out here might sound like science fiction, but it’s not. These efforts are backed by the United Nations in coordination with World Bank’s Human Capital Project. The World Bank has developed “smart” social impact bonds on blockchain, call bond-i. Many of these technologies, including retinal scan payments and digital currency have been developed using refugee communities through development aid channels. All the pieces were there waiting for the right catalyst. That catalyst is Covid. We must recognize this “totalitarian” software-as-a-service is now in play and could end up anywhere in the world in an instant – wherever there is money to be made.
To the tender ministrations of Ronald Cohen’s Social Finance; George Overholser’s Third Sector Capital Partners; Harvard Kennedy School’s Government Performance Lab; Stanford’s Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society; New Profit’s impact investing arm America Forward; the human capital innovators at ReadyNation and Council For A Strong America; add seed money from the Social Innovation Fund and the Social Impact Partnerships Pay For Result Act. Take that combination and pour it into the nation’s 8,700+ “Opportunity Zones,” where thanks to the decimation of the global economy the world’s largest asset holders are able to scoop up property and business in low income neighborhoods at rock bottom prices, and if they hold them for a decade they never have to pay capital gains taxes. Almost as if it had been planned.
No provisions are in place to protect local communities. Black families, who could be forced out by displacement or managed as impact commodities will have no protection under the law. Those who remain will likely become fodder for social entrepreneur wrap around services. Such programs have been perfected over thirty years in the Harlem Children’s Zone by Geoffrey Canada and George Soros’s former fund manager Stanley Druckenmiller with financial support from Paul Tudor Jones, hedge fund billionaire who got his start trading cotton futures and founded the Robin Hood Foundation. His foundation underwrote an entire book of equations linking social investments to economic rates of return. Feel free to browse all 168 pages published here. None of this is about eliminating poverty, but rather refining ways of growing it steadily and managing it profitably.
These arrangements, which have been set up as social impact bonds and pay for success deals, are designed to be data-driven. It is the “impact metrics” that enable the world’s richest to profit off misery. The general idea is that social problems are assigned a cost, which creates an offset that is used to fund “evidence-based” “solutions.” The prison industrial complex, built to brutally extract profit from the Black bodies that were excessed by the previous phase of globalization, is one of the largest cost-offsets. But chronic illnesses like asthma, diabetes, heart disease, and lead poisoning are big ones, too. The premise is that if you “fix” a poor person before they become incarcerated, diabetic, underemployed, or mentally-ill, you reduce the cost to tax-payers, and the investor can take a slice of the cost differential as a return on investment. Philanthropists, acting on behalf of finance and technology interests, fund academics at elite institutions to formulate “human capital” equations that justify this predatory enterprise.
Examples include:
Early Childhood Education and Home Visits – Heckman Equation, James Heckman, University of Chicago
Social Emotional Learning ROI – Clive Belfield, Teachers College Columbia University
Mental Health and Labour Economics – Richard Layard, Centre for Economic Performance London School of Economics
On the basis of such equations global investors are financing data-driven “solutions” for social problems with the understanding that they will continue to make money on poverty, misery and trauma as long as it remains well managed. In addition the people being run through such systems are turned into commodities for mining, not for their well-being, but to remake them as interoperable data on dashboards for investment portfolios. This is where we have landed. If we don’t resist now, our fate will be sealed. Life reduced to metrics stored by the National Interoperability Collaborative by Stewards of Change for artificial intelligence predictive profiling.
The World Economic Forum makes it very clear that through artificial intelligence, quantum computing, 6G, and synthetic biology the global elite intend to reengineer humanity to their own twisted ends. They envision an exclusive resort world meant for the rich and their robots. The masses, useless eaters, shall be disposed of, but profitably through creative debt structuring. The next “big short” won’t be toxic bundled mortgages, but rather human capital futures comprised of poor toddlers, returning citizens, the disabled and the elderly.
Society is staring down high-tech eugenics, and it is being sold to Black America as disruptive innovation. The chains meant to bind families into this new economic system as tradable data commodities are biometric health passports. The Commons Project, a partnership of the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Economic Forum (WEF), intends to control the masses using real-time health data that will dictate rights to access work, education, and employment. Digital vaccination records will, in effect, become slave passes. One of the architects of the system, JP Pollak, is based at Cornell-Tech with another Commons Project board member and Internet of Things pioneer Deborah Estrin. I doubt many people realize that our future mobility options are being plotted in * LEED certified buildings in the middle of the East River.
Having waged military and economic warfare against the peoples of the world, having looted the earth’s resources and saddled the poor with insurmountable debt, imperial interests are closing in on the final frontier, taking over our bodies cell by cell with mRNA “therapeutics.” Those who won’t submit to joining this population level bioengineering program may soon find themselves locked out of a normal life.
For centuries the Black community has resisted an unrelenting colonial project. Now we are faced with the “software of life,” settler-colonialism in single-use bar-coded syringes. Colonization shrunk to the cellular level. We must face the very real prospect of a cyborg future where natural humans are wiped from the face of the earth.
We have no choice other than to do everything in our power to derail such plans. We will stand not only against the merger of man with machine, but against the privatization of public benefit systems as pay for success investment opportunities. Attempts to defund the police and reform the judicial system will be for nothing unless we see that the end game is to turn the entire world into a digital jail run on blockchain from space using satellites and 5G. They want to track the “useless eaters” like livestock, and monitor us in the panopticon of smart cities using phones with vaccination passports (slave passes) and eventually wearable and implantable (chip) technologies.
When James Bullard, the CEO of the St. Louis Federal Reserve, called for testing every person every day this spring, you have to wonder if he was thinking about Graphene biosensors that transmit health data in real time to smart sensing environments. In this brave new world of pandemic preparedness, health security finance, vaccine bonds, and Goldman Sachs’ lockdown indices, the central banks intend to lay claim to bodies and minds.
They’ve been priming the children already, awarding skills points and badges for excellence in STEM and cyber-security (GCHQ) and robotics (Lego). They earn good behavior scrip while consuming “personalized” AI curricula funded by defense contractors. UNICEF is backing “innovative” educational software where children wouldn’t even have to know how to read – they would code using gestures in virtual reality headsets with haptic controllers. Look at the branding of Nubian VR that UNICEF is rolling out in Kenya. These African children are literally having their god given senses stolen from them and are being turned into batteries to power the hive mind of a completely militarized and dying planet. Deprived of history, humanities, art, music, sports, free play, and nature, the next generation will know no life outside of Google’s box.
In the coming years, the billionaires intend to force the masses, who’ve been pushed out of their previous jobs by the lockdowns, to code this biosecurity state into reality. The plan is for re-skilling for Fourth Industrial Revolution industries be done through Income Sharing Agreements (ISAs) in which people sign contracts to have their future wages garnished to pay back “investors” in their training. In 2018, David Cooper of Purdue Research Foundation, participated in a panel on ISAs at the annual Arizona State University – Global Silicon Valley conference. He was very clear that they anticipated the opening of a very large equity market in securitized debt for higher education (now post-Covid re-training, framed as lifelong learning). The platform to securitize the debt is Edly. Edly was co-founded by Christopher Ricciardi, the grandfather of Collateralized Debt Obligations. As you may remember it was CDOs that played a major role crashing the global economy the last time around. Once again history is not in the past, it is very much present. Each time to poor get played by the powerful.
Governor Jack Murphy, former Goldman Sachs executive, is rolling out an ISA program now in New Jersey in the form of Career Impact Bonds. This effort pairs nicely with United Way’s ALICE (Assets Limited Income Constrained Employed – the working poor) campaign, which originated out of their Northern New Jersey office. There is considerable overlap between the United Way and the Federal Reserve branches on the topic of fin-clusion (financial inclusion). In fact James Bullard, the test-every person-every day guy, was former board chair of United Way USA while serving as CEO of the St. Louis Federal Reserve branch. I don’t suppose it’s any coincidence that two hedge fund billionaires, John Overdeck and David Siegel who have heavily subsidized ed-tech software and workforce-aligned education programs through their foundations, live in that part of the state, too.
The global reskilling will be done under the banner of a Green New Deal, a faux-rebellion staged to profit corporate masters using the best behavioral engineering money can buy. It will involve deployment of massive embedded sensor networks that will transmit information and create a layered, digital, “mixed-reality.” Given how racialized the training data is, it is frightening to imagine what is will be like to navigate this “new” terrain built on a foundation of redlining, environmental racism, state violence, and deprivation.
The human capital commodities markets run on data. For this reason we must agree to push education, medicine, therapy and other services into the cloud, so data analysts can gather the metrics in service of “pay for success.” We are supposed to ignore the fact that children in Congo are mining the cobalt for the devices and that the energy and water requirements needed to run server farms are unsustainable. We are supposed to overlook the e-waste. We are not meant to know that while our children are being put into artificial intelligence feedback loops (sold as “personalized learning”) on HP laptops, another division of the company is running biometric border control in Palestine. They don’t want us to make those connections, that this machine that is “learning” our children in intimate detail, is fabricated by a company that will likely running future geo-fencing and facial recognition operations for the biosecurity state.
Picture life as a Pokémon-Go experience. Niantic and the Knight Foundation describe this as augmented cities. Now imagine a virtual fence, the kind you might use for a pet, adjusted in real time from a phone. To this mix add digital welfare benefits that are conditional and activated only upon demonstrated completion of assigned “self-improvement” tasks. Throw in low-cost mobile devices for digital wallets, stick QR codes in key locations, add drones and robot police dogs, slave patrols remade for mega-city asymmetrical warfare. In Australia they are already pitching the idea of “walk for the dole,” and they have remade their disability benefits as tokens on blockchain. They call it “programmable money.” Folks know it’s always been about playing the game, but this new game is going to have a lot less wriggle room after they make money “smart.”
This “social improvement” plan has been in the works for years, set up by the “Giving Pledge” signers, “The Good Club.” The billionaires know what’s best for you, and are going to “help” whether you like it or not. Once caught in their web of digital “social care” you’ll be expected to submit to operant conditioning and digital nudges. They’ll call it “social prescribing.” They’ll call it “cradle to career” pathways.” They’ll call it “continuum of care”. But really, it’s digital slavery, and they aim to harvest your life force, and that of your children, and send it to the cloud to be harvested by misers.
The billionaires are using Covid to attempt to sell this control system to Black America with soothing, progressive-sounding words like “equity,” “inclusion,” and “sustainability.” If this sounds like a stretch, I encourage you to read this Harvard Business Review op-ed from April that advocates Macro Eyes satellite surveillance of African children tied to vaccine compliance.
We know colonial powers have used Africa as a sacrificial zone of extraction and cheap labor for centuries. Well, the new extractive industry, according to former Alphabet / Google chairman Eric Schmidt, is data. Black bodies are being targeted as primary sites of extraction under the next phase of globalization, Globalization 4.0. Schmidt should know. His Alphabet spin-off CityBlock was set up three years ago to coordinate health-related wrap around services for urban populations. They pitch “healthy communities,” but their profit center must be understood within the larger framework of human capital finance tied to data profiling.
The plan is to turn social determinants of health into a weapon that will further oppress those most in need of housing, nutrition, employment, and education. They cover the big game (Sidewalk Labs, smart city infrastructure) and the small game (the NEST unit that controls your home environment). Eric Schmidt is working with Cuomo to “Reimagine New York,” including vaccine mandates. The “show me your papers” digital control mechanism works only as far as you can require continuous upgrades to that Gates Foundation-backed “software of life.”
All of this runs on health data, so Google’s involvement with Michael Bloomberg, ambassador to the WHO, impact investor and major proponent of ed-tech and social prescribing, in the development of the Cornell-Technion campus on Roosevelt Island is important. Their intent is to manage us through our digital dust linked to our actions within smart environments. All of that dust feeds signals intelligence informing hedge fund artificial intelligence that will be betting for us and against us in the near future.
The human capital bond market program is running through the central banking system and is closely tied to the adoption of digital wallets designed hold all sorts of tokenized assets including currencies, civil records, public benefits, and even rights and privileges. The state of Illinois, home of the commodities futures market in Chicago, has already been toying with this concept, imagining the many ways they could use innovative technologies to further control the poor.
A 2018 report to the Illinois Blockchain Task Force advanced the idea of programmable food assistance vouchers that would incentivize approved food purchases. Now combine that with the Imperial College of London’s spin off DNA nudge band, which supposedly aligns food items to your DNA, using samples gathered from Covid testing. Next combine food-tracking wearables with good behavior scrip, as is being used in the school-based Houston food pantry, and you see the trap being laid out piece by piece until the monstrous totality of it can be sprung on the Black community under the guise of keeping everyone “safe” and “healthy.”
The economic devastation wrought by the lockdowns will make many people wards of the state. Housing and food insecurity will put families at risk of being accused of neglect. A particular concern given that many of them are required to have surveillance devices on in their homes all day as a condition of their child “attending” school. Then, through a combination of welfare to work policies, public private partnerships, and predatory income sharing agreements like New Jersey’s Career Impact Bond program, they will reskill people as fodder for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The health passports are the gateway to creating digital civil registries that will eventually track public benefit access and indebtedness.
Reduced to collections of ones and zeros our individual and collective traumas will be run through algorithms and magically transformed into investment opportunities to be packaged as securities for human capital portfolios. These bonds will be aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and marketed as ESG (Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance) compliant.
Criminalized poverty will put families on pathways of compulsory self-improvement. E-carceration takes on a whole new meaning in this era of the Internet of Bodies that is being advanced by the WEF. CoreCivic and Geo Group have already been shifting resources into social work, continuum of care. Their guards will be replaced by growing cadres of social workers, therapists, educators, and health care providers, agents of a corporate state.
Lives reduced to impact metrics feeding “pay for success” finance deals, deals that allow pension funds to say their investments are “socially-responsible.” Very few realize that ESG investments aligned to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are mostly about managing the poor as data. Goal 1 is poverty. Goal 2 is Hunger. Goal 3 is health. Goal 4 is education. No one stops to consider that creating profitable markets in poverty management is no way to solve poverty.
All of this is profoundly anti-life, the idea of using digital nudges coded into smart environments to shape our behaviors and compel us conform to a world whose rulers do not have our best interests at heart. Life is not a game for entertainment or profit. We have the right to say no, to revoke consent for ourselves and for future generations. We will not submit to e-government civil registries to be put on blockchain, a coffle for the twenty-first century. Our lives are not meant for social impact processing to remake us as compliant machines for industrially engineered society. That is not our destiny.
Take this stand for the children, the babies, and those yet unborn that they may remain grounded in the real world, not the digital one. With deep spirit refuse to accept the future being forced on the masses by a small group of sociopathic billionaires, a future that would have everyone predictively profiled as burdens on society so hedge funds can gamble our lives as futures commodities.
Dismantle the human capital bond markets plotted out in the aftermath of the last economic crash by the Federal Reserve, the United Way, pension funds, insurers, accounting firms, health management organizations, and banks. With a visceral understanding of the intergenerational trauma wrought by slavery and America’s broken social compact, it is Black America that shine a light on the puppet masters advancing this program. It is rolling out because the Davos crowd has the money to buy off everyone. Electoral politics, non-profit institutions, and communities of faith are all under their thumb.
It is time to wake up to the reality that social entrepreneurship is about mining poverty for profit within a police state that is increasingly being run by artificial intelligence with drone surveillance. The Global Impact Investment Network and the Impact Management Project are calling the shots – over two thousand of the world’s largest asset holders. Philanthropists like Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Marc Benioff, Jeff Bezos, and Pierre Omidyar have created these destructive forms of innovative finance. It is called “Stakeholder Capitalism;” it operates out of Davos, and it intends to mine our lives to increase their wealth and power over the earth.
But we are David and in our hands we hold the pebbles that can take Goliath down. Think of Hercules, George Washington’s cook at the President’s House in Philadelphia, intentionally kept in slavery in a city of Free Blacks. He bided his time; he learned the ways of the machine; and then made his escape to freedom.
All of humanity, including the ancestors and the unborn are counting on us.
Is the real Klaus Schwab a kindly old uncle figure wishing to do good for humanity, or is he really the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labour and aided Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb? Johnny Vedmore investigates.
On the morning of 11 September 2001, Klaus Schwab sat having breakfast in the Park East Synagogue in New York City with Rabbi Arthur Schneier, former Vice President for the World Jewish Congress and closely associate of the Bronfman and Lauder families. Together, the two men watched one of the most impactful events of the next twenty years unfold as planes struck the World Trade Center buildings. Now, two decades on, Klaus Schwab again sits in a front row seat of yet a generation-defining moment in modern human history.
Always seeming to have a front row seat when tragedy approaches, Schwab’s proximity to world-altering events likely owes to his being one of the most well-connected men on Earth. As the driving force behind the World Economic Forum, “the international organization for public-private cooperation,” Schwab has courted heads of state, leading business executives, and the elite of academic and scientific circles into the Davos fold for over 50 years. More recently, he has also courted the ire of many due to his more recent role as the frontman of the Great Reset, a sweeping effort to remake civilization globally for the express benefit of the elite of the World Economic Forum and their allies.
Schwab, during the Forum’s annual meeting in January 2021, stressed that the building of trust would be integral to the success of the Great Reset, signalling a subsequent expansion of the initiative’s already massive public relations campaign. Though Schwab called for the building of trust through unspecified “progress,” trust is normally facilitated through transparency. Perhaps that is why so many have declined to trust Mr. Schwab and his motives, as so little is known about the man’s history and background prior to his founding of the World Economic Forum in the early 1970s.
Like many prominent frontmen for elite-sponsored agendas, the online record of Schwab has been well-sanitized, making it difficult to come across information on his early history as well as information on his family. Yet, having been born in Ravensburg, Germany in 1938, many have speculated in recent months that Schwab’s family may have had some tie to Axis war efforts, ties that, if exposed, could threaten the reputation of the World Economic Forum and bring unwanted scrutiny to its professed missions and motives.
In this Unlimited Hangout investigation, the past that Klaus Schwab has worked to hide is explored in detail, revealing the involvement of the Schwab family, not only in the Nazi quest for an atomic bomb, but apartheid South Africa’s illegal nuclear programme. Especially revealing is the history of Klaus’ father, Eugen Schwab, who led the Nazi-supported German branch of a Swiss engineering firm into the war as a prominent military contractor. That company, Escher-Wyss, would use slave labor to produce machinery critical to the Nazi war effort as well as the Nazi’s effort to produce heavy water for its nuclear program. Years later, at the same company, a young Klaus Schwab served on the board of directors when the decision was made to furnish the racist apartheid regime of South Africa with the necessary equipment to further its quest to become a nuclear power.
With the World Economic Forum now a prominent advocate for nuclear non-proliferation and “clean” nuclear energy, Klaus Schwab’s past makes him a poor spokesperson for his professed agenda for the present and the future. Yet, digging even deeper into his activities, it becomes clear that Schwab’s real role has long been to “shape global, regional and industry agendas” of the present in order to ensure the continuity of larger, much older agendas that came into disrepute after World War II, not just nuclear technology, but also eugenics-influenced population control policies.
A Swabian Story
On 10 July 1870, Klaus Schwab’s grandfather Jakob Wilhelm Gottfried Schwab, referred to later as simply Gottfried, was born in a Germany at war with its French neighbours. Karlsruhe, the town where Gottfried Schwab was born, was located in the Grand Duchy of Baden, ruled in 1870 by the 43 year old Grand Duke of Baden, Frederick I. The following year, the aforementioned Duke would be present at the proclamation of the German Empire which took place in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles. He was the only son-in-law of the incumbent Emperor Wilhelm I and, as Frederick I, was one of the reigning sovereigns of Germany. By the time Gottfried Schwab turned 18 years old, Germany would see Wilhelm II take the throne upon the death of his father, Frederick III.
In 1893, a 23 year old Gottfried Schwab would officially depart from Germany giving up his German citizenship and leaving Karlsruhe in order to emigrate to Switzerland. At the time, his occupation was noted as being that of a simple baker. Here, Gottfried would meet Marie Lappert who was from Kirchberg near Bern, Switzerland and who was five years his junior. They would marry in Roggwil, Bern, on 27 May 1898 and the following year, on 27 April 1899, their child Eugen Schwab was born. At the time of his birth, Gottfried Schwab had moved up in the world, having become a Machine Engineer. When Eugen was around one year old, Gottfried and Marie Schwab decided to return to live in Karlsruhe and Gottfried reapplied for German citizenship again.
Eugen Schwab would follow in the footsteps of his father and also become a Machine Engineer and in future years, he would advise his children to do the same. Eugen Schwab would eventually begin working at a factory in a town in Upper Swabia in Southern Germany, capital of the district of Ravensburg, Baden-Württemberg.
The factory where he would forge his career was the German branch of a Swiss company named Escher Wyss. Switzerland had many long standing economic ties to the Ravensburg area, with Swiss traders in the early 19th century bringing in yarn and weaving products. In the same period, Ravensburg delivered grain to Rorschach until 1870, alongside breeding animals and various cheeses, deep within the Swiss Alps. Between 1809 and 1837, there were 375 Swiss people living in Ravensburg, though the Swiss population had dropped to 133 by 1910.
In the 1830s, skilled Swiss workers set up a cotton factory with an incorporated bleaching and finishing plant owned and maintained by the Erpf brothers. The Ravensburg horse market, created in around 1840, also attracted many people from Switzerland, especially after the 1847 opening of the railway line from Ravensburg to Friedrichshafen, a town situated on nearby Lake Constance on the borderlands of Switzerland and Germany.
Rorsach grain traders would make regular visits to the Ravensburger Kornhaus and eventually this cross-border cooperation and trade also led to a branch of the Zurich machine factory, Escher-Wyss & Cie, opening in the city. This feat was made plausible once a train line connecting the Swiss to the German route network was completed between 1850 and 1853. The factory was set up by Walter Zuppinger between 1856 to 1859 and would begin production in 1860. In 1861, we can see the first official patent of the manufacturers Escher-Wyss in Ravensburg of “peculiar facilities on mechanical looms for ribbon weaving”. At this time, the Ravensburg branch of Escher Wyss would be directed by Walter Zuppinger, and would be where he developed his tangential turbine and where he gained a number of additional patents. In 1870, Zuppinger along with others would also founded a paper mill works in Baienfurt close to Ravensburg. He retired in 1875 and devoted all his energies to the further advance of turbines.
Founding Document of the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg Factory, dated 1860.
At the turn of the new century, Escher-Wyss had put the ribbon weaving to one side and begun to concentrate on much bigger projects like the production of large industrial turbines and, in 1907, they sought an “approval and concession procedure” for the construction of a hydropower plant near Dogern am Rhein, which was reported in a Basel brochure from 1925.
By 1920, Escher-Wyss found themselves embroiled in serious financial difficulties. The treaty of Versailles had restricted the military and economic growth of Germany following the Great War, and the Swiss Company found the downturn in neighbouring national civil engineering projects too much to bear. The parent branch of Escher-Wyss was located in Zurich and dated back to 1805 and the company, which still benefited from a good reputation and a history lasting more than a century, was deemed too important to lose. In December 1920, a reorganization was carried out by writing down the share capital from 11.5 to 4.015 million French Francs and which was later increased again to 5.515 million Swiss Francs. By the end of the financial year of 1931, Escher-Wyss was still losing money.
Yet, the plucky company continued to deliver large scale civil engineering contracts throughout the 1920s as noted in the official correspondence written in 1924 from Wilhelm III Prince of Urach to the company Escher-Wyss and to the asset manager of the House of Urach, accountant Julius Heller. This document discusses the “General Terms and Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Delivery of Machines and Other Equipment for Hydropower Plants”. This is also confirmed in a brochure on the “Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Installation of Turbines and Machine Parts within the German Reich”, printed on March 20, 1923 in an advertising brochure from Escher-Wyss for a universal oil pressure regulator.
After the Great Depression in the early 1930s had laid waste to the global economy, Escher-Wyss announced, “as the catastrophic development of the economic situation in connection with the currency declines; The company [Escher-Wyss] is temporarily unable to continue its current liabilities in various customer countries.” The company also revealed that they would apply for a court deferral to the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Nachrichten, which reported on 1 December 1931 that, “the company Escher-Wyss has been granted a stay of bankruptcy until the end of March 1932 and, acting as curator in Switzerland, a trust company has been appointed.” The article stated optimistically that, “there should be a prospect of continuing operations.” In 1931, Escher-Wyss employed around 1,300 non-contracted workers and 550 salaried employees.
By the mid-1930s, Escher-Wyss had again found itself in financial trouble. In order to rescue the company this time, a consortium was brought on board to save the ailing engineering firm. The consortium was partly formed by the Federal Bank of Switzerland (which was coincidently headed by a Max Schwab, who is of no relation to Klaus Schwab) and further restructuring took place. In 1938, it was announced that an engineer at the firm, Colonel Jacob Schmidheiny would become the new President of the Board of Directors at Escher-Wyss. Soon after the outbreak of war in 1939, Schmidheiny was quoted as saying, “The outbreak of war does not necessarily mean unemployment for the machine industry in a neutral country, on the contrary.” Escher-Wyss, and its new management, were apparently looking forward to profiting off the war, paving the way for their transformation into a major Nazi military contractor.
A Brief History of Jewish Persecution in Ravensburg
When Adolf Hitler came to power, many things changed in Germany, and the story of the Jewish population of Ravensburg during that era is a sad one to tell. Yet, it was hardly the first time that anti-Semitism had first been recorded as having reared its ugly head in the region.
In the Middle Ages, a synagogue, mentioned as far back as 1345 was located at the centre of Ravensburg, serving a small Jewish community which can be traced from 1330 to 1429. At the end of 1429 and through 1430, the Jews of Ravensburg were targeted and a horrific massacre ensued. In the nearby settlements of Lindau, Überlingen, Buchhorn (later renamed Friedrichshafen), Meersburg and Konstanz, there were mass arrests of Jewish residents. The Jews of Lindau were burnt alive during the 1429/1430 Ravensburg blood libel, in which members of the Jewish community were accused of ritually sacrificing babies. In August 1430, in Überlingen, the Jewish community was forced to convert, 11 of them did so and the 12 who refused were killed. The massacres which took place in Lindau, Überlingen and Ravensburg happened with the direct approval of the ruling King Sigmund and any remaining Jews were soon expelled from the region.
Ravensburg had this ban confirmed by Emperor Ferdinand I in 1559 and it was upheld, for example, in an 1804 instruction issued for the city guard, which read: “Since the Jews are not allowed to engage in any trade or business here, no one else is allowed to enter the city by post or by carriage, The rest, however, if they have not received a permit for a longer or shorter stay from the police office, are to be removed from the city by the police station.”
Not until the 19th century were Jews able to settle legally in Ravensburg again and, even by then, their number remained so small that a synagogue was not rebuilt. In 1858, there were only 3 Jews recorded in Ravensburg and, in 1895, this number peaked at 57. From the turn of the century until 1933, the numbers of Jews living in Ravensburg had steadily decreased until the community was only made up of 23 people.
By the start of the 1930s, there were seven main Jewish families living in Ravensburg, including the Adler, Erlanger, Harburger, Herrmann, Landauer, Rose and Sondermann families. After the National Socialists seized power, some of the Ravensburg Jews were initially forced to emigrate, while others would later be murdered in Nazi concentration camps. Leading up to World War II, there were many public displays of hatred towards the small community of Jews in and around Ravensburg.
As early as March 13, 1933, about three weeks before the nationwide Nazi boycott of all Jewish shops in Germany, SA guards posted themselves in front of two of the five Jewish shops in Ravensburg and tried to prevent potential buyers from entering, putting up signs on one shop stating “Wohlwert closed until Aryanization”. Wohlwert’s would soon become “Aryanised” and would be the only Jewish-owned shop to survive the Nazi pogrom. The other owners of the four large Jewish department stores in Ravensburg; Knopf; Merkur; Landauer and Wallersteiner were all forced to sell their properties to non-Jewish merchants between 1935 and 1938. During this period, many of the Ravensburg Jews were able to flee abroad before the worst of the National Socialist persecution began. While at least eight died violently, it was reported that three Jewish citizens who lived in Ravensburg survived because of their “Aryan” spouses. Some of the Jews who were arrested in Ravensburg during Kristallnacht were forced to march through the streets of Baden-Baden under SS guard supervision the following day and were later deported to Sachsenhausen concentration camp.
Horrific Nazi crimes against humanity took place in Ravensburg. On 1 January 1934, the “Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseases” came into force in Nazi Germany, meaning people with diagnosed illnesses such as dementia, schizophrenia, epilepsy, hereditary deafness, and various other mental disorders, could be legally forcibly sterilised. In the Ravensburg City Hospital, today called Heilig-Geist Hospital, forced sterilisations were carried out beginning in April 1934. By 1936, sterilisation was the most performed medical procedure in the municipal hospital.
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Escher-Wyss Ravensburg and the War
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
Nazi officials in front of the Ravensburg Town Hall in 1938, Source: Haus der Stadtgeschichte Ravensburg
Western military intelligence were already aware of Escher-Wyss’ complicity and collaboration with the Nazis. There are records available from western military intelligence at the time, specifically Record Group 226 (RG 226) from the data compiled by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which shows the Allied forces were aware of some of the Escher-Wyss’ business dealings with the Nazis.
Within RG 226, there are three specific mentions of Escher-Wyss including:
File number 47178 which reads: Escher-Wyss of Switzerland is working on a large order for Germany. Flame-throwers are despatched from Switzerland under the name Brennstoffbehaelter. Dated Sept. 1944.
File number 41589 showed that the Swiss were allowing German exports to be stored in their country, a supposedly neutral nation during World War II. The entry reads: Business relations between Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo (ENCASO), Escher Wyss, and Mineral Celbau Gesellschaft. 1 p. July 1944; see also L 42627 Report on collaboration between the Spanish Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo and the German Rheinmetall Borsig, on German exports stored in Switzerland. 1 p. August 1944.
File number 72654 claimed that: Hungary’s bauxite was formerly sent to Germany and Switzerland for refining. Then a government syndicate built an aluminium plant at Dunaalmas on the borders of Hungary. Electric power was provided; Hungary contributed coal mines, and equipment was ordered from the Swiss firm Escher-Wyss. Production began in 1941. 2 pp. May 1944.
Yet, Escher-Wyss were leaders in one blossoming field in particular, the creation of new turbine technology. The company had engineered a 14,500 HP turbine for the Norsk Hydro industrial facility’s strategically important hydroelectric plant at Vemork, near Rjukan in Norway. The Norsk Hydro plant, part powered by Escher Wyss, was the only industrial plant under Nazi control capable of producing heavy water, an ingredient essential for making plutonium for the Nazi atomic bomb program. The Germans had put all possible resources behind the production of heavy water, but the Allied forces were aware of the potentially game-changing tech advances by the increasingly desperate Nazis.
During 1942 and 1943, the hydro plant was the target of partially successful British Commando and Norwegian Resistance raids, although heavy water production continued. The Allied forces would drop more than 400 bombs on the plant, which barely affected the operations at the sprawling facility. In 1944, German ships attempted to transport heavy water back to Germany, but the Norwegian Resistance were able to sink the ship carrying the payload. With help from Escher-Wyss, the Nazis were almost able to change the tides of war and bring about an Axis victory.
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
Eugen Schwab would dutifully maintain the status quo during the war years. After all, with young Klaus Martin Schwab having been born in 1938 and his brother Urs Reiner Schwab born a few years later, Eugen would have wanted to keep his children out of harm’s way.
Klaus Martin Schwab – International Man of Mystery
Born on 30 March 1938 in Ravensburg, Germany, Klaus Schwab was the eldest child in a normal nuclear family. Between 1945 and 1947, Klaus attended primary school in Au, Germany. Klaus Schwab recalls in a 2006 interview with the Irish Times that:”After the war, I chaired the Franco-German regional youth association. My heroes were Adenauer, De Gasperi and De Gaulle.”
Klaus Schwab and his younger brother, Urs Reiner Schwab, were both to follow in the footsteps of their grandfather, Gottfried, and their father, Eugen, and would both initially train as machine engineers. Klaus’s father had told the young Schwab that, if he wanted to make an impact on the world, then he should train as a Machine Engineer. This would only be the beginning of Schwab’s University credentials.
Klaus would begin studying his plethora of degrees at Spohn-Gymnasium Ravensburg between 1949 and 1957, eventually graduating from the Humanistisches Gymnasium in Ravensburg. Between 1958 and 1962, Klaus began working with various engineering companies and, in 1962, Klaus completed his mechanical engineering studies at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich with an engineering diploma. The following year, he also completed an economics course at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. From 1963 until 1966, Klaus worked as Assistant to the Director-General of the German Machine-building Association (VDMA), Frankfurt.
In 1965, Klaus was also working on his doctorate from the ETH Zurich, writing his dissertation on: “The longer-term export credit as a business problem in mechanical engineering”. Then, in 1966, he received his Doctorate in Engineering from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich. At this time, Klaus’s father, Eugen Schwab, was swimming in bigger circles than he had previously swam. After being a well known personality in Ravensburg as the Managing Director of the Escher-Wyss factory from before the war, Eugen would eventually be elected as President of the Ravensburg Chamber of Commerce. In 1966, during the founding of the German committee for Splügen railway tunnel, Eugen Schwab defined the founding of the German committee as a project “that creates a better and faster connection for large circles in our increasingly converging Europe and thus offers new opportunities for cultural, economic and social development”.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab gained a Doctorate in Economics from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland as well as a Master of Public Administration qualification from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard in the United States. While at Harvard, Schwab was taught by Henry Kissinger, who he would later say were among the top 3-4 figures who had most influenced his thinking over the course of his entire life.
Henry Kissinger and his former pupil, Klaus Schwab, welcome former- UK PM Ted Heath at the 1980 WEF annual meeting. Source: World Economic Forum
In the previously mentioned Irish Times article of 2006, Klaus talks about that period as being very important to the formation of his present idealogical thinking, stating: “Years later, when I came back from the US after my studies at Harvard, there were two events that had a decisive triggering event on me. The first was a book by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber, The American Challenge – which said Europe would lose out against the US because of Europe’s inferior management methods. The other event was – and this is relevant to Ireland – the Europe of the six became the Europe of the nine.” These two events would help shape Klaus Schwab into a man who wanted to change the way people went about their business.
That same year, Klaus’s younger brother Urs Reiner Schwab graduated from ETH Zurich as a mechanical engineer, and Klaus Schwab went to work for his father’s old company, Escher-Wyss, soon to become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG, Zurich, as Assistant to the Chairman to aid in the reorganisation of the merging companies. This leads us towards Klaus’s nuclear connections.
The rise of a technocrat
Sulzer, a Swiss company whose origins date back to 1834, had first risen to prominence after starting to build compressors in 1906. By 1914, the family-run firm had become part of “three joint-stock companies,” one of which was the official holding company. In the 1930s, Sulzer’s profits would suffer during the Great Depression and, like many businesses at the time, faced disruption and industrial actions from their workers.
World War II may not have affected Switzerland as much as her neighbours, but the economic boom that was to follow led to Sulzer growing in power and market dominance. In 1966, just before the arrival of Klaus Schwab at Escher-Wyss, the Swiss turbine manufacturers signed a cooperation agreement with the Sulzer brothers in Winterthur. Sulzer and Escher-Wyss would begin to merge in 1966, when Sulzer purchased 53% of the company shares. Escher-Wyss would officially become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG in 1969 when the last of the shares were acquired by the Sulzer brothers.
Once the merger had started, Escher-Wyss would begin to be restructured and two of the existing Board Members would be the first to find their service to Escher-Wyss coming to an end. Dr. H. Schindler and W. Stoffel would resign from the Board of Directors now headed by Georg Sulzer and Alfred Schaffner. Dr. Schindler had been a member of the Escher-Wyss Board of Directors for 28 years and had worked alongside Eugen Schwab throughout much of his service. Peter Schmidheiny would later take over as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Escher-Wyss, continuing the Schmidheiny family rule over the company’s executives.
During the restructuring process, it was decided that Escher-Wyss and Sulzer would concentrate on separate areas of machine engineering with the Escher-Wyss factories primarily work on hydraulic power plant construction, including turbines, storage pumps, reversing machines, closing devices and pipelines, as well as steam turbines, turbo compressors, evaporation systems, centrifuges and machines for the paper and pulp industry. Sulzer would concentrate on the refrigeration industry as well as steam boiler construction and gas turbines.
On 1 January 1968, the freshly reorganised Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG was rolled out publicly and the company had become streamlined, a move deemed necessary because of several large acquisitions. This included a close collaboration with Brown Boveri, a group of Swiss electric engineering companies who had also worked for the Nazis, supplying the Germans with some of their U-boat technology used during World War II. Brown Boveri was also described as “defence-related electrical contractors” and would find the conditions of the Cold War arms race to be beneficial to their business.
The merger and reorganisation of these Swiss mechanical engineering giants saw their collaboration pay off in unique ways. During the 1968 Winter Olympics in Grenoble, Sulzer and Escher-Wyss used 8 refrigeration compressors to create tonnes of artificial ice. In 1969, the two firms combined to help in the building of a new passenger ship named “Hamburg”, the first ship in the world to be fully air-conditioned thanks to the Sulzer Escher-Wyss combination.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab officially burst onto the scene of the Swiss business community and took a lead in the merger between Sulzer and Escher-Wyss, as well as forming profitable alliances with Brown Boveri and others. In December 1967, Klaus would speak at a Zurich event to the top Swiss machine engineering organisations; the Employers Association of Swiss Machine and Metal Manufacturers and the Association of Swiss Machine Manufacturers.
In his talk, he would correctly predict the importance of incorporating computers into modern Swiss machine engineering, stating that:
“In 1971, products that are not even on the market today are likely to account for up to a quarter of sales. This requires companies to systematically research possible developments and identify gaps in the market. Today, 18 of the 20 largest companies in our machine industry have planning departments that are entrusted with such tasks. Of course, everyone has to make use of the latest technological advances, and the computer is one of them. The many small and medium-sized companies in our machine industry take the path of cooperation or use the services of special data processing service providers.”
Computers and data were obviously seen as important to the future, according to Schwab, and this was further projected in the reorganisation of Sulzer Escher-Wyss during their merger. Sulzer’s modern website reflects this noteworthy change in direction, stating that, in 1968: “Material technology activities are intensified [by Sulzer] and form the basis for medical technology products. The fundamental change from a machine-building company to a technology corporation starts to become apparent.”
Klaus Schwab was helping to turn Sulzer Escher-Wyss into something more than just a machine building giant, he was transforming them into a technology corporation driving at high speed into a hi-tech future. It should also be noted that Sulzer Escher-Wyss changed another focus of their business to help them “form the basis for medical technology products,” an area not previously mentioned as a target industry for Sulzer and/or Escher-Wyss.
But technological advancement wasn’t the only upgrade Klaus Schwab wanted to introduce at Sulzer Escher-Wyss, he also wanted to change how the company thought about their business managerial style. Schwab and his close associates were pushing an entirely new business philosophy which would allow “all employees to accept the imperatives of motivation and to ensure at home a sense of flexibility and manoeuvrability.”
It is here in the late 1960s where we see Klaus begin to emerge as a more public figure. At this time, the Sulzer Escher-Wyss company also became more interested in engaging with the press than ever before. In January 1969, the Swiss giants setup a public advisory session entitled the “Press Day of the Machine Industry“, which mainly concerned questions on company management. During the event, Schwab would state that companies using authoritarian styles of business management are “unable to fully activate the ‘human capital’”, an argument he would use on many separate occasions during the late 1960s.
Plutonium and Pretoria
Escher-Wyss were pioneers in some of the most important tech in power generation. As the US Department of Energy points out in their paper on Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle Development (CBC), a device used in hydro and nuclear power plants, “Escher-Wyss was the first company known to develop the turbomachinery for CBC systems starting in 1939.” Going on to state that 24 systems were built, “with Escher-Wyss designing the power conversion cycles and building the turbomachinery for all but 3”. By 1966, just before the entrance of Schwab into Escher-Wyss and the start of the Sulzer merger, the Escher-Wyss helium compressor was designed for the La Fleur Corporation and continued the evolution of the Brayton Cycle Development. This technology was still of importance to the arms industry by 1986, with nuclear powered drones being equipped with a helium-cooled Brayton cycle nuclear reactor.
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh.
In the report, Peter Hug outlined how Sulzer Escher Wyss AG (referred to post-merger as just Sulzer AG) had supplied vital components to the South African government and found evidence of Germany’s role in supporting the racist regime, also revealing that the Swiss government “was aware of illegal deals but ‘tolerated them in silence’ while supporting some of them actively or criticised them only half-heartedly”. Hug’s report was eventually finalised in a work entitled: “Switzerland and South Africa 1948-1994 – Final Report of the NFP 42+ commissioned by the Swiss Federal Council” which was compiled and written by Georg Kreis and published in 2007.
By 1967, South Africa had constructed a reactor as part of a plan to produce plutonium, the SAFARI-2 located at Pelindaba. SAFARI-2 was part of a project to develop a reactor moderated by heavy water which would be fuelled by natural uranium and cooled using sodium. This link to developing heavy water for the creation of uranium, the same technology which had been utilised by the Nazis also with the help of Escher-Wyss, may explain why South Africans initially got Escher-Wyss involved. But by 1969, South Africa abandoned the heavy water reactor project at Pelindaba because it was draining resources from their uranium enrichment program that had first begun in 1967.
A South African nuke in storage
In 1970, Escher-Wyss were definitely deeply involved with nuclear technology, as seen in a record available in the Landesarchivs Baden-Württemberg. The record shows details of a public procurement process and contains information about award talks with specific companies involved in the procurement of nuclear technology and materials. The companies cited include: NUKEM; Uhde; Krantz; Preussag; Escher-Wyss; Siemens; Rheintal; Leybold; Lurgi; and the infamous Transnuklear.
The Swiss and South Africans had a close relationship through this period of history, when it was hardly easy for the brutal South African regime to find close allies. By 4 November 1977, the United Nations Security Council had enacted resolution 418 which imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa, an embargo that wouldn’t be fully lifted until 1994.
Georg Kreis pointed out the following in his detailed assessment of the Hug report:
“The fact that the authorities assumed a laisse-faire attitude even after May 1978 comes to the fore in an exchange of letters between the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the DFMA in October/December 1978. As the study by Hug explicates, the Anti-Apartheid Movement of Switzerland pointed to German reports according to which Sulzer Escher-Wyss and a company called BBC had supplied parts for the South African uranium enrichment plant, and to repeated credits to ESCOM, which also included considerable contributions by Swiss banks. These assertions led to questions of whether the Federal Council – in light of fundamental support of the UN embargo, ought not to instigate the National Bank to stop authorising credits for ESCOM in the future.”
Swiss banks would help to fund the South African race to nukes and, by 1986, Sulzer Escher-Wyss were successfully producing special compressors for uranium enrichment.
The Founding of the World Economic Forum
In 1970, the young upstart, Klaus Schwab wrote to the European Commission and asked for help in setting up a “non-commercial think tank for European business leaders”. The European Commission would sponsor the event as well, sending French politician Raymond Barre to act as the forum’s “intellectual mentor”. Raymond Barre, who was at that time European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, would later go on to become French PM and would be accused of making anti-Semitic comments while in office.
So, in 1970, Schwab left Escher Wyss to organise a two-week business managerial conference. In 1971, the first meeting of the World Economic Forum – then called the European Management Symposium – convened in Davos, Switzerland. Around 450 participants from 31 countries would take part in Schwab’s first European Management Symposium, mostly made up of managers from various European companies, politicians, and US academics. The project was recorded as organised by Klaus Schwab and his secretary Hilde Stoll who, later the same year, would become Klaus Schwab’s wife.
Klaus’s European symposium was not an original idea. As writer Ganga Jey Aratnam stated quite coherently in 2018:
“Klaus Schwab’s “Spirit of Davos” was also the “Spirit of Harvard”. Not only had the business school advocated the idea of a symposium. Prominent Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith championed the affluent society as well as capitalism’s planning needs and the rapprochement of East and West.”
It was also true that, as Aratnam also pointed out, this was not the first time Davos had hosted such events. Between 1928 and 1931, the Davos University Conferences took place at the Hotel Belvédère, events which were co-founded by Albert Einstein and were only halted by the Great Depression and the threat of looming war.
The Club of Rome and the WEF
The most influential group that spurred the creation of Klaus Schwab’s symposium was the Club of Rome, an influential think tank of the scientific and monied elite that mirrors the World Economic Forum in many ways, including in its promotion of a global governance model led by a technocratic elite. The Club had been founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King during a private meeting at a residence owned by the Rockefeller family in Bellagio, Italy.
Among its first accomplishments was a 1972 book entitled “The Limits to Growth” that largely focused on global overpopulation, warning that “if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century.” At the third meeting of the World Economic Forum in 1973, Peccei delivered a speech summarizing the book, which the World Economic Forum website remembers as having been the distinguishing event of this historical meeting. That same year, the Club of Rome would publish a report detailing an “adaptive” model for global governance that would divide the world into ten, inter-connected economic/political regions.
The Club of Rome was long controversial for its obsession with reducing the global population and many of its earlier policies, which critics described as influenced by eugenics and neo-Malthusian. However, in the Club’s infamous 1991 Book, The First Global Revolution, it was argued that such policies could gain popular support if the masses were able to link them with an existential fight against a common enemy.
To that effect, The First Global Revolution contains a passage entitled “The common enemy of humanity is Man”, which states the following:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
In the years since, the elite that populate the Club of Rome and the World Economic Forum have frequently argued that population control methods are essential to protecting the environment. It is thus unsurprising that the World Economic Forum would similarly use the issues of climate and environment as a way to market otherwise unpopular policies, such as those of the Great Reset, as necessary.
The Past is Prologue
Since the founding of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab has become one of the most powerful people in the world and his Great Reset has made it more important than ever to scrutinize the man sitting on the globalist throne.
Given his prominent role in the far-reaching effort to transform every aspect of the existing order, Klaus Schwab’s history was difficult to research. When you start to dig into the history of a man like Schwab, who sits aloft other shadowy elite movers and shakers, you soon find lots of information has been hidden or removed. Klaus is somebody who wants to stay hidden in the shadowy corners of society and who will only allow the average person to see a well-presented construct of their chosen persona.
Is the real Klaus Schwab a kindly old uncle figure wishing to do good for humanity, or is he really the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labour and helped the Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb? Is Klaus the honest business manager who we should trust to create a fairer society and workplace for the common man, or is he the person who helped push Sulzer Escher-Wyss into a technological revolution that led to its role in the illegal creation of nuclear weapons for South Africa’s racist apartheid regime? The evidence I have looked at does not suggest a kindly man, but rather a member of a wealthy, well-connected family that has a history of helping create weapons of mass destruction for aggressive, racist governments.
As Klaus Schwab said in 2006 “Knowledge will soon be available everywhere – I call it the ‘googlisation’ of globalisation. It’s not what you know any more, it’s how you use it. You have to be a pace setter.” Klaus Schwab considers himself to be a pace setter and a top table player, and it must be said that his qualifications and experience are impressive. Yet, when it comes to practising what you preach, Klaus has been found out. One of the three biggest challenges on the priority list for the World Economic Forum is the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, yet neither Klaus Schwab nor his father Eugen lived up to those same principles when they were in business. Quite the opposite.
In January, Klaus Schwab announced that 2021 is the year that the World Economic Forum and its allies must “rebuild trust” with the masses. However, if Schwab continues to hide his history and that of his father’s connections to the “National Socialist Model Company” that was Escher-Wyss during the 1930s and 1940s, then people will have good reason to distrust the underlying motivations of his overreaching, undemocratic Great Reset agenda.
In the case of the Schwabs, the evidence doesn’t point at simply poor business practices or some sort of misunderstanding. The story of the Schwab family instead reveals a habit of working with genocidal dictators for the base motives of profit and power. The Nazis and the South African apartheid regime are two of the worst examples of leadership in modern politics, yet the Schwabs obviously couldn’t or wouldn’t see that at the time.
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The last question that should be asked about the real motivations behind the actions of Herr Schwab, may be the most important for the future of humanity: Is Klaus Schwab trying to create the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or is he trying to create the Fourth Reich?
The Great Reset may go down as the most important book, perhaps with hindsight. I will be adding to it over the next month with a section reviewing the demise of every economy that has ever tried to impose precisely what they are doing now. We need not just look at Russia and China or how the collapse of Marxism forced political change, and we need not even regurgitate the ongoing example of Venezuela. There are more shocking examples that warn of civil war and the breakup of nations, such as Yugoslavia and the collapse of Spain, which was once the wealthiest nation in Europe before it fell to third world status. Spain became a serial defaulter beginning in 1557, 1575, 1575, 1596, 1607, and 1647. You would think that people would wise up and stop lending to governments. That is the definition of insanity; they continually do the same stupid thing and expect a different result.
Then there is Argentina. Most write off South America and pay no attention to it, assuming they are all just corrupt banana republics. Believe it or not, Argentina was actually one of the richest countries in the world at the start of the 20th century. Then the Marxists dominated South America, and when they did, they absolutely destroyed Argentina. Argentina has never been able to recover, much as was the outcome of former Yugoslavia, Spain, Russia, and just about every other country Marxists seized control.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2021 10:40 pm Post subject:
UN-Backed Banker Alliance Announces “Green” Plan to Transform the Global Financial System
The most powerful private financial interests in the world, under the cover of COP26, have developed a plan to transform the global financial system by fusing with institutions like the World Bank and using them to further erode national sovereignty in the developing world.
On Wednesday, an “industry-led and UN-convened” alliance of private banking and financial institutions announced plans at the COP26 conference to overhaul the role of global and regional financial institutions, including the World Bank and IMF, as part of a broader plan to “transform” the global financial system. The officially stated purpose of this proposed overhaul, per alliance members, is to promote the transition to a “Net-Zero” economy. However, the group’s proposed “reimagining” of international financial institutions (IFIs), according to their recently published “progress report”, would also move to merge these institutions with the private banking interests that compose the alliance; create a new system of “global financial governance”; and erode national sovereignty among developing countries by forcing them to establish business environments deemed “friendly” to the interests of alliance members. In other words, the powerful banking interests that compose this group are pushing to recreate the entire global financial system for their benefit under the guise of promoting sustainability.
This alliance, called the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), was launched in April by John Kerry, US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate Change; Janet Yellen, US Secretary of the Treasury and former chair of the Federal Reserve; and Mark Carney, the UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance and former chair of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada. Carney, who is also the UK Prime Minister’s Finance Advisor for the COP26 conference, currently co-chairs the alliance with US billionaire and former Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg.
GFANZ Leadership; Source: GFANZ
Upon its creation, GFANZ stated that it would “provide a forum for strategic coordination among the leadership of finance institutions from across the finance sector to accelerate the transition to a net zero economy” and “mobilize the trillions of dollars necessary” to accomplish the group’s zero emissions goals. At the time of the alliance’s launch, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson described GFANZ as “uniting the world’s banks and financial institutions behind the global transition to net zero” while John Kerry noted that “the largest financial players in the world recognize energy transition represents a vast commercial opportunity.” In analyzing those two statements together, it seems clear that GFANZ has united the world’s most powerful private banks and financial institutions behind what they see as, first and foremost, “a vast commercial opportunity”, their exploitation of which they are marketing as a “planetary imperative.”
John Kerry in conversation with CNN’s Christine Amanpour at COP 26; Source: CNN
GFANZ is composed of several “subsector alliances”, including the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAM), the Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance (NZAOA), and the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA). Together, they command a formidable part of global private banking and finance interests, with the NZBA alone currently representing 43% of all global banking assets. However, the “largest financial players” who dominate GFANZ include the CEOs of BlackRock, Citi, Bank of America, Banco Santander and HSBC, as well as David Schwimmer, CEO of the London Stock Exchange Group and Nili Gilbert, Chair of the Investment Committee of the David Rockefeller Fund.
Notably, another Rockefeller-connected entity, the Rockefeller Foundation, recently played a pivotal role in the creation of Natural Asset Corporations (NACs) in September. These NACs seek to create a new asset class that would put the natural world, as well as the ecological processes that underpin all life, up for sale under the guise of “protecting” them. Principals of GFANZ, including BlackRock’s Larry Fink, have long been enthusiastic about the prospects of NACs and other related efforts to financialize the natural world and he has also played a key role in marketing said financialization as necessary to combat climate change.
As part of COP26, GFANZ – a key group at that conference – is publishing a plan aimed at scaling “private capital flows to emerging and developing economies.” Per the alliance’s press release, this plan focuses on “the development of country platforms to connect the now enormous private capital committed to net zero with country projects, scaling blended finance through MDBs [multilateral development banks] and developing high integrity, credible global carbon markets.” The press release notes that this “enormous private capital” is money that alliance members seek to invest in emerging and developing countries, estimated at over $130 trillion, and that – in order to deploy these trillions in invest – “the global financial system is being transformed” by this very alliance in coordination with the group that convened them, the United Nations.
Proposing a Takeover
Details of GFANZ’s plan to deploy trillions of member investments into emerging markets and developing countries was published in the alliance’s inaugural “Progress Report”, the release of which was timed to coincide with the COP26 conference. The report details the alliance’s “near-term work plan and ambitions,” which the alliance succinctly summarizes as a “program of work to transform the financial system.”
The report notes that the alliance has moved from the “commitment” stage to the “engagement” stage, with the main focus of the engagement stage being the “mobilization of private capital into emerging markets and developing countries through private-sector leadership and public-private collaboration.” In doing so, per the report, GFANZ seeks to create “an international financial architecture” that will increase levels of private investment from alliance members in those economies. Their main objectives in this regard revolve around the creation of “ambitious country platforms” and increased collaboration between MDBs and the private financial sector.
GFANZ Progress ReportDownload
Per GFANZ, a “country platform” is defined as a mechanism that convenes and aligns “stakeholders”, i.e. a mechanism for public-private partnership/stakeholder capitalism, “around a specific issue or geography”. Examples offered include Mike Bloomberg’s Climate Finance Leadership Initiative (CFLI), which is partnered with Goldman Sachs and HSBC, among other private-sector institutions. While framed as being driven by “stakeholders,” existing examples of “country platforms” offered by the GFANZ are either private-sector led initiatives, like the CFLI, or public-private partnerships that are dominated by powerful multinational corporations and billionaires. As recently explained by journalist and researcher Iain Davis, these “stakeholder capitalism” mechanism models – despite being presented as offering a “more responsible” form of capitalism – instead allow corporations and private entities to participate in forming the regulations that govern their own markets and giving them a greatly increased role in political decision-making by placing them on equal footing with national governments. It is essentially a creative way of marketing “corporatism,” the definition of fascism infamously supplied by Italian dictator Benito Mussolini.
In addition to the creation of “corporatist” “country platforms” that focus on specific areas and/or issues in the developing world, GFANZ aims to also further “corporatize” multilateral development banks (MDBs) and development finance institutions (DFIs) in order to better fulfill the investment goals of alliance members. Per the alliance, this is described as increasing “MBD-private sector collaboration.” The GFANZ report notes that “MDBs play a critical role in helping to grow investment flows” in the developing world. MDBs, like the World Bank, have long been criticized for accomplishing this task by trapping developing nations in debt and then using that debt to force those nations to deregulate markets (specifically financial markets), privatize state assets and implement unpopular austerity policies. The GFANZ report makes it clear that the alliance now seeks to use these same, controversial tactics of MDBs by forcing even greater deregulation on developing countries to facilitate “green” investments from alliance members.
The report explicitly states that MDBs should be used to prompt developing nations “to create the right high-level, cross-cutting enabling environments” for alliance members’ investments in those nations. The significantly greater levels of private capital investment, which are needed to reach Net-Zero per GFANZ, require that MDBs are used to prompt developing nations to “establish investment-friendly business environments; a replicable framework for deploying private capital investments; and pipelines of bankable investment opportunities.” GFANZ then notes that “private capital and investment will flow to these projects if governments and policymakers create the appropriate conditions”, i.e. enabling environments for private-sector investments.
In other words, through the proposed increase in private-sector involvement in MDBs, like the World Bank and regional development banks, alliance members seek to use MDBs to globally impose massive and extensive deregulation on developing countries by using the decarbonization push as justification. No longer must MDBs entrap developing nations in debt to force policies that benefit foreign and multinational private-sector entities, as climate change-related justifications can now be used for the same ends.
BlackRock CEO and GFANZ Principal Larry Fink talks to CNBC during COP26; Source: CNBC
This new modality for MDBs, along with their fusion with the private sector, is ultimately what GFANZ proposes in terms of “reimagining” these institutions. GFANZ principal and BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, during a COP26 panel that took place on November 2nd, explicitly referred to the plan to overhaul these institutions when he said that: “If we’re going to be serious about climate change in the emerging world, we’re going to have to really focus on the reimagination of the World Bank and the IMF.”
Fink continued:
“They are the senior lender, and not enough private capital’s coming into the emerging world today because of the risks associated with the political risk, investing in brownfield investments — if we are serious about elevating investment capital in the emerging world … I’m urging the owners of those institutions, the equity owners, to focus on how we reimagine these institutions and rethink their charter.”
GFANZ’s proposed plans to reimagine MDBs are particularly alarming given how leaked US military documents openly admit that such banks are essentially “financial weapons” that have been used as “Financial Instruments and Diplomatic Instruments of US National Power” as well as Instruments of what those same documents refer to as the “current global governance system” that are used to force developing countries to adopt policies they otherwise would not.
In addition, given Fink’s statements, it should not be surprising that the GFANZ report notes that their effort to establish “country platforms” and alter the functioning and charters of MDBs is a key component of implementing pre-planned recommendations aimed at “seizing the New Bretton Woods moment” and remaking the “global financial governance” system so that is “promote[s] economic stability and sustainable growth.”
As noted in other GFANZ documents and on their website, the goal of the alliance is the transformation of the global financial system and it is quite obvious from member statements and alliance documents that the goal of that transformation is to facilitate the investment goals of alliance members beyond what is currently possible by using climate change-related dictates, as opposed to debt, as the means to that end.
The UN and the “Quiet Revolution”
In light of GFANZ’s membership and their ambitions, some may wonder why the United Nations would back such a predatory initiative. Doesn’t the United Nations, after all, chiefly work with national governments as opposed to private-sector interests?
Though that is certainly the prevailing public perception of the UN, the organization has – for decades – been following a “stakeholder capitalist” model that privileges the private sector and billionaire “philanthropists” over national governments, with the latter merely being tasked with creating “enabling environments” for the policies created by and for the benefit of the former.
Speaking to the World Economic Forum in 1998, then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan made this shift explicit:
“The United Nations has been transformed since we last met here in Davos. The Organization has undergone a complete overhaul that I have described as a ‘quiet revolution’…A fundamental shift has occurred. The United Nations once dealt only with governments. By now we know that peace and prosperity cannot be achieved without partnerships involving governments, international organizations, the business community and civil society…The business of the United Nations involves the businesses of the world.”
With the UN now essentially a vehicle for the promotion of stakeholder capitalism, it is only fitting that it would “convene” and support the efforts of a group like GFANZ to extend that stakeholder capitalist model to other institutions involved in global governance, specifically global financial governance. Allowing GFANZ members, i.e. many of the largest private banks and financial institutions in the world, to fuse with MDBs, remake the “global financial governance system” and gain increased control over political decisions in the emerging world is a banker’s dream come true. To get this far, all they have needed is to convince enough of the world’s population that such shifts are necessary due to the perceived urgency of climate change and the need to rapidly decarbonize the economy. Yet, if put into practice, what will result is hardly a “greener” world, but a world dominated by a small financial and technocratic elite who are free to profit and pillage from both “natural capital” and “human capital” as they see fit.
Today, MDBs are used as “instruments of power” that utilize debt to force developing nations to implement policies that benefit foreign interests, not their national interests. If GFANZ gets their way, the MDBs of tomorrow will be used to essentially eliminate national sovereignty, privatize the “natural assets” (e.g. ecosystems, ecological processes) of the developing world and force increasingly technocratic policies designed by global governance institutions and think tanks on ever more disenfranchised populations.
As we exit the pandemic, expect to hear much more about The Great Reset and building back better. Far from resulting in a low-carbon dream life, though, it’s a cartoonish fantasy that will hand the global elite even more power.
‘The Great Reset’ is a term that has been bandied about quite readily by most Western neo-liberal politicians. So often, in fact, and without proper explanation, that it strikes the prudent observer as a kind of paid advertisement.
a closer look at the great reset – a fake utopia sold to us by charlatans
But what is it exactly? The term rose to prominence at the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in June 2020. It was initially launched by the Prince of Wales, before being absorbed into the philosophy of the sartorially dystopian sci-fi villain Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the WEF.
The Great Reset refers to a plan to rebuild the world’s infrastructure ‘in a sustainable way’ following the economic ravages of the Covid-19 pandemic and to establish a global treaty to prevent future pandemics, or as it is described more formally, to “build a more robust international health architecture that will protect future generations.” If you ever hear people talking about “building back better,” they are referring to The Great Reset.
Probably the most disturbing part of The Great Reset is how much it strongly resembles business-as-usual, only with EXTRA globalism. Most of the plan’s outlines include a further weakening of national boundaries and individual national autonomy, in favour of a more ‘universal governance.’ As usual, it is the rapidly vanishing Western middle class which must shoulder this burden, as their freedoms are further curtailed to meet the quotas of corporate-media-fuelled activism.
Regardless, many world leaders, no doubt charmed into acquiescence by Schwab’s commandingly sinister Blofeld-esque wardrobe, agreed to the Great Reset, including Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Mark Rutte, Pedro Sánchez, Erna Solberg and Volodymyr Zelensky. According to John Kerry, Joe Biden’s administration is on board, too.
But the general agreement of the Western leaders is absolutely typical of any agenda which is espoused by NATO, the UN, or the WEF. If an emotionally charged, politically vague and ultimately ineffectual edict or bill is proposed by one of these entities – each resembling a shabby, globe-trotting team of insurance salesmen – our effete politicians line up to show the most fervent compliance.
As a rule, it seems their solutions to specific environmental or scientific problems mysteriously become entwined with LGBTQ+ rights, workplace equity, open borders initiatives and other unrelated social justice causes. It’s as though any goals they have are somehow unilaterally from the same source, or entail the same solution, regardless of causality or consequence. Therefore, a united response to a global pandemic mysteriously also equals trans rights activism.
In their own words, “No single government or multilateral agency can address this (pandemic) threat alone. Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly co-ordinated fashion.”
There are many other sweeping sentiments expressed by Schwab and his acolytes which can seem either trite or threatening. Consider “the gulf between what markets value and what people value will close” and “we want more attention paid to scientific experts. No one can “self-isolate” from climate change so we all need to “act in advance and in solidarity.” There is much talk of the pursuit of “fairer and equitable outcomes.”
International treaties always tend to be about concentrating power. It’s one of those rules of life, for realists, as there is no escaping power dynamics in human affairs. Real problems don’t often have feel-good solutions. Often, they require ‘solutions that sound mean’, that don’t sound good on a corporate goals bulletin. Initiatives like The Great Reset all entail the gradual loss of the autonomy of individual nations, as their decision-making power is transferred to an international, disembodied rule-maker.
It has been, without a doubt, a globalist fantasy for a long time, but the key question is: do they realise what they are doing or not?
As far as their amazing coordinated pandemic response goes, this appears to be nothing more than forced world-wide vaccinations for EVERYBODY. According to Klaus Schwab himself: “As long as not everybody is vaccinated, nobody will be safe.” To which the attendant neo-liberal world leaders nodded in re-affirming unison, repeating in unison their mantra: “Global public good.”
BREAKING! Klaus Schwab Calls For Global Health Pass Based On Implantable Microchip.
Absolute must-read article on the subject: Very Detailed Explanation Of The Great Reset And The New World Order.
Schwab, despite appearing like an immortal brothel-keeper at Kublai Khan’s Xanadu, is really cut from the same cloth as your typical EU technocrat. His ideas are not creative, they are quite staid and pedestrian, and research of his career shows they have been unchanged since the 1970s. He has consistently been preaching the very same thing, like a broken record.
Schwab believes we can achieve environmental solutions without altering capitalism in the slightest, by creating treaties of “mutual accountability and shared responsibility, transparency and co-operation within the international system.” His idea involves ‘ethical capitalism’ – where the excesses of capitalism will somehow be held at bay by ‘ethical stakeholders,’ to whom the corporations will be held accountable, while (conveniently) the elites and systems already in place will continue as they are. This is the master plan of the World Economic Forum, largely unchanged for 40 years.
The result? A green technocracy, one assumes, with a WEF-mandated ‘ethical stakeholder’ apparatus, a worldwide spiderweb organisation ruling by the threatened fears of pandemic and carbon doom. No section of society would be exempt from edicts of ‘the new treaty.’
The Great Reset website appears to be little more than an advertisement for modern pod-living. It seems to style itself as a low-carbon dream-life (without loss of modern convenience) to effeminate hipsters. One can see slovenly-looking neo-liberal youths, frequent references to LGBTQ+ values, and an overall urgency about carbon footprints.
There is a hint of Adbusters about the website, creator of the Occupy Wall Streetmovement. Despite the fact that the WEF and Davos and all associated entities are entirely elite institutions, the website styles itself on grassroots urban activism. There is much cringeworthy symbology in its white papers, such as a green and rainbow flag-combination with fey slogans like ‘we salute you, zoom queen!’
Schwab refers to the aim of The Great Reset as “the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” with the first being powered by water and steam, the second introducing mass production, and the third electronic automation. The fourth will blur the lines between “physical, digital and biological spheres.”
In this grab-bag of magical advances, he lists, “fields such as artificial intelligence, robotics, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, 3-D printing, nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science, energy storage and quantum computing.”
This sounds like cartoonish optimism, as many of these technologies are anything but clean and don’t seem to de facto relate to side-stepping out of industrialism or anything else. On top of that, fewer than 9% of companies use the machine learning, robotics, touch screens and other advanced technologies listed as somehow ‘changing everything.’ Stakeholder capitalism, as a concept, does not explain itself as foolproof, and will no doubt be freely interpreted by the likes of Silicon Valley or supply chain conglomerates.
The jewel in the crown of Great Reset optimism has to be the belief that the advent of AI will alter everything positively, again without specifics, to somehow create a low-carbon new world.
It appears at best to be all be smoke and mirrors, a childish corporate fantasy manufactured by isolated bean counters. At worst, it is an intentional power-grab by unaccountable international agencies and hidden oligarchs.
Either way, it is a fake utopia at the price of privacy and autonomy, sold to us by used-car salesmen who think they are princes. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
By Jacob Nordangard
Global Research, February 12, 2022
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Through its Young Global Leaders program, the World Economic Forum has been instrumental in shaping a world order that undermines all democratic principles. For several decades, this program has nurtured compliant leaders acting as WEF agents in governments around the world. The consequences are far-reaching and may turn out to be devastating for humanity.
I have to say then I mention names like Mrs Merkel, even Vladimir Putin and so on they all have been Young Global Leaders of The World Economic Forum. But what we are really proud of now with the young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, President of Argentina and so on, is that we penetrate the cabinets… It is true in Argentina and it is true in France now… (Klaus Schwab)
Click here or image to access Video
In 1992, Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum launched a program initially called Global Leaders of Tomorrow.
In 2004, this program was turned into the Forum for Young Global Leaders (which I cover in my book The Global Coup D’Etat) – a 5-year program of indoctrination into WEFs principles and goals.
The aim was – and is – to find suitable future leaders for the emerging global society. The program has since its inception has included politicians, business leaders, royalty, journalists, performers and other cultural influencers who have excelled in their fields but have not yet turned 40 years of age (originally 43 in order to include Angela Merkel). It has since grown into an extensive global network of dedicated leaders with enormous resources and influence, all working to implement the technocratic plans of the World Economic Forum in their respective nations and fields.
The network creates a force for worldwide influence through the combination of the individual skills and resources of its members.
As Klaus Schwab says in the introductory quote, it has become very successful.
Already in the first year, 1992, a number of highly influential candidates were elected. Among 200 selected were global profiles such as Angela Merkel, Tony Blair, Nicolas Sarkozy, Bill Gates, Bono, Richard Branson (Virgin), Jorma Ollila (Shell Oil), and José Manuel Barroso (President of the European Commission 2004–2014).[1]
More examples of influential Young Global Leaders [2]:
Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden
Crown Prince Haakon of Norway
Crown Prince Fredrik of Denmark
Prince Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, Netherlands
Princess Reema Bint Bandar Al-Saud, Ambassador for Saudi-Arabia in USA
Jacinda Arden, Prime Minister, New Zeeland
Alexander De Croo, Prime Minister, Belgium
Emmanuel Macron, President, France
Sanna Marin, Prime Minister, Finland
Carlos Alvarado Quesada, President, Costa Rica
Faisal Alibrahim, Minister of Economy and Planning, Saudi Arabia
Shauna Aminath, Minister of Environment, Climate Change and Technology, Maldives
Ida Auken, MP, former Minister of Environment, Denmark (author to the infamous article “Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better”)
Annalena Baerbock, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Leader of Alliance 90/Die Grünen, Germany
Kamissa Camara, Minister of the Digital Economy and Planning, Mali
Ugyen Dorji, Minister of Domestic Affairs, Bhutan
Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Canada
Martín Guzmán, Minister of Finance, Argentina
Muhammad Hammad Azhar, Minister of Energy, Pakistan
Paula Ingabire, Minister of Information and communications technology and Innovation, Rwanda
Ronald Lamola, Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, South Africa
Birgitta Ohlson, Minister for European Union Affairs 2010–2014, Sweden
Mona Sahlin, Party Leader of the Social Democrats 2007–2011, Sweden
Stav Shaffir, Leader of the Green Party, Israel
Vera Daves de Sousa, Minister of Finance, Angola
Leonardo Di Caprio, actor and Climate Activist
Mattias Klum, photographer and Environmentalist
Jack Ma, Founder of Alibaba
Larry Page, Founder of Google
Ricken Patel, Founder of Avaaz
David de Rothschild, adventurer and Environmentalist
Jimmy Wale, Founder of Wikipedia
Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman of Investor
Niklas Zennström, Founder of Skype
Mark Zuckerberg, Founder of Facebook
The purpose from the beginning has been to “identify and advance a future-oriented global agenda, focusing on issues at the intersection of the public and private sectors.”
Public–Private Partnerships is one of the cornerstones of the World Economic Forum philosophy. That is, a merger between state and large companies (also known as corporativism) with the aim of solving global problems of in a more “effective” way. The choice of leaders clearly reflects this aspiration.
The Young Global Leaders group was initially instructed to identify the major challenges of the 21st century. These included peace, the environment, education, technology and health – areas which these upcoming leaders could exploit politically, economically, and culturally in the new millennium.
Partners for Global Leaders of Tomorrow in 2000 were large global companies such as The Coca Cola Company, Ernst & Young, Volkswagen, and BP Amoco. These could contribute to the agenda by “playing an active role in developing and implementing the concept of the GLT project. The partners can therefore actively participate in the development of GLT programs; representatives of the partner companies as well as their guests are invited to GLT meetings .. ”Since the Global Leaders of Tomorrow was turned into Young Global Leaders 2004, partners such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, and JPMorganChase (with alumni from the program) have also participated as sponsors.
The ultimate consequence of both public–private partnerships and these target areas is the creation of a largely tyrannical social contract in which the individual has become subordinated to these powerful interests. Noble goals of creating a better world have also been kidnapped. This is especially evident in the context of the partnership between the WEF and the UN and the implementation of the global goals (Agenda 2030) through the application of the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
This means that the democratic principles and division of power of the 20th century have largely been completely undermined and instead replaced by a new global class that shapes our common future based on their own interests.
This has led to a de facto privatisation of both national governments and international organisations, where lobbyists are no longer kept in the lobby but have moved into the seat of power, shaping policies directly affecting our lives. What this means has become particularly evident since the pandemic was declared in March 2020. In addition, leading multinational investment management corporations such as BlackRock, led by the World Economic Forum’s own Larry Fink, have constantly moved their positions forward.
German economist and journalist Ernst Wolff believes that many of the national leaders included in the Young Global Leader program have been selected for their willingness to carry out the tough agenda of lockdowns in recent years without asking any questions, and that their impending failure (as evidenced by in a growing dissatisfaction of the masses) will be used as an excuse to create a new form of Global Government where the old nation states become largely obsolete.
A new global digital currency with Universal Basic Income (UBI) can then be gradually introduced to replace our doomed monetary system.[3] This conclusion partly coincides with my own.
It is also supported by Paul Raskin‘s scenarios from The Great Transition Initiative on how a totalitarian “New Earth Order” is established, to be replaced in the long run by a global democratic government (Earth Federation) with a World Constitution.[4]
The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the catastrophic failure of an every-country-for-itself approach to public health, and national economic interests, rather than global needs, continue to dominate discussions of climate policy, paving the path toward climate chaos.
Under the tricameral World Parliament come the four main agencies of the Earth Federation government: the World Supreme Court system, the World Executive, the World Enforcement System, and the World Ombudsman.[5]
Glen T. Martin, The Great Transition Requires the Earth Constitution
The vision is that a peaceful and harmonious world in balance is created through the establishment of a World Federation with a World Parliament, World Government and a World Court. These are ideas that have long circulated in Club of Rome and closely connected New Age circles.
The question is how such a new global system of power would escape the fate of being kidnapped by the same interests that created our current corrupt and failing system?
This is in view of those who support projects such as The Great Transition (initiated with start-up capital from Steven Rockefeller). What is happening is rather a method of taking us to their ultimate solution in the form of a global technocratic control system.
However, it is highly unlikely that this plan will succeed. Awareness is spreading like wildfire and the panic of the elite increases as their narrative crumbles and people become more and more immune to the propaganda. Hence all the inquisitors and “fact checkers” who diligently gatekeep the narrative and help steer public opinion in the “right” direction. They are surely to be trusted since, for example, David Roy Thomson, Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Corporation, is an alumni of Global Leaders of Tomorrow, class of 1993.
It is now time to take control of our own destinies and to avoid falling into new traps.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Thanks to investigative journalist Cory Morningstar for the clip that inspired this blog article. Follow her blog Wrong Kind of Green.
Notes
[1] World Economic Forum, GLT Class of 1993.pdf
[2] World Economic Forum, Young Global Leaders Community (searchable list over YGL alumni)
[3] Michael Lord, “Exposed: Klaus Schwab’s School For Covid Dictators, Plan for ‘Great Reset’“, RAIR Foundation, November 10, 2021
[4] Paul Raskin, Journey to Earthland: The Great Transition to Planetary Civilization.pdf, Tellus Institute, Boston, 2016
[5] Glen T. Martin, The Great Transition Requires the Earth Constitution“, Great Transition Initiative, November 2021
“The greatest conspiracies are in plain sight” – Edward Snowden
UPDATE JANUARY 25th, 2022: 200% VINDICATED
A 2017 interview, resurfaced just now by Rise Melbourne (thanks!), shows Klaus Schwab making a summary of this expose in just one minute:
UPDATE JANUARY 9, 2022: SHAMELESS SHILLS:
SHARE THIS MEME
I’ve just unearthed a series of videos that show an unpublicized side of the World Economic Forum and its leader Klaus Schwab.
These videos are extra bonuses to a 2019 German Documentary titled “Das Forum” (The Forum), which seems part of Klaus Schwab’s idea of imprinting his personal image in history for the 50th WEF anniversary.
In 2018, Schwab decided to allow a carefully selected outsider in his kitchen, in a mutually complicit attempt at positive publicity and fame. There are precedents in history. What followed was quite a disaster, in my personal opinion, because Klaus doesn’t have the subtlety needed to do this and it all derailed in a blatant bad-taste cult of personality. All under the disguise of investigative journalism, of course.
I have previously published some of these extras, but now I have the full package and we’re going to weed out the propaganda looking for real truth gems.
From this first video we find out about the so called “Young Global Leaders”, which are pretty clearly World Economic Forum’s youth elite organization. I don’t have yet a quality translation of the part in German, but the English dialogue in the beginning is quite telling.
This second video reveals shocking former Young Global Learders names, and possible new candidates (as of 2018)
Class of 2011
Justin Trudeau has been among the first to let us know he’s aligned and awaiting instructions, even before he came out in the news claiming “The Great Reset” is a conspiracy. He’s been mentioning “Build Back Better” since February-March 2020, before Biden ever heard this oxymoron put together for the first time.
“Kyle Kemper is not a nobody. Not only is he Justin Trudeau’s half-brother, and the son of Margaret Trudeau, but he has a business portfolio: a founder and the Chief Executive Officer of Swiss Key, and previously an Executive Director and Strategic advisor at the Chamber of Digital Commerce Canada. He finished his BCOMM, marketing business, from Dalhousie University.” – En-volve
In the video above, Putin confirms Blair is one of his “good friends”. Recorded 10 years ago, when they were fresh YGL alumni.
In this third “resurrected” video, we watch them openly discussing regime change in countries unaligned with WEF’s “democratic liberalism” and the Fourth Industrial Revolution
VIDEO DELETED BY YOUTUBE, COULDN’T RECOVER IT YET, BUT I WILL…
Welcome to the younger Forum!
No one’s younger than the king and his heirs, right?
Young Global Leaders
The Young Global Leaders, or Forum of Young Global Leaders, is an independent non-profit organization managed from Geneva, Switzerland, under the supervision of the Swiss government.
History
Launched by Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum in 2004, the Young Global Leaders are governed by a board of twelve world and industry leaders, ranging from Queen Rania of Jordan to Marissa Mayer of Yahoo! and Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales. Schwab created the group with $1 million won from the Dan David Prize, and the inaugural 2005 class comprised 237 young leaders. Young Global Leaders participate in the Annual Meeting of the New Champions, established in 2007 and known informally as “Summer Davos“, alongside Global Growth Companies and other delegations to the World Economic Forum.
Papa Schwab welcomes his “Young Global Leaders” at their Inaugural Summit in 2005
In this shape and form, YGL exists since 2004, but it’s actually an older structure bearing different names over time, such as Global Leaders for Tomorrow. Thus, the archives intertwin and overlap, and named get lost. But the agenda stayed the same.
I just dug out a very interesting little gem from the belly of the Internets, which brings us to:
Selection process
Found their original playbook!
SOURCE
As per this Israeli SOURCE:
“The World Economic Forum, which is an independent international organization that defines its goal as improving the state of the world, started the Global Leaders for Tomorrow Program began in 1993. The program’s aim is “to provide an informal, efficient framework for an ongoing exchange of opinions on strategic issues of concern to this younger generation of decision-makers,” the forum describes.
“The GLT Community represents the new generation of global leaders, nearly 500 individuals from business, politics, public interest groups, the media, the arts and the sciences, who have demonstrated responsible leadership vis-a-vis society, business developments, the environment and socially responsible initiatives,” the Geneva-based forum said.
The criteria for making the list include being under 37 years old, proving a commitment to public affairs, and demonstrating leadership in addressing issues beyond their immediate professional interest.
Once selected, GLTs are invited for three consecutive years to a special GLT program at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, and for five years to a yearly GLT Summit and to regional activities of the World Economic Forum.”
The current narrative, as per Wikipedia:
“Representing over 70 different nations, Young Global Leaders are nominated by alumni to serve six-year terms and are subject to veto during the selection process. Candidates must be younger than 38 years old at the time of acceptance (meaning active YGLs are 44 and younger), and highly accomplished in their fields. Over the years, there have been hundreds of honorees, including several popular celebrities, alongside recognized high achievers and innovators in politics, business, academia, media, and the arts.”
Reception
BusinessWeek‘s Bruce Nussbaum describes the Young Global Leaders as “the most exclusive private social network in the world”, while the organization itself describes the selected leaders as representing “the voice for the future and the hopes of the next generation”.
Members and alumni
Notable members and alumni of Young Global Leaders include:
Young Global Leader David Rothschild, fresh off the YGL boat, preaching the WEF gospel on TV
YOPP! SHE GOT HER OWN FEATURE
BOOM! IVANKA TRUMP A WEF YOUNG GLOBAL LEADER CONFIRMED BY WH
Jacinda Ardern
Lera Auerbach
Sergei Brin (Google founder)
Anderson Cooper
Leonardo DiCaprio
Alexander De Croo
Emmanuel Macron
Sanna Marin
Annika Saarikko
Ida Auken
Jens Spahn
Annalena Baerbock
Ska Keller
Sandro Salsano
Ólafur Elíasson
Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Sebastian Kurz
Ashton Kutcher
Jack Ma
Tolullah Oni
Larry Page
Michael Schumacher
Charlize Theron
Bhavin Turakhia
Fasi Zaka
Mark Zuckerberg
More American horsemen of the Great Reset
Let’s look at more celebrity YGL’s
Interestingly enough, Daniel Crenshaw has been deleted from their website. But not from the Internet Archive 😉
Crenshaw is also confirmed by this CNBC report
Dude doesn’t even look alive
Young Global Leaders–Anderson Cooper and Leonardo DiCaprio Are In The Most Exclusive Private Social Network In The World.
By Bloomberg, March 18, 2008, 4:00 AM GMT
The World Economic Forum out of Davos just announced its new 2008 list of YGLs—Young Global Leaders. In a growing universe of private social networks, the YGL network has got to be one of—if not THE—most exclusive sn around. A few weeks ago, I predicted that Cameron Sinclair, who founded Architecture for Humanity would become a YGL—and he did.
YGL website profile
YGLers can find out who fellow members of the social network are in any particular city around the world by clicking on the map site (can’t do it here, sorry). Works for regions too. Want to chat with a fellow YGLer if you’re visiting Silicon Valley, call up Marc Benioff, Shai Agassi, Sergey Brin (Google founder), Gavin Newson (San Fran mayor), Jerry Yang or John Battelle. If you’re in New York City, Business News TV star Maria Bartiromo is a YGLer.
WEF’s ‘Young Global Leader’ and Google owner Sergey Brin chats with his mentor at Davos 2017
Fellowship Supporters
Aliko Dangote Foundation
Executive Education Partners and Supporters
Bill and Penny George
David Rubenstein
Harvard Kennedy School
Howard Cox
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Marilyn Carlson Nelson and Glen Nelson
Princeton University Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment
Singapore Economic Development Board
University of Oxford Saïd Business School
University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business
Willis Towers Watson
Endowment Supporters (gifts from YGL members of 50,000+ CHF)
The YGL Endowment Fund was created by the community’s members to support the long-term ambitions of the Forum of Young Global Leaders. Its proceeds are intended to support the community programming and to ensure participation is accessible to all members.
Andrew Cohen
Ellana Lee
Georges Kern
Henrik Naujoks
Jill Otto
Katherine Garrett-Cox
M Arsjad Rasjid Mangkuningrat
Peter Lacy
Richard Stromback
Ron Cao
Sandro Salsano
Thor Björgolfsson
Veronica Colondam
Yana Peel
Zhang Yi-Chen
About us
Our growing membership of more than 1,400 members and alumni of 120 nationalities includes civic and business innovators, entrepreneurs, technology pioneers, educators, activists, artists, journalists, and more.
Aligned with the World Economic Forum’s mission, we seek to drive public-private co-operation in the global public interest. We are united by the belief that today’s pressing problems present an opportunity to build a better future across sectors and boundaries.
History
Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, created the Forum of Young Global Leaders in 2004 to help the world meet increasingly complex and interdependent problems. His vision was to create a proactive multistakeholder community of the world’s next-generation leaders to inform and influence decision-making and mobilize transformation.
Through the Forum of Young Global Leaders, Klaus Schwab envisioned facilitating earnest dialogue and friendships across cultures to bridge divides, fostering fresh thinking and dynamic new ways of collaboration to shape a more positive, peaceful and prosperous society.
Annual Reports _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Mon May 16, 2022 3:48 am Post subject: Anti-WHO Control Petition
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/614335
Worth a quick sign. The WHO and their controllers are all Criminals Against Humanity, and belong in the Hague, not lording it over the peasants/useless eaters. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
The decline of the US dollar, the three ‘systems’, the sanctions war on Russia, on the eve of the publication of Prof. Hudson’s new book: The Destiny of Civilization: Finance Capitalism, Industrial Capitalism or Socialism.”
Transcript
BENJAMIN NORTON: Hey, everyone. I’m Ben Norton, and this is the Multipolarista podcast. And I have the great pleasure of being joined today by one of my favorite guests, one of I think the most important economists in the world today. I’m speaking with Professor Michael Hudson.
If you’ve seen any of the interviews I’ve done with Professor Hudson over the past few years, you probably know that he’s a brilliant analyst. He always has, I think, the best analysis to understand what’s going on economically and also politically, geopolitically, in the world today.
And right now is, I think, a very important moment to have Professor Hudson on today. We’re going to talk about the economic war on Russia and the process of economic decoupling between Russia and China and the West, which is something that Professor Hudson has talked about for many years. And that really has accelerated with the Western sanctions on Russia over Ukraine.
We’re also going to talk about the decline in U.S. dollar hegemony. A recent report from the International Monetary Fund, which is dominated by the U.S., acknowledged that the use of the dollar in foreign bank reserves is gradually declining.
Now, it’s not going to disappear overnight. But even the IMF is acknowledging that dollar hegemony is eroding. And, of course, the IMF acknowledged that the Western sanctions on Russia are going to further erode the hegemony of the U.S. dollar.
We now see Russia doing business with China in the Chinese yuan. Russia is also doing business with India with the Indian rupee. And of course Russia has been telling Europe that if it wants to buy Russian energy, it has to do so with Russian rubles.
So there’s so much to talk about today, Professor Hudson, but I want to begin in the first half of this interview today talking about a new book that you’re just about to publish.
Today is Monday, May 9th. You said on Wednesday, May 11th, the book comes out. And it’s called “The Destiny of Civilization: Finance Capitalism, Industrial Capitalism or Socialism.”
And everything that I just prefaced this interview with, discussing the economic war in Russia and sanctions and decoupling, this is all deeply related to what you talk about in this book. And I had the pleasure of getting an early copy and reading through it. It’s a really important book, I think.
And you talk about this fundamental divide internationally – and this is a divide that actually goes back historically as well – between these three models for different economic systems you discuss: finance capitalism, industrial capitalism, and socialism.
And your argument is that the U.S. empire has been a force for imposing neoliberalism, which is a particular form of finance capitalism, which is nonproductive, in which finance capital destroys productive industries in pursuit of rent-seeking, and what you call the rentier class.
So instead of producing, as the classical bourgeois economists had said capitalism would be a productive system instead, finance capitalism is fundamentally a system of destruction and debt.
And your argument is that this is deeply rooted in U.S. foreign policy. This is the U.S. foreign policy strategy for expanding its economic power, is imposing this finance capitalist model on the world.
So can you expand further on your argument about the fight between finance capitalism, industrial capitalism, and socialism, and why you decided to publish this book now?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well the book came out of a series of 10 lectures that I did for my Chinese audience. I’ve been a professor at Peking University for a number of years in economics, and have professorships at other universities, Wuhan and Hong Kong.
And I have a fairly large audience of about 65,000 people per lecture there. And I was asked to give my general overview, sort of a history of economic development in the West, for the Chinese.
And in order to understand today’s finance capitalism, you have to understand what industrial capitalism was, as it was described in the 19th century.
And it’s often forgotten, or played down, that industrial capitalism was revolutionary. What it was trying to do – from the physiocrats in France in the late 18th century to Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Marx, and the whole late-19th century flowering of socialism – the ideal of classical value theory and rent theory, was to say what is the actual value, the cost value of producing goods and services?
And what is earned by the capitalist, when he employs labor to make a profit, and what is unearned? And what is unearned was the landlord class. That was the hereditary warrior class that conquered all of the European kingdoms in the Middle Ages.
And the attempt by England’s industrialists was saying, look, we cannot become the workshop of the world; we cannot undersell foreign countries if we have a landlord class ripping off all of the money in land rent.
And if we have predatory banking, or the wealthy people just lend really for buying property, or making distressed loans or predatory loans that have nothing to do with financing actual capital formation.
Well, what made this capitalism revolutionary was the British industrialists and advocates of industry, even the bankers in Ricardo’s time, said, well, in order to overthrow the landlord class, which controls the House of Lords and all of the upper chambers of government in Europe, we have to have democratic reform.
If we have democratic reform and give voting to the people, they’re going to vote against the landlord class, and then we can have an efficient economy where our prices of our exports and our goods and services reflect the actual cost of production, not the rake off for the rentiers class, not the rake off of what landlords take, not the rake off of what predatory bankers take.
And the whole long 19th century leading up to World War One was this revolutionary value theory that depicted land rent and monopoly rent and financial returns as being unearned income and wanting to strip it away.
And all of this seemed to be moving toward socialism. The industrialists were all in favor of government public utilities, of government enterprise, because they said, if the government doesn’t provide health care, then individuals are going to have to pay it, and it’ll cost a lot of money, like it does in the United States.
And so you had the conservative prime minister of England, Benjamin Disraeli, saying, health, all is health, we’ve got to provide public health for the people.
And it was the conservative Bismarck in Germany that said, we’ve got to provide pensions. If labor has to save up for the pensions, then it’s not going to have enough money to buy the goods and services that we Germans are producing. We have got to make pensions public.
So all of this move towards socialism was not only in favor of increasing living standards, which soared in the 19th century, but also in freeing the economy from the rentier class, from the landlords, from the bankers.
And for the classical economists, a free market was a market free from landlords, free from bankers, free from monopolists.
Well, needless to say, the rentiers fought back. And by after World War Two, we’ve seen a continual anti-classical theory replacing the classical idea of free markets with a value of free theory, saying, well, everybody earns whatever they they have. All wealth is earned, not unearned. And if Goldman Sachs partners are paid more than anyone else, that’s because they’re so productive.
So you had a move rejecting classical economics, a junk economics, and a kind of artificial economics that doesn’t really talk about how finance capitalism has worked.
And as it turns out, the business plan of finance capitalism was so predatory that it was anti-industrial.
That’s why President Clinton in the United States moved to invite China into the International Labor Organization, saying, well, we can fight wage rises in America by a race to the bottom. We can we can hire Asians to do work, and that will cause unemployment here. And that’s wonderful for the industrialists. It will basically cut wages and keep American wages down.
Well, that basically is the strategy of finance capitalism, and the aim of finance capitalism is not to invest in factories, and plant equipment, and research and development, but to live in the short term, but to make money by financial engineering, not industrial engineering.
And it becomes predatory, and so you have the whole ideological attack on public enterprise. You have Frederick Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom,” where you say, if government provides public healthcare, that’s “the road to serfdom,” where actually it’s finance capitalism that is the road to debt peonage and serfdom.
And you have now a whole disparagement of government. And all of this is a counter-revolution to the revolutionary impetus of industrial capitalism in its early stages.
And it’s true that corporations now are just as right-wing as the the banks and the hedge funds. But that’s because corporate industry has been taken over by the financial sector, and the heads of almost every industrial corporation are rewarded the how high they can push the stock price, to exercise the stock options they’re paid in.
And you increase the stock price not by investing more, not by hiring more labor or increasing productivity or increasing sales, but simply by using whatever income you have to buy back your stocks. And by buying back your stocks, this forces up their price.
And, most of all, by giving political contributions in this country to the Democrats and Republicans alike, who appoint Federal Reserve heads that have spent $7-9 trillion buying up stocks and bonds to increase the price of buying a retirement income, to increase Wall Street prices, to increase housing prices, and make America even less competitive industrially.
So finance capitalism is what has essentially de-industrialized the United States and turned the Midwest into a Rust Belt.
Well, the alternative, obviously, are the societies that have not followed this neoliberal finance capitalist plan. And the most successful economy, obviously, has been China, which is why it has been spending so much time there.
And China has done exactly what 19th-century United States, Germany, England, and France did. It has kept basic utilities, basic needs, housing, and above all, finance and banking, in the public domain, as public utilities.
Instead of having an independent financial sector operating on its own self-interest, the Bank of China creates the money. And the Bank of China lends money by deciding, where do we need to have investment in real estate to provide housing for the population at as low a price as we can make it? How do we build up the industry? How do we provide an educational system with training? How do we provide health?
And the fact is that the central planning in an efficient socialist style, not the Stalinist planning that everybody refers to of Russia, but a mixed economy as you have in China, which is truly a mixed economy, with guidance, like the French planification.
Well, that is obviously the way in which you survive and you avoid the kind of overloading the economy with debt service, with high rents, with high payments to the health-care monopoly in the United States, by avoiding all of this payment to a rentier class that has what the classical economists call unearned income, predatory income.
And instead of unseating them, we’ve put them in charge, and made the banks and Wall Street, and the city of London, and the Paris Bourse, the central planners.
So we do have central planning much more centralized than anything that was dreamed by the socialists. But the planning, the centralized planning is done by the financial sector.
And financial planning is short-termism; it’s short-term planning; it’s take your money and run. And that’s what is stripping and impoverishing the global economy today.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Absolutely. And, in your book, you write about the important distinction between the classical economic idea of a so-called free market, and how, you argue that, neoliberals turn that idea on its head.
So this is what you write in your book. And this is, again, Michael Hudson’s new book, “The Destiny of Civilization,” which is out this week. You write:
“The neoliberal ideology inverts the classical idea of a free market from one that is free from economic rent to one that is free for the rentier classes” – that is the rent-extracting classes – “to extract rent and gain dominance.”
So they they completely flip the idea of what it means to have a free market.
And then you note that, “in contrast to classical political economy, this neoliberal ideology promotes tax favoritism for rentiers, privatization, financialization, and deregulation.” And you discuss all of that.
That is, of course, what we could call the Washington consensus.
And then you argue that “U.S. foreign policy seeks to extend this neoliberal rentier program throughout the world.”
And you have a very interesting section of your book where you discuss this concept as “free-trade imperialism.”
So can you talk about what your idea of “free-trade imperialism” is and how it relates to U.S. foreign policy?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, the Nobel Prize is given basically for junk economics. And probably the worst junk economist of the century was Paul Samuelson.
He made the absurd claim that he proved mathematically that, if you have free trade then, and don’t have tariffs, and don’t have any government protection, then everyone will become more equal. At least the proportions between labor and capital will be more equal. Well, the reality is just the opposite.
And the term “free-trade imperialism” was actually created by a British historian of trade theory who pointed out that, wait a minute, when England went for free trade, the idea was, if we have free trade, we can stifle other countries from being able to industrialize, because if we have free trade, then we can tell America, we will open our doors to your markets – meaning the markets of the slave South, that Britain supported – and in exchange, you will open your markets to our industrial goods.
And America followed that until the Civil War, which was fought not only over slavery, but by the Republican Party after 1853 that said very explicitly, if we’re going to win the election – the Whigs never could win – if we, the new party, are going to win the election and industrialize America, we’ve got to integrate ourselves with the anti-slavery issue, with emancipation, but for us, the economic war of America is a war of, either we’re going to have protective tariffs in the North, or we’re going to end up as a non-industrial, raw materials-producing society, as the South wants.
And that was the debate from 1815, when the Napoleonic wars ended and world trade began again, until really the Civil War.
And America became strong in the way that Germany became strong too, by having protective tariffs, in order to have prices large enough to nurture what was called infant industry, to nurture American manufacturing.
And I wrote a long book about this, published some years ago based on my PhD dissertation, “America’s Protectionist Takeoff.”
Well, the English tried to fight against other countries protecting their economy, saying that if you just have free trade, you’ll get rich. Whereas the reality is, if we have free trade, you’ll get poor, if you’re not already able to have industrial and labor productivity and agricultural productivity on par with the most advanced countries.
Free trade was an attempt to prevent other countries from investing government money and building up their agriculture, and building up their industry, and building up their productivity, and creating a school system, to raise wages, to make wages more productive.
And the American protectionists said, well, we’re going to have a high-wage economy because high-wage labor undersells pauper labor. And skilled, well-fed, well-rested American labor can produce much more than the pauper labor of other countries that have free trade.
Well, what the leading American protectionist economist, Erasmus Peshine Smith, went to Japan and helped industrial help Japan break away from British free trade, helped Japan industrialize.
And other American economists, other foreign economists, all picked up the ideas of the American protectionist, like Friedrich List went to Germany promoting protectionism.
And Peshine Smith’s book, “The Manual of Political Economy,” was translated into all the foreign languages – Japanese, Italian, French, German.
And you had Europe realizing that free trade polarizes economies. Well, it was this that after World War One, and especially World War Two, when you had orthodox economics turning into basically propaganda.
That’s where you and Samuelson and others try to convince other countries, governments are bad, leave everything to the wealthy people, to the finance people, trickle-down economies, it’s all going to trickle down, don’t worry, just give more money to the rich, and don’t have any government interference with markets.
Whereas America had got rich by interfering with markets, to shape them in the years leading up to World War One.
But after World War One, America had already achieved its industrial dominance. And it was after World War One that America said, ok, now our protective tariffs have enabled us to outproduce all the other countries, and our protectionist agriculture especially – the most protected sector in America, has always been agriculture, since the 1930s.
Basically it said, well, now we can outproduce other countries, we can undersell them, now we can tell them to go for free trade.
And after World War Two, the Americans created the World Bank for economic impoverishment, and the International Monetary Austerity Fund.
And the World Bank’s leading objective was to prevent other countries from investing in their own food production.
The guiding line of the World Bank was, we’ve got to provide infrastructure for building up plantation agriculture in Latin America, and Africa, and other countries, so that they will grow tropical export crops, but they cannot be permitted to grow grain or wheat to feed themselves; they must be dependent on the United States.
And so the function of free trade, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund has been to finance dependency, backed up by the American support of dictatorships throughout Latin America who agree to have client oligarchies supporting pro-American trade patterns and avoiding any kind of self-reliance, so that the United States can do what it has recently done to Russia and other countries, impose sanctions – say, well, now that you depended on us for your grain, we can now impose sanctions, and you can’t feed yourself if you don’t follow the policies we want.
That was the policy that America tried to use against China after Mao’s revolution. And fortunately for China, Canada broke that monopoly, and said, well, we’re going to sell grain to China. And China was always very friendly to Canada in those earlier decades.
So basically, free trade means no government, no socialism. It means central planning essentially by Wall Street – countries should let American firms come in, buy control of their raw materials, resources, control of their oil and gas, and mineral rights, and forests and plantations, and basically let other countries send their whole economic surplus to the United States, where it will be duly financialized to buy out other countries’ raw materials and rent yielding resources.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Yeah, and in your book, you have a very funny passage that I think really encapsulates this ideology that you’re talking about here.
You referred to Charles Wilson, who was the secretary of defense under Eisenhower in the U.S., and he was also the former CEO of General Motors.
And he famously said, “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” And that idea has morphed into the idea that, “What’s good for Wall Street is good for America.”
And then you note that “this merged with evangelistic U.S. foreign policy that says ‘What’s good for America is good for the world.’ And therefore the logical syllogism is clear: ‘What’s good for Wall Street is good for the world.’”
And you describe this, you link it to the new cold war, this idea that what’s good for the U.S. is good for the world and what’s good for Wall Street is good for the U.S., therefore, what’s good for Wall Street is good for the world.
You argue, “We must recognize how finance capitalism has gained power over industrial economies, above all in the United States, from which it seeks to project itself globally, led by the financialized U.S. economy. Today’s new Cold War is a fight to impose rentier-based finance capitalism on the entire world.”
And this is such an important analysis. Because among those very few people of us who talk about this idea of the new cold war and how dangerous it is, there are very few people who frame it in economic terms.
Usually we frame it in political terms, right, the geopolitical interests between the US and the EU on one side, and China and Russia on the other.
And going back to Brzezinski and The Grand Chessboard, his 1997 book, where he talks about the importance of preventing near strategic competitors from emerging in Eurasia. That’s of course a geopolitical discussion and economics is part of it, but it’s often not at the forefront.
But your analysis I think is even more important, and more accurate, because your argument is not only is it geopolitical, but the geopolitical struggle is rooted in economics. And this is an economic struggle between systems.
So talk talk more about the new cold war and how you see it.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, as we’re seeing now, the world is dividing into two parts. We can see that in the fight against Russia, which is also a fight against China, and against India, as you noted. And it seems Indonesia and other countries as well.
The United States is pushing a world that can be controlled by American investors. The ideal of the American neoliberal plan is to do to other countries what it did to Russia after 1991: take all of your public domain, your oil companies, your nickel mines, your electric utilities, give them all to the wealthy oligarchy, that can only make money once it’s taken control of these companies, by selling the stocks to the West.
The West will buy out oil, just like Mikhail Khodorkovsky tried to sell Yukos oil to Standard Oil in the West. And we’ve got to put an oligarchy that will sell all of the national domain, all of the patrimony and natural resources, and all the companies, to American investors on the cheap.
The Russian stock market led all the stock markets in the world from 1994 up to about 1998. This was a huge rip off. The United States wants to be able to do that to the rest of the world.
And it was furious when Russia said, we’ve lost more population as a result of neoliberalism than we did in all of World War Two fighting against Nazism. We’ve got to stop.
And Russia began to say, we’ve got to use Russia’s population, and industry, and natural resources for Russia’s benefit, not for the United States’ benefit.
Well, the United States was absolutely furious with this. And the fury has erupted in the NATO war against Russia in the last few months, and what’s ongoing now.
And the United States says, U.S. State Department officials have said, what we want to do is carve up Russia into maybe four different countries: Siberia, western Russia, southern Russia or Central Asia, maybe northern Russia.
And once we’ve done that, we cut Russia off from China, then we go into China. We finance, we send ISIS and al-Qaeda into the Uyghur areas, the Muslim areas, and we start a color revolution there. And then we break up China, into a northern part, a southern part, a central part.
And once we break them up, we can more or less control them. And we can then come in, buy up their resources, and take over their industry, their labor, and their government, and get richer to obtain from China, Russia, India, Indonesia, and Iran the wealth that we’re no longer producing in the United States, now that we de-industrialized.
So the world is dividing into two parts. And it’s not simply the United States and its European satellites on the one hand versus the non-white population on the other hand; it’s finance capitalism versus the rest of the world, which is protecting itself by socialism, which in many ways fulfills what was the ideal of industrial capitalism during the 19th century, when industrial capitalism was actually progressive.
And it was progressive. That’s part of the whole theme of my book. It was revolutionary. It tried to free economies from the legacy of feudalism, from the legacy of hereditary landlords.
And now the financial class is no longer the landlord class, but the landlord class pays most of its rent to the financial class in the form of mortgage interest, as it borrows money to buy property and housing and commercial sites on credit.
And you have the kind of financialization that has increased housing prices in the United States to over 40% of income, that is officially guaranteed for mortgages. That has priced American labor out of the market.
Privatized health care, 18% of GDP, that is pricing America out of the world market. Debt, auto debt, student debt, which in other countries education is free; that’s pricing America out of the market.
So you have a basically un-competitive economy that’s committing financial suicide, following the same dynamic that destroyed the Roman empire, where a predatory oligarchy took over and maintained power by an assassination policy of its critics, just very similar to what America has been doing in Latin America and other countries.
So you’re having history repeat itself with this same kind of world split. And this split couldn’t have occurred back in the 1970s, with the Bandung Conference in Indonesia. There were other attempts by the Non-Aligned nations to break free of American imperialism, but they didn’t have a critical mass.
So right now, for the first time, you have a critical mass. And you have the ability of China, Iran, Russia, India, other countries together to be self-sufficient. They don’t need relations with the United States.
They can handle their own; they can create their own monetary system outside of the International Monetary Fund, which is basically an arm of the Defense Department. They can give loans to build up the infrastructure of countries outside of the World Bank, which is basically an arm of the Defense Department, the deep state.
So you have the American economy – essentially a merger between the military-industrial complex and the Wall Street FIRE sector, finance, insurance, and real estate – really cannot develop any more than the Roman Empire could develop, by trying to obtain militarily what it could not produce at home anymore.
Well, China and other countries, now that they have their industrial base, the raw materials, the food, the ability to feed themselves, the agriculture, and the technology, they can go their own way.
And so we’re seeing in the last few months the beginning of a war that is going to go on for, I think, 20 years, maybe 30 or 40 years. The world is splitting away.
And it won’t be a pretty sight, because the United States and its European satellites are trying to fight to prevent an inevitable break away they cannot prevent, any more than Europe’s landlord class could prevent industrial capitalism from developing in the 19th century.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Yeah, and this is a good segue to what I wanted to ask you about, Professor Hudson, which is the economic war on Russia.
And I should say, of course, that today is May 9th. Today is Victory Day in Russia, celebrating the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War Two. Not the US and British victory over Nazi Germany, the Soviet victory, in which 27 million Soviets died.
And actually I should say that, here on YouTube, in the comment section, there are some Russians who are your fans, Professor Hudson, saying they’re thanking you for your cogent analysis of Russia.
But on the subject of Russia, Professor Hudson, we now have seen that since Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine on February 24th, we saw really what could be referred to as financial shock-and-awe. That’s a term that’s been used.
Just as when the U.S. invaded Iraq, it waged a military shock-and-awe campaign on Iraq. Well, now it is waging economic or financial shock-and-awe on Russia.
And Russia has been referred to as the most heavily sanctioned country in history. Which I think is probably accurate, although maybe the DPRK, maybe North Korea, is more sanctioned. But I mean we’re talking about levels of sanctions not seen against a country of this size ever.
And you can also refer to it as the contemporary equivalent of medieval siege warfare against Russia.
Joe Biden, in a speech in Poland, made it clear what Washington’s goal is: it’s regime change. The U.S. wants to overthrow the Russian government, as it did in the Soviet Union in 1991, and clearly install a a pliant alcoholic neoliberal puppet like Boris Yeltsin.
So can you talk about, from an economic perspective, what do you see as the effects of this economic war on Russia?
And specifically in terms of the concept of decoupling, which you have talked about for years, and you have said that the Western sanctions on Russia and China were accelerating that process of decoupling. And this was before the financial shock-and-awe we’ve seen.
So you talked about a move away from this neoliberal globalization where everything is interconnected, or at least capital is interconnected globally, to the creation of a kind of, what you could say is kind of an economic iron curtain.
But how do you see that also in terms of integrating the Eurasian economies more deeply?
And also what is the effect on the European economies, which my impression is that Europe is going to become what you call an economic dead zone, more and more reliant on the U.S., whereas Russia, China, and Iran, and even potentially India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia – we’re seeing much more economic integration of Asia, which is, of course, where the majority of humanity lives.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well you have used the words shock-and-awe, picking it up from the U.S. statements of shock-and-awe. There hasn’t been any shock-and-awe; there’s been a self-defeating piffle, and laughter.
That’s not all. There was an attempt to grab $300 billion of Russia’s foreign reserves, saying, well, any country that leaves their reserves in American banks or in the American Monetary Fund to stabilize their currency, we can grab if we don’t like their policy.
So the idea was, now Russia is going to go broke. It can’t afford to buy anything without U.S. dollars. And the people are going to get so angry, they’re going to vote against Putin. And then we can pour in our money to twerps like Navalny and other right-wingers who have promised to be the new Yeltsins.
Well, it didn’t work that way. They did grab the $300 billion of Russia’s reserves. Russia immediately said, ok, we have our own money. We now, fortunately, have enough oil and gas that we don’t have to sell to Europe and Germany. If they want to freeze in the dark and let their pipes burst when the weather gets cold, that’s their problem. We’ll sell to India, and China, and other countries.
And there was, for a few days, the ruble plunged, by saying, uh oh, what is Russia going to do? So all the foreign exchange traders thought, you can trust Biden to have a really brilliant policies.
I think Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize winner, said Biden is the greatest American president since Roosevelt, or since Truman, that he was so smart. Well, that’s why Krugman got the Nobel Prize, for making statements like that.
So immediately Russia said, well, obviously we can’t get paid in dollars anymore, or in euros, because, you’ll just grab them, so you’ll have to buy oil and gas in rubles. We’re going to price it in our own currency. Just like China had talked about pricing its exports in yuan.
And so what has happened is that immediately the ruble not only recovered, but is now selling at a higher rate than it was before the American sanctions. So there was no shock at all. The Americans felt shock.
The Americans are shocked. The Americans are awed. The Russians are laughing and everything is going their way.
So it’s almost as if – I would not accuse Biden of being on the pay of Russia, and I would not say that the leaders of Congress are the Russian agents, but if they were Russian agents, if they were paid by Russia, they could not have done a better job of helping Russia catalyzing its protectionism that it wouldn’t do itself.
The fact is that President Putin and many of the people around him still were neoliberals. I mean, they began as neoliberals, in the ’90s.
They began by hoping that they could make an arrangement with Germany and Europe, that Europe would develop their industry and make Russia as efficient an economy as Germany or the United States. Well, obviously that hasn’t happened.
All the same, they didn’t think of imposing protective tariffs as the United States did. They didn’t protect their agriculture. They bought grain, and cheese, and other agricultural products from the Baltics, and from other countries.
Well, now that, once the Americans put on the sanctions, beginning already under the Trump administration, all of a sudden Russia had to produce its own food.
And it did. It made the investment. It is now the largest agricultural exporter in the world, not a food-deficit country. It’s not importing any more cheese from Lithuania and the Baltics. It has its own cheese segment.
And the sanctions are forcing Russia to do exactly what the United States, Germany, and other protectionist countries did in the 19th century, developing their own industry by isolating it from low-priced foreign imports that would be priced so low that the Russians otherwise could not afford to make the investment in factories, plants, equipment, research, and development.
So what the United States has done is actually catalyze Russia moving together.
And also, for three or four years, I have been talking with Russians, and with the Chinese, and other countries about the need to de-dollarize. If you want to develop your own economy, you have to develop your economy in your own interest with public spending and planning, independent from the United States.
Well, now everybody thought that, well, in a few years it may take a decade for China, Russia, Iran, all these countries to break away from the U.S. But America said, we’re going to help you, we’re going to speed up the breakaway process. We’re going to isolate you. So you’ve got to band together against us.
So that’s exactly what it has done. You can just imagine how the Russians are crying all the way to the bank about this.
And how China is watching what the Americans are doing to Russia, and listening to President Biden saying, you know, Russia is not our real enemy, our real enemy of China. And when we’re finished with Russia, then we’re going to go against China and do the same thing to it.
Well you can imagine what this is leading the Chinese government to try to plan to be sufficiently independent from the United States, so that similar type sanctions will not hurt it.
And President Xi in the last few weeks has said we’ve got to make China as independent as possible. We’ve got to make our own computer chips. We’ve got to not depend on the United States for anything, except maybe Walt Disney movies. That’s basically about it.
So it’s as if – you know, I had mentioned earlier that finance lives in the short term. American policy, being financial policy, lives in the short term. And it’s looking at if it can make a quick, a quick victory, and forget about what’s going to happen next.
I’m told that, years ago, already from the war with Iran, and then Iraq and Syria, in the State Department, if there were Arab specialists who spoke Arabic, they were all fired. Because they said, well, if you can speak Arabic, you must’ve learned Arabic because you’re sympathetic with them. You’re fired. We won’t have anyone who can read Arabic here.
Well, now in the last decade or so, they fired all the Russia specialists from the the State Department and CIA, saying, well, if you can read Russian, why would you want to learn Russian? You must like something in Russia. You wanted to learn it. You’re fired.
So they have people who have no idea of what’s happening in Russia, no idea what’s happening in these other countries. And they’re blinded by their ideology.
And if anyone would say, wait a minute now, public planning and making education a public utility is actually making them more competitive, well, that’s against the ideology. That’s not the corporate type.
And they’re taught, well, we really can’t trust people, maybe they’re tending toward socialism, and they’re out the door.
So you’re having American policy pretty much run by the blind, and the Europeans are simply taking orders, and money in little white envelopes from the United States, to just show their loyalty, and basically are willing to spend three to seven times as much for their energy, for their liquefied natural gas and oil, by buying from the United States, than they are by a long-term contract with Russia.
Europe is willing to spend now $5 trillion on putting together ports that can handle shipping tankers for liquefied natural gas instead of relying on the Russian pipeline, the Nord Stream Two, that’s already there.
So Europe is making an enormous sacrifice. If it doesn’t have Russian gas, and it refuses to pay rubles, it says, if you don’t give us our gas and oil for free, you’re attacking us, because we’ve been getting all of your oil and gas for free, because all the dollars, all the money we pay, you’ve recycled to the United States in your foreign reserves. Thank heavens, the U.S. can grab it all. If you don’t continue to give it to us for free, then you’re attacking us.
To the United States, other countries protecting their economy, other countries trying to raise their living standards, and especially other countries undertaking land reform, are viewed as enemies of the United States, because they’re an enemy of the neoliberal American financial system.
And the idea of the unipolar world where the United States gets all of the profits, and rents, and interests of the world economy, just as ancient Rome stripped its provinces by getting all of their wealth and income for themselves, not producing it at home, while impoverishing their own domestic population. It’s just an exact parallel.
So Europe is willing to say, well, ok, if we don’t have a Russian gas, well, that means that our chemical companies cannot buy the gas to make the fertilizer to make our crops grow, and our agricultural productivity is going to fall by about 50%.
We’re also going to spend a lot more money on America’s military, NATO arms to support NATO. So higher food, higher military spending, higher energy costs.
This ends Europe as an industrial rival to Asia, and Eurasia, I should say, because now the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative and other spending investment, capital investment, throughout Western Asia is creating a new productive plant that is not only self-sufficient, but is leaving the United States and Europe without any industrial competitive power. They’ve priced themselves out of the world market. They’re no longer competitive.
So the world is developing. And I’m sure the only way that the NATO countries can fight against it is militarily, by threatening to bomb. But they can’t fight economically. They can’t fight financially. They tried by disconnecting Russia from the SWIFT system. It put it in its own system very quickly.
It really is left without a strategy, except that it’s done a wonderful job of controlling the public relations dimension of this war, making it appear as if somehow other countries are the aggressors, in not letting America exploit them, and making it appear as if Russia is the aggressor in Ukraine, instead of NATO prodding and prodding Russia to say, we’re going to capture your port at Crimea, and we’re going to attack the Russian-speakers if you don’t fight back, and we’re going to keep bombing them year after year, from 2014 on, we’re going to keep bombing them until you protect them.
So all of this is treated as if America is purely defending itself. Well, this is what the Nazis said in World War Two. Hitler and Goebbels said, we can always mobilize a population to support our war by saying it’s a war to defend ourselves.
And that’s how the United States in Europe are doing it. Not only are they pulling a strategy out of Goebbels’ Nazi book, but a few weeks ago, Germany went to the museums, the military museums, where they had the old Panzer tanks from World War Two, and they sent the Panzer tanks, the Nazi tanks from World War II, to Ukraine, saying this is symbolic, now we can fight Russia with the same German Nazi tanks run by the neo-Nazi groups, that Zelensky is supporting, the same Nazi fight against Russia. We can reenact World War Two with the same tanks, even symbolically, to show that this is a fight of Naziism, and neoliberalism, against Eurasia.
BENJAMIN NORTON: We’ve also seen Germany not only re-militarizing, but also boosting its relations with Japan. There are some terrifying echoes of of World War Two.
But you mentioned something that I want to analyze a little bit more, which is the strength of the Russian ruble. I talked about the concept of financial shock-and-awe that was waged on Russia. And President Biden said, “the Russian ruble has become rubble,” he joked. He said the Russian ruble has become rubble.
Well, that’s actually not at all what happened. This is the value of the dollar to Russian rubles, right now [showing a graph]. Russian rubles are at 69 to the dollar. A few days ago, it was at 64, or 65 to the dollar, which is actually better than it was even before the Russian war in Ukraine, which began in February 24th.
And it did spike, and there was a peak here, at which it was devalued to 139 to the dollar, about half the value it has now. But in the months leading up to the Russian military intervention, in November and December, it was around 75 to the dollar.
So the ruble has actually strengthened despite these sanctions. And here’s a report from Reuters from five days ago, that was May 4th: the “Rouble leaps to over 2-year high vs dollar, euro as EU ups sanctions.” So the ruble is doing quite well.
And you talked about the Russian mechanism to force Europe to buy energy exports from Russia in the Russian ruble. And this graphic here, for people watching, it’s in Russian, but really it just shows this mechanism in which a European firm that wants to buy gas from Russia’s state owned gas giant Gazprom, it has to send the money in euros to the Gazprombank, which is the obviously the bank that works with Gazprom, and then it puts it in a special account in euros, and then that is sold in the Moscow exchange for Russian rubles.
And then those rubles are put in another special account, called a K account, that belongs to that European firm. It has two accounts, two special accounts with Gazprombank, one in euros, one in rubles. And then this special ruble account sends that money to Gazprom. And then once the money reaches Gazprom, that’s when Russia considers that the payment officially went through.
So this is the mechanism by which Russia is getting paid in rubles. And much of Europe claimed at first that they would not do so, but eventually they gave in. So that’s an incredible development.
And related to that, what I wanted to ask you about, is I think another reason that the Russian ruble has strengthened and stabilized is not only because Russia continues to maintain constant exports of energy to Europe and other parts of the world.
You can talk about the central bank policies. But one of the policies is that the Russian central bank has basically put the ruble on gold, which I think is a very interesting and historic development.
And we saw that from the beginning of April until the end of June, the Bank of Russia says that it’s going to buy gold at a fixed price of 5000 rubles per gram of gold. And then the question is whether or not in July, when this policy ends, if it’s going to continue, and if the ruble will basically become fixed, it become pegged to gold like the U.S. dollar was up until 1971.
So you don’t think it will be? So talk about this policy. Do you think that that the gold standard is going to come back? Or apparently you don’t think so.
MICHAEL HUDSON: No, Russia is not going on on the gold standard. What it is doing is investing, its foreign exchange in the only way that is not grabbable. It’s investing it in gold; it’s putting gold in its reserves.
It is not setting its exchange rate according to the price of gold, but it is buying gold with what it has been getting.
I want to go back to your talk about rubble. You talked about, “from ruble to rubble,” what President Biden said.
There have been a lot of pictures of rubble in the news for the last few days. For instance, there are talks of, here’s a Ukrainian picture, and look at this picture of a Russian tank, we shot it down, it’s rubble. Turns out it’s a Ukrainian tank, that they just say it was the Russian tank we shot down.
So basically, they’re taking their own destruction, and they’re saying that, while they’re being destroyed, they’re saying, no, this is a picture of Russia being destroyed, Russian assets, not Ukrainian assets being destroyed.
Well, the similar thing is with the Russian ruble. America says, look, we’ve isolated the the ruble. Well, what has happened? If you isolate the ruble and you say we’re not going to export anything more to Russia, so it’s not going to be able to spend any of its rubles on buying American or European products.
Well, meanwhile, Russia can continue to earn rubles from Germany and Europe, and it can continue to earn foreign exchange from other countries that it’s selling its agriculture to at rising prices, its oil and gas at rising prices, too. So obviously, the balance of payments is going way up.
And they believe that what is in store is a new monetary system that is an alternative to the dollar IMF system.
And in this system other countries will hold their reserves in each other’s currencies. In other words, Russia will hold Indian rupees and Chinese yuan. China will hold rupees and Russian rubles.
There will be the equivalent of what Keynes thought of as something like artificial special drawing rights that the banks will be able to create to help fund governments to undertake capital investment.
But for settlements settling balance of payments deficits among countries, once they don’t have enough foreign exchange to make a swap, they will use gold as the means of settlement, because gold is a pure asset. It’s not a liability.
Any foreign currency basically is held in a foreign country that has the power to do what America did to Russia and just grab it all, and say, we’re just wiping it all out.
It’s as if you have a bank account, and the bank says, we’ve just emptied out your account to give it to one of our friends, and you don’t have it anymore. You can’t do that if gold is held in your own country.
Venezuela made the problem of keeping its gold in England, trusting England, saying that, even if there is war, they’ll never interrupt gold and finance. And England just grabbed Venezuela’s gold.
So, obviously, countries are not going to leave their gold in other countries. Even little Germany has asked America to begin sending back the gold that it has in the Federal Reserve Bank of America because it’s worried that what if it ever buys Russian gas again? America will grab all of Germany’s gold, grab all the German money, and it’ll be like World War One all over again.
So this act that America did of grabbing Russian money, Afghanistan’s foreign reserves it grabbed, this is telling all the other countries, pull all your money out of dollars. What are they going to put it in? There’s not that much they can put it in that it is absolutely safe.
So gold is a flight to safety today, because it’s one of the things that all of the world realizes as having an international value for settling balance of payments deficits, that is independent of world politics.
So that’s the explanation. Russia is not going on gold. It’s going on an independent standard from the United States with gold as an element of its foreign reserve, just as it’s holding Chinese yuan and Indian rupees.
It’s not going on the rupee standard. It’s not going on the yuan standard. And it’s not going on the gold standard. But these are elements of its foreign reserves.
BENJAMIN NORTON: I have a question for you. It’s kind of a more technical question that I’ve always wondered. And I’ve tried to do research on this, because there’s not much information.
So we know that that the U.S. and European Union have frozen over $300 billion from Russia’s central bank foreign exchange reserves. And of course they did this after doing the same to Iran, to Venezuela, to Afghanistan, which is now threatening a famine in Afghanistan that could kill more people than died in the 20-year NATO-U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan, which is another topic that really needs to get more coverage.
And I should add, by the way, that the US and the EU, they’ve frozen nearly half of Russia’s central bank’s foreign exchange reserves, and are now saying they’re not going to give it back. So they stole it. I mean, they stole half of its reserves.
My question is, what is the mechanism by which they effectively freeze and steal those reserves?
Because my understanding is that there is of course a physical element of those reserves, which you’re talking about, which is gold. But not all of the $640 billion in Russia’s central bank reserves is physical currency, right? A lot of it is just computerized? It’s number in computers and bank accounts.
So when when the U.S. and the EU steal this money from central banks like in Russia or Afghanistan – obviously in the case of Venezuela, as you mentioned, they physically stole the gold. But if it’s not gold, is it physical cash stored in Moscow, like physical dollars and euros? Or it’s mostly just numbers in a computer, which is why they can steal it?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Every country needs to manage its exchange rates, and there’s always like an up-and-down and a zigzag in the flow of payments for imports and exports, investment, capital movements, debt service, all of that.
So countries want to stabilize their exchange rate. How do they do that? Well, most of the big exchange markets are in New York and in London.
So countries would leave their money in correspondent banks. Like when Iran, at the time under the shah, kept that foreign reserve in the Chase Manhattan Bank. So when Iran, after the revolution and Khomeini came in, and Iran wanted to pay interest on the foreign debt that the shah had run up, they told Chase, please, here’s our bondholders, please pay them.
Well Chase was told by the Treasury, don’t pay them, just take the money and hold it. So Chase said, we put a freeze on your account. And so Iran defaulted, and then Chase and the State Department said, oh, Iran defaulted, it missed the payment. Now, all the money that it’s due for foreign debt has to be paid all at once. And Chase paid all of the bondholders off. No more money in the account. It was all emptied out.
Suppose you had an account in Chase Manhattan. And they said, ok, now you’ve done something really bad, you put Michael Hudson on the show. We’re going to grab your account. We’re going to give it to Mr. Guaidó, because he needs the money in Venezuela because the people still are not voting for him. So all of a sudden, you won’t have money in your account. It’ll go to Mr. Guaidó’s account.
Well, that’s what happened with Russia. They took the money. They grabbed the money from Russia’s account. And they said, half the money we’re going to give to, I think, to the 9/11 people, because we all know that it was Russia that bombed the World Trade Center on 9/11.
And we’re going to give it to all sorts of other people who suffered all over the world. It’s all Russia’s fault.
BENJAMIN NORTON: But Professor Hudson, when you say that they seized Russia’s assets, you mean the assets held by the Russian central bank in foreign bank accounts?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Yes, yes.
BENJAMIN NORTON: And these are not physical assets, these are numbers in a computer, right?
MICHAEL HUDSON: In Venezuela’s case, Venezuela had used some of its oil company earnings to buy oil stations and refining companies and the United States actually grabbed the ownership of the gas stations and the refineries and distribution system that Venezuela had in America.
BENJAMIN NORTON: It’s called Citgo.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Citgo, yeah. Russia doesn’t really have any capital investments in the United States. It did have bank accounts, and that was all that the United States could grab.
BENJAMIN NORTON: So when you say that, when Russia, at least for now, the central bank is allowing convertibility of rubles at a set rate into gold, that’s a temporary policy to make sure that they have a physical asset that their central bank can hold on to, because if they have dollars or euros in their reserves, my understanding is that’s not physical cash, it’s actually just numbers in a computer, so they don’t have it physically in their bank reserves, so it’s easy to steal that money.
Obviously, if they had billions of dollars worth of cash, of paper cash, it would be much harder to steal it, but if it’s just on a bank account, if it’s numbers in a computer, then they can just freeze it.
So I think this is also a reflection of a point that you’ve also made about the financialization of the economy, is it’s also just a lot of this capital is not even physical capital.
MICHAEL HUDSON: Yes. Savings take the form – one person’s savings is another person’s debt. So these are Russia’s deposits in American banks that it used to buy or sell rubles, or to buy goods from America, or to receive payments in, if Russia exports something such as oil. Americans buyers of Russian oil would put the money into the Russian bank account.
They never dreamed that this would be grabbed. But now Russia says, ok, you’ve grabbed our money, now that means that we get to grab all of your assets in Russia. This is great! All of your stock holdings in nickel, and Yukos, and all these other companies, ok, you’ve got the money, we have the assets, look at us as just buying the assets on the cheap.
And the Western investors in Russia have all been selling their Russian assets to show that they’re good American citizens in NATO, and the Russians are buying up these European and American assets on the cheap, largely by borrowing money from the banks, that get the money from the central bank, now that they’re so wealthy, and all of the foreign exchange reserves is a result of the American shock-and-awe statement, that’s sort of shock-and-awe in reverse.
So Russia is coming through just fine. And you can imagine how the American strategists are gnashing the teeth. They don’t understand how Russia was able to avoid being bankrupted by this.
They really are not economists. They’re not really financiers. They’re foreign-policy strategists. They’re ideologues that are not very well educated in how to think about the future and how to recognize the fact that the world can actually change from what it is today into something else. And sometimes that change is not in America’s interests. That is sort of not a permitted thought over here.
So essentially, Americans and Europe are operating in the blind, and Russia and China, and Iran, and India, are all looking at how are we going to restructure the world so that we come out of it more prosperous than we were before, not more impoverished. That’s really what the world is dividing into.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Professor Hudson, I don’t know if this is directly related, but it’s it’s something that’s always been a very curious question in my mind.
Germany, back in 2016 and 2017, it moved, physically moved, its central bank’s gold reserves, which had been stored in New York, London, and Paris, and it physically moved those reserves, those gold reserves, to Frankfurt.
Now this was before the U.S. and Britain stole Venezuela’s gold reserves and other reserves. But do you know anything about what motivated Germany’s central bank to move the physical location of its gold reserves into Germany itself?
MICHAEL HUDSON: I don’t think it’s all moved yet. It’s still going on. Gold is very heavy, as heavy has lead, basically. And America said, well, we can only do a little bit, trickle by trickle. So America has been returning the gold very slowly.
So I think Germany, with all of its history of hyper inflation, I think just realizes that, now that gold is not used to settle balance of payments deficits anymore – the gold that Germany had in America was all of the exports that it made to the United States during the Vietnam War. This is Vietnam War gold.
You remember that President de Gaulle would every month cash in, the dollars that America spent in Vietnam would all be spent from Vietnam to Paris, the dollars would end up there, the central bank of Paris would essentially buy gold on the London exchange and keep the gold either in New York or in London.
Well, Germany, because America defeated Germany, and it wasn’t going to keep its gold in Russia, that defeated it even more, it said, well, ok, we’re cashing in our surplus dollars for gold, but we’re going to hold the gold in America.
But now it says, well, America is never going to settle its balance of payments deficits and its foreign debt in gold again, because it doesn’t have any balance of payments surplus, any ability to do that.
It’s going to spend its export surplus and its investment surplus on war. So it’s never going to be able to pay. That’s obvious. Let’s get the gold back.
That was the calculation that every country was making already a decade ago. They realized that America can never repay its foreign debt, unlike other countries.
When other countries can’t pay their foreign debt, they have to go to the International Monetary Fund, that tells them, well, we’ll make you a loan, but you have to sell off your natural resource reserves to the Americans, or we won’t lend you the money.
Well, basically, that’s not going to happen anymore. They realized that America is just going to say, haha, we’re just not going to pay.
Well, now other countries are saying, wait a minute, if America’s never going to repay its foreign debt, why do the Global South countries have to pay their debt to the IMF and the World Bank, all this dollar debt to dollar bondholders?
If America won’t pay, we don’t have to pay. Let’s have a clean slate. Let’s start from the beginning. And we’re only going to have debt and credit relations with friendly countries, not countries that want to go to war with us like America did in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and now Russia.
So that’s basically what’s happening.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Great. And just to wrap up here, I have another question. And I know your time is limited, so I really appreciate you being here.
I have a quick question about the decline in U.S. dollar hegemony. We were talking about the strength of the ruble, the economic war on Russia; we talked about the bilateral trade that’s growing between Russia and China using the Chinese yuan, between Russia and India using the Indian rupee. And Iran also is talking about doing business with a basket of currencies.
I want to point to a report that was recently published by economists who work with the IMF. And I published an article about this over at Multipolarista.com, “IMF admits US dollar hegemony declining due to rise of Chinese yuan and sanctions on Russia.”
And there is this report that was published by the IMF, by these economists, and I cite you, Professor Hudson, in this report. It’s a working paper from the IMF, published in March, titled “The Stealth Erosion of Dollar Dominance.”
And here’s a graph, for people watching, here’s a graph from the report. And it shows not a large, but a noticeable and consistent decline in the use of the holding of the U.S. dollar in the foreign exchange reserves of central banks around the world. So this is around the world.
And it has declined in the past years from about 70% of central bank exchange reserves to about 60%. So a 10% decline. That’s not massive, but it’s steady and I think it’s going to accelerate.
And at the same time they’ve also found an increase in the use of what they call “non-traditional currencies” in the foreign exchange reserves of central banks around the world.
And here you can see this graph. I mean it looks like a significant influence because if you look at the y-axis it’s only from 90 to 100. But there is a significant increase in the use of other currencies in foreign exchange reserves, aside from the U.S. dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen, and the British pound. And the currency that is increasingly popular is the Chinese yuan.
So that’s one half of my question. The other half is about this interesting report that was published in the Financial Times, and it’s titled “Russia Sanctions Threaten to Erode Dominance of Dollar, says IMF.”
And the FT interviewed the IMF’s first deputy managing director, Gita Gopinath, who acknowledged that the sanctions imposed on Russia over its military intervention in Ukraine could lead to what she says “fragmentation at a smaller level.”
And she did say that the dollar is eroding influence, but “would remain the major global currency.”
So, that’s a two part question. I’m wondering if you could talk about the decline in U.S. dollar hegemony and how the sanctions will potentially erode that. And then the other half of the question is, can you comment on the declining use of dollars in foreign exchange reserves?
MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, this is what my book “Super Imperialism” was all about. When I first published it in 1972, I could see how the whole thing was unfolding for the next 50 years. And we just published last year a third edition of it, bringing it up to date.
Dollar hegemony means America’s entire balance of payments deficit in the ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s was military. So the dollars that were being pumped into the world economy were the result of military spending.
But the dollars would end up in foreign central banks, especially from Asia to France, Germany, others. What were they going to do with it? Well after 1971 they could not buy gold anymore, so all they could do was buy U.S. Treasury securities. IOUs.
And so they re-lent to the Treasury all the money that America was spending militarily. And the more money America spent in waging its cold war militarily against the world, the more money central banks would lend to the U.S. government to finance the U.S. deficit that was spent largely on the military-industrial complex and foreign military operations.
So dollar hegemony was a free lunch financing America’s almost 800 military bases across the world, to fight against communism, defined as any country that doesn’t let American industry and finance buy control of its raw materials, agriculture, resources.
Schwab Family Values
February 20, 2021 Johnny Vedmore
On the morning of 11 September 2001, Klaus Schwab sat having breakfast in the Park East Synagogue in New York City with Rabbi Arthur Schneier, former Vice President for the World Jewish Congress and close associate of the Bronfman and Lauder families. Together, the two men watched one of the most impactful events of the next twenty years unfold as planes struck the World Trade Center buildings. Now, two decades on, Klaus Schwab again sits in a front row seat of yet another generation-defining moment in modern human history.
Always seeming to have a front row seat when tragedy approaches, Schwab’s proximity to world-altering events likely owes to his being one of the most well-connected men on Earth. As the driving force behind the World Economic Forum, “the international organization for public-private cooperation,” Schwab has courted heads of state, leading business executives, and the elite of academic and scientific circles into the Davos fold for over 50 years. More recently, he has also courted the ire of many due to his more recent role as the frontman of the Great Reset, a sweeping effort to remake civilization globally for the express benefit of the elite of the World Economic Forum and their allies.
Schwab, during the Forum’s annual meeting in January 2021, stressed that the building of trust would be integral to the success of the Great Reset, signalling a subsequent expansion of the initiative’s already massive public relations campaign. Though Schwab called for the building of trust through unspecified “progress,” trust is normally facilitated through transparency. Perhaps that is why so many have declined to trust Mr. Schwab and his motives, as so little is known about the man’s history and background prior to his founding of the World Economic Forum in the early 1970s.
Like many prominent frontmen for elite-sponsored agendas, the online record of Schwab has been well-sanitized, making it difficult to come across information on his early history as well as information on his family. Yet, having been born in Ravensburg, Germany in 1938, many have speculated in recent months that Schwab’s family may have had some tie to Axis war efforts, ties that, if exposed, could threaten the reputation of the World Economic Forum and bring unwanted scrutiny to its professed missions and motives.
In this Unlimited Hangout investigation, the past that Klaus Schwab has worked to hide is explored in detail, revealing the involvement of the Schwab family, not only in the Nazi quest for an atomic bomb, but apartheid South Africa’s illegal nuclear programme. Especially revealing is the history of Klaus’ father, Eugen Schwab, who led the Nazi-supported German branch of a Swiss engineering firm into the war as a prominent military contractor. That company, Escher-Wyss, would use slave labor to produce machinery critical to the Nazi war effort as well as the Nazi’s effort to produce heavy water for its nuclear program. Years later, at the same company, a young Klaus Schwab served on the board of directors when the decision was made to furnish the racist apartheid regime of South Africa with the necessary equipment to further its quest to become a nuclear power.
With the World Economic Forum now a prominent advocate for nuclear non-proliferation and “clean” nuclear energy, Klaus Schwab’s past makes him a poor spokesperson for his professed agenda for the present and the future. Yet, digging even deeper into his activities, it becomes clear that Schwab’s real role has long been to “shape global, regional and industry agendas” of the present in order to ensure the continuity of larger, much older agendas that came into disrepute after World War II, not just nuclear technology, but also eugenics-influenced population control policies.
A Swabian Story
On 10 July 1870, Klaus Schwab’s grandfather Jakob Wilhelm Gottfried Schwab, referred to later as simply Gottfried, was born in a Germany at war with its French neighbours. Karlsruhe, the town where Gottfried Schwab was born, was located in the Grand Duchy of Baden, ruled in 1870 by the 43 year old Grand Duke of Baden, Frederick I. The following year, the aforementioned Duke would be present at the proclamation of the German Empire which took place in the Hall of Mirrors at the Palace of Versailles. He was the only son-in-law of the incumbent Emperor Wilhelm I and, as Frederick I, was one of the reigning sovereigns of Germany. By the time Gottfried Schwab turned 18 years old, Germany would see Wilhelm II take the throne upon the death of his father, Frederick III.
In 1893, a 23 year old Gottfried Schwab would officially depart from Germany giving up his German citizenship and leaving Karlsruhe in order to emigrate to Switzerland. At the time, his occupation was noted as being that of a simple baker. Here, Gottfried would meet Marie Lappert who was from Kirchberg near Bern, Switzerland and who was five years his junior. They would marry in Roggwil, Bern, on 27 May 1898 and the following year, on 27 April 1899, their child Eugen Schwab was born. At the time of his birth, Gottfried Schwab had moved up in the world, having become a Machine Engineer. When Eugen was around one year old, Gottfried and Marie Schwab decided to return to live in Karlsruhe and Gottfried reapplied for German citizenship again.
Eugen Schwab would follow in the footsteps of his father and also become a Machine Engineer and in future years, he would advise his children to do the same. Eugen Schwab would eventually begin working at a factory in a town in Upper Swabia in Southern Germany, capital of the district of Ravensburg, Baden-Württemberg.
The factory where he would forge his career was the German branch of a Swiss company named Escher Wyss. Switzerland had many long standing economic ties to the Ravensburg area, with Swiss traders in the early 19th century bringing in yarn and weaving products. In the same period, Ravensburg delivered grain to Rorschach until 1870, alongside breeding animals and various cheeses, deep within the Swiss Alps. Between 1809 and 1837, there were 375 Swiss people living in Ravensburg, though the Swiss population had dropped to 133 by 1910.
In the 1830s, skilled Swiss workers set up a cotton factory with an incorporated bleaching and finishing plant owned and maintained by the Erpf brothers. The Ravensburg horse market, created in around 1840, also attracted many people from Switzerland, especially after the 1847 opening of the railway line from Ravensburg to Friedrichshafen, a town situated on nearby Lake Constance on the borderlands of Switzerland and Germany.
Rorsach grain traders would make regular visits to the Ravensburger Kornhaus and eventually this cross-border cooperation and trade also led to a branch of the Zurich machine factory, Escher-Wyss & Cie, opening in the city. This feat was made plausible once a train line connecting the Swiss to the German route network was completed between 1850 and 1853. The factory was set up by Walter Zuppinger between 1856 to 1859 and would begin production in 1860. In 1861, we can see the first official patent of the manufacturers Escher-Wyss in Ravensburg of “peculiar facilities on mechanical looms for ribbon weaving”. At this time, the Ravensburg branch of Escher Wyss would be directed by Walter Zuppinger, and would be where he developed his tangential turbine and where he gained a number of additional patents. In 1870, Zuppinger along with others would also founded a paper mill works in Baienfurt close to Ravensburg. He retired in 1875 and devoted all his energies to the further advance of turbines.
Founding Document of the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg Factory, dated 1860.
At the turn of the new century, Escher-Wyss had put the ribbon weaving to one side and begun to concentrate on much bigger projects like the production of large industrial turbines and, in 1907, they sought an “approval and concession procedure” for the construction of a hydropower plant near Dogern am Rhein, which was reported in a Basel brochure from 1925.
By 1920, Escher-Wyss found themselves embroiled in serious financial difficulties. The treaty of Versailles had restricted the military and economic growth of Germany following the Great War, and the Swiss Company found the downturn in neighbouring national civil engineering projects too much to bear. The parent branch of Escher-Wyss was located in Zurich and dated back to 1805 and the company, which still benefited from a good reputation and a history lasting more than a century, was deemed too important to lose. In December 1920, a reorganization was carried out by writing down the share capital from 11.5 to 4.015 million French Francs and which was later increased again to 5.515 million Swiss Francs. By the end of the financial year of 1931, Escher-Wyss was still losing money.
Yet, the plucky company continued to deliver large scale civil engineering contracts throughout the 1920s as noted in the official correspondence written in 1924 from Wilhelm III Prince of Urach to the company Escher-Wyss and to the asset manager of the House of Urach, accountant Julius Heller. This document discusses the “General Terms and Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Delivery of Machines and Other Equipment for Hydropower Plants”. This is also confirmed in a brochure on the “Conditions of the Association of German Water Turbine Manufacturers for the Installation of Turbines and Machine Parts within the German Reich”, printed on March 20, 1923 in an advertising brochure from Escher-Wyss for a universal oil pressure regulator.
After the Great Depression in the early 1930s had laid waste to the global economy, Escher-Wyss announced, “as the catastrophic development of the economic situation in connection with the currency declines; The company [Escher-Wyss] is temporarily unable to continue its current liabilities in various customer countries.” The company also revealed that they would apply for a court deferral to the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Nachrichten, which reported on 1 December 1931 that, “the company Escher-Wyss has been granted a stay of bankruptcy until the end of March 1932 and, acting as curator in Switzerland, a trust company has been appointed.” The article stated optimistically that, “there should be a prospect of continuing operations.” In 1931, Escher-Wyss employed around 1,300 non-contracted workers and 550 salaried employees.
By the mid-1930s, Escher-Wyss had again found itself in financial trouble. In order to rescue the company this time, a consortium was brought on board to save the ailing engineering firm. The consortium was partly formed by the Federal Bank of Switzerland (which was coincidently headed by a Max Schwab, who is of no relation to Klaus Schwab) and further restructuring took place. In 1938, it was announced that an engineer at the firm, Colonel Jacob Schmidheiny would become the new President of the Board of Directors at Escher-Wyss. Soon after the outbreak of war in 1939, Schmidheiny was quoted as saying, “The outbreak of war does not necessarily mean unemployment for the machine industry in a neutral country, on the contrary.” Escher-Wyss, and its new management, were apparently looking forward to profiting off the war, paving the way for their transformation into a major Nazi military contractor.
A Brief History of Jewish Persecution in Ravensburg
When Adolf Hitler came to power, many things changed in Germany, and the story of the Jewish population of Ravensburg during that era is a sad one to tell. Yet, it was hardly the first time that anti-Semitism had first been recorded as having reared its ugly head in the region.
In the Middle Ages, a synagogue, mentioned as far back as 1345 was located at the centre of Ravensburg, serving a small Jewish community which can be traced from 1330 to 1429. At the end of 1429 and through 1430, the Jews of Ravensburg were targeted and a horrific massacre ensued. In the nearby settlements of Lindau, Überlingen, Buchhorn (later renamed Friedrichshafen), Meersburg and Konstanz, there were mass arrests of Jewish residents. The Jews of Lindau were burnt alive during the 1429/1430 Ravensburg blood libel, in which members of the Jewish community were accused of ritually sacrificing babies. In August 1430, in Überlingen, the Jewish community was forced to convert, 11 of them did so and the 12 who refused were killed. The massacres which took place in Lindau, Überlingen and Ravensburg happened with the direct approval of the ruling King Sigmund and any remaining Jews were soon expelled from the region.
Ravensburg had this ban confirmed by Emperor Ferdinand I in 1559 and it was upheld, for example, in an 1804 instruction issued for the city guard, which read: “Since the Jews are not allowed to engage in any trade or business here, no one else is allowed to enter the city by post or by carriage, The rest, however, if they have not received a permit for a longer or shorter stay from the police office, are to be removed from the city by the police station.”
Not until the 19th century were Jews able to settle legally in Ravensburg again and, even by then, their number remained so small that a synagogue was not rebuilt. In 1858, there were only 3 Jews recorded in Ravensburg and, in 1895, this number peaked at 57. From the turn of the century until 1933, the numbers of Jews living in Ravensburg had steadily decreased until the community was only made up of 23 people.
By the start of the 1930s, there were seven main Jewish families living in Ravensburg, including the Adler, Erlanger, Harburger, Herrmann, Landauer, Rose and Sondermann families. After the National Socialists seized power, some of the Ravensburg Jews were initially forced to emigrate, while others would later be murdered in Nazi concentration camps. Leading up to World War II, there were many public displays of hatred towards the small community of Jews in and around Ravensburg.
As early as March 13, 1933, about three weeks before the nationwide Nazi boycott of all Jewish shops in Germany, SA guards posted themselves in front of two of the five Jewish shops in Ravensburg and tried to prevent potential buyers from entering, putting up signs on one shop stating “Wohlwert closed until Aryanization”. Wohlwert’s would soon become “Aryanised” and would be the only Jewish-owned shop to survive the Nazi pogrom. The other owners of the four large Jewish department stores in Ravensburg; Knopf; Merkur; Landauer and Wallersteiner were all forced to sell their properties to non-Jewish merchants between 1935 and 1938. During this period, many of the Ravensburg Jews were able to flee abroad before the worst of the National Socialist persecution began. While at least eight died violently, it was reported that three Jewish citizens who lived in Ravensburg survived because of their “Aryan” spouses. Some of the Jews who were arrested in Ravensburg during Kristallnacht were forced to march through the streets of Baden-Baden under SS guard supervision the following day and were later deported to Sachsenhausen concentration camp.
Horrific Nazi crimes against humanity took place in Ravensburg. On 1 January 1934, the “Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseases” came into force in Nazi Germany, meaning people with diagnosed illnesses such as dementia, schizophrenia, epilepsy, hereditary deafness, and various other mental disorders, could be legally forcibly sterilised. In the Ravensburg City Hospital, today called Heilig-Geist Hospital, forced sterilisations were carried out beginning in April 1934. By 1936, sterilisation was the most performed medical procedure in the municipal hospital.
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Escher-Wyss Ravensburg and the War
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
Nazi officials in front of the Ravensburg Town Hall in 1938, Source: Haus der Stadtgeschichte Ravensburg
Western military intelligence were already aware of Escher-Wyss’ complicity and collaboration with the Nazis. There are records available from western military intelligence at the time, specifically Record Group 226 (RG 226) from the data compiled by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which shows the Allied forces were aware of some of the Escher-Wyss’ business dealings with the Nazis.
Within RG 226, there are three specific mentions of Escher-Wyss including:
File number 47178 which reads: Escher-Wyss of Switzerland is working on a large order for Germany. Flame-throwers are despatched from Switzerland under the name Brennstoffbehaelter. Dated Sept. 1944.
File number 41589 showed that the Swiss were allowing German exports to be stored in their country, a supposedly neutral nation during World War II. The entry reads: Business relations between Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo (ENCASO), Escher Wyss, and Mineral Celbau Gesellschaft. 1 p. July 1944; see also L 42627 Report on collaboration between the Spanish Empresa Nacional Calvo Sotelo and the German Rheinmetall Borsig, on German exports stored in Switzerland. 1 p. August 1944.
File number 72654 claimed that: Hungary’s bauxite was formerly sent to Germany and Switzerland for refining. Then a government syndicate built an aluminium plant at Dunaalmas on the borders of Hungary. Electric power was provided; Hungary contributed coal mines, and equipment was ordered from the Swiss firm Escher-Wyss. Production began in 1941. 2 pp. May 1944.
Yet, Escher-Wyss were leaders in one blossoming field in particular, the creation of new turbine technology. The company had engineered a 14,500 HP turbine for the Norsk Hydro industrial facility’s strategically important hydroelectric plant at Vemork, near Rjukan in Norway. The Norsk Hydro plant, part powered by Escher Wyss, was the only industrial plant under Nazi control capable of producing heavy water, an ingredient essential for making plutonium for the Nazi atomic bomb program. The Germans had put all possible resources behind the production of heavy water, but the Allied forces were aware of the potentially game-changing tech advances by the increasingly desperate Nazis.
During 1942 and 1943, the hydro plant was the target of partially successful British Commando and Norwegian Resistance raids, although heavy water production continued. The Allied forces would drop more than 400 bombs on the plant, which barely affected the operations at the sprawling facility. In 1944, German ships attempted to transport heavy water back to Germany, but the Norwegian Resistance were able to sink the ship carrying the payload. With help from Escher-Wyss, the Nazis were almost able to change the tides of war and bring about an Axis victory.
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
Eugen Schwab would dutifully maintain the status quo during the war years. After all, with young Klaus Martin Schwab having been born in 1938 and his brother Urs Reiner Schwab born a few years later, Eugen would have wanted to keep his children out of harm’s way.
Klaus Martin Schwab – International Man of Mystery
Born on 30 March 1938 in Ravensburg, Germany, Klaus Schwab was the eldest child in a normal nuclear family. Between 1945 and 1947, Klaus attended primary school in Au, Germany. Klaus Schwab recalls in a 2006 interview with the Irish Times that:”After the war, I chaired the Franco-German regional youth association. My heroes were Adenauer, De Gasperi and De Gaulle.”
Klaus Schwab and his younger brother, Urs Reiner Schwab, were both to follow in the footsteps of their grandfather, Gottfried, and their father, Eugen, and would both initially train as machine engineers. Klaus’s father had told the young Schwab that, if he wanted to make an impact on the world, then he should train as a Machine Engineer. This would only be the beginning of Schwab’s University credentials.
Klaus would begin studying his plethora of degrees at Spohn-Gymnasium Ravensburg between 1949 and 1957, eventually graduating from the Humanistisches Gymnasium in Ravensburg. Between 1958 and 1962, Klaus began working with various engineering companies and, in 1962, Klaus completed his mechanical engineering studies at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich with an engineering diploma. The following year, he also completed an economics course at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. From 1963 until 1966, Klaus worked as Assistant to the Director-General of the German Machine-building Association (VDMA), Frankfurt.
In 1965, Klaus was also working on his doctorate from the ETH Zurich, writing his dissertation on: “The longer-term export credit as a business problem in mechanical engineering”. Then, in 1966, he received his Doctorate in Engineering from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich. At this time, Klaus’s father, Eugen Schwab, was swimming in bigger circles than he had previously swam. After being a well known personality in Ravensburg as the Managing Director of the Escher-Wyss factory from before the war, Eugen would eventually be elected as President of the Ravensburg Chamber of Commerce. In 1966, during the founding of the German committee for Splügen railway tunnel, Eugen Schwab defined the founding of the German committee as a project “that creates a better and faster connection for large circles in our increasingly converging Europe and thus offers new opportunities for cultural, economic and social development”.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab gained a Doctorate in Economics from the University of Fribourg, Switzerland as well as a Master of Public Administration qualification from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard in the United States. While at Harvard, Schwab was taught by Henry Kissinger, who he would later say were among the top 3-4 figures who had most influenced his thinking over the course of his entire life.
Henry Kissinger and his former pupil, Klaus Schwab, welcome former- UK PM Ted Heath at the 1980 WEF annual meeting. Source: World Economic Forum
In the previously mentioned Irish Times article of 2006, Klaus talks about that period as being very important to the formation of his present idealogical thinking, stating: “Years later, when I came back from the US after my studies at Harvard, there were two events that had a decisive triggering event on me. The first was a book by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber, The American Challenge – which said Europe would lose out against the US because of Europe’s inferior management methods. The other event was – and this is relevant to Ireland – the Europe of the six became the Europe of the nine.” These two events would help shape Klaus Schwab into a man who wanted to change the way people went about their business.
That same year, Klaus’s younger brother Urs Reiner Schwab graduated from ETH Zurich as a mechanical engineer, and Klaus Schwab went to work for his father’s old company, Escher-Wyss, soon to become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG, Zurich, as Assistant to the Chairman to aid in the reorganisation of the merging companies. This leads us towards Klaus’s nuclear connections.
The rise of a technocrat
Sulzer, a Swiss company whose origins date back to 1834, had first risen to prominence after starting to build compressors in 1906. By 1914, the family-run firm had become part of “three joint-stock companies,” one of which was the official holding company. In the 1930s, Sulzer’s profits would suffer during the Great Depression and, like many businesses at the time, faced disruption and industrial actions from their workers.
World War II may not have affected Switzerland as much as her neighbours, but the economic boom that was to follow led to Sulzer growing in power and market dominance. In 1966, just before the arrival of Klaus Schwab at Escher-Wyss, the Swiss turbine manufacturers signed a cooperation agreement with the Sulzer brothers in Winterthur. Sulzer and Escher-Wyss would begin to merge in 1966, when Sulzer purchased 53% of the company shares. Escher-Wyss would officially become Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG in 1969 when the last of the shares were acquired by the Sulzer brothers.
Once the merger had started, Escher-Wyss would begin to be restructured and two of the existing Board Members would be the first to find their service to Escher-Wyss coming to an end. Dr. H. Schindler and W. Stoffel would resign from the Board of Directors now headed by Georg Sulzer and Alfred Schaffner. Dr. Schindler had been a member of the Escher-Wyss Board of Directors for 28 years and had worked alongside Eugen Schwab throughout much of his service. Peter Schmidheiny would later take over as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Escher-Wyss, continuing the Schmidheiny family rule over the company’s executives.
During the restructuring process, it was decided that Escher-Wyss and Sulzer would concentrate on separate areas of machine engineering with the Escher-Wyss factories primarily work on hydraulic power plant construction, including turbines, storage pumps, reversing machines, closing devices and pipelines, as well as steam turbines, turbo compressors, evaporation systems, centrifuges and machines for the paper and pulp industry. Sulzer would concentrate on the refrigeration industry as well as steam boiler construction and gas turbines.
On 1 January 1968, the freshly reorganised Sulzer Escher-Wyss AG was rolled out publicly and the company had become streamlined, a move deemed necessary because of several large acquisitions. This included a close collaboration with Brown Boveri, a group of Swiss electric engineering companies who had also worked for the Nazis, supplying the Germans with some of their U-boat technology used during World War II. Brown Boveri was also described as “defence-related electrical contractors” and would find the conditions of the Cold War arms race to be beneficial to their business.
The merger and reorganisation of these Swiss mechanical engineering giants saw their collaboration pay off in unique ways. During the 1968 Winter Olympics in Grenoble, Sulzer and Escher-Wyss used 8 refrigeration compressors to create tonnes of artificial ice. In 1969, the two firms combined to help in the building of a new passenger ship named “Hamburg”, the first ship in the world to be fully air-conditioned thanks to the Sulzer Escher-Wyss combination.
In 1967, Klaus Schwab officially burst onto the scene of the Swiss business community and took a lead in the merger between Sulzer and Escher-Wyss, as well as forming profitable alliances with Brown Boveri and others. In December 1967, Klaus would speak at a Zurich event to the top Swiss machine engineering organisations; the Employers Association of Swiss Machine and Metal Manufacturers and the Association of Swiss Machine Manufacturers.
In his talk, he would correctly predict the importance of incorporating computers into modern Swiss machine engineering, stating that:
“In 1971, products that are not even on the market today are likely to account for up to a quarter of sales. This requires companies to systematically research possible developments and identify gaps in the market. Today, 18 of the 20 largest companies in our machine industry have planning departments that are entrusted with such tasks. Of course, everyone has to make use of the latest technological advances, and the computer is one of them. The many small and medium-sized companies in our machine industry take the path of cooperation or use the services of special data processing service providers.”
Computers and data were obviously seen as important to the future, according to Schwab, and this was further projected in the reorganisation of Sulzer Escher-Wyss during their merger. Sulzer’s modern website reflects this noteworthy change in direction, stating that, in 1968: “Material technology activities are intensified [by Sulzer] and form the basis for medical technology products. The fundamental change from a machine-building company to a technology corporation starts to become apparent.”
Klaus Schwab was helping to turn Sulzer Escher-Wyss into something more than just a machine building giant, he was transforming them into a technology corporation driving at high speed into a hi-tech future. It should also be noted that Sulzer Escher-Wyss changed another focus of their business to help them “form the basis for medical technology products,” an area not previously mentioned as a target industry for Sulzer and/or Escher-Wyss.
But technological advancement wasn’t the only upgrade Klaus Schwab wanted to introduce at Sulzer Escher-Wyss, he also wanted to change how the company thought about their business managerial style. Schwab and his close associates were pushing an entirely new business philosophy which would allow “all employees to accept the imperatives of motivation and to ensure at home a sense of flexibility and manoeuvrability.”
It is here in the late 1960s where we see Klaus begin to emerge as a more public figure. At this time, the Sulzer Escher-Wyss company also became more interested in engaging with the press than ever before. In January 1969, the Swiss giants setup a public advisory session entitled the “Press Day of the Machine Industry“, which mainly concerned questions on company management. During the event, Schwab would state that companies using authoritarian styles of business management are “unable to fully activate the ‘human capital’”, an argument he would use on many separate occasions during the late 1960s.
Plutonium and Pretoria
Escher-Wyss were pioneers in some of the most important tech in power generation. As the US Department of Energy points out in their paper on Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle Development (CBC), a device used in hydro and nuclear power plants, “Escher-Wyss was the first company known to develop the turbomachinery for CBC systems starting in 1939.” Going on to state that 24 systems were built, “with Escher-Wyss designing the power conversion cycles and building the turbomachinery for all but 3”. By 1966, just before the entrance of Schwab into Escher-Wyss and the start of the Sulzer merger, the Escher-Wyss helium compressor was designed for the La Fleur Corporation and continued the evolution of the Brayton Cycle Development. This technology was still of importance to the arms industry by 1986, with nuclear powered drones being equipped with a helium-cooled Brayton cycle nuclear reactor.
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh.
In the report, Peter Hug outlined how Sulzer Escher Wyss AG (referred to post-merger as just Sulzer AG) had supplied vital components to the South African government and found evidence of Germany’s role in supporting the racist regime, also revealing that the Swiss government “was aware of illegal deals but ‘tolerated them in silence’ while supporting some of them actively or criticised them only half-heartedly”. Hug’s report was eventually finalised in a work entitled: “Switzerland and South Africa 1948-1994 – Final Report of the NFP 42+ commissioned by the Swiss Federal Council” which was compiled and written by Georg Kreis and published in 2007.
By 1967, South Africa had constructed a reactor as part of a plan to produce plutonium, the SAFARI-2 located at Pelindaba. SAFARI-2 was part of a project to develop a reactor moderated by heavy water which would be fuelled by natural uranium and cooled using sodium. This link to developing heavy water for the creation of uranium, the same technology which had been utilised by the Nazis also with the help of Escher-Wyss, may explain why South Africans initially got Escher-Wyss involved. But by 1969, South Africa abandoned the heavy water reactor project at Pelindaba because it was draining resources from their uranium enrichment program that had first begun in 1967.
A South African nuke in storage
In 1970, Escher-Wyss were definitely deeply involved with nuclear technology, as seen in a record available in the Landesarchivs Baden-Württemberg. The record shows details of a public procurement process and contains information about award talks with specific companies involved in the procurement of nuclear technology and materials. The companies cited include: NUKEM; Uhde; Krantz; Preussag; Escher-Wyss; Siemens; Rheintal; Leybold; Lurgi; and the infamous Transnuklear.
The Swiss and South Africans had a close relationship through this period of history, when it was hardly easy for the brutal South African regime to find close allies. By 4 November 1977, the United Nations Security Council had enacted resolution 418 which imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa, an embargo that wouldn’t be fully lifted until 1994.
Georg Kreis pointed out the following in his detailed assessment of the Hug report:
“The fact that the authorities assumed a laisse-faire attitude even after May 1978 comes to the fore in an exchange of letters between the Anti-Apartheid Movement and the DFMA in October/December 1978. As the study by Hug explicates, the Anti-Apartheid Movement of Switzerland pointed to German reports according to which Sulzer Escher-Wyss and a company called BBC had supplied parts for the South African uranium enrichment plant, and to repeated credits to ESCOM, which also included considerable contributions by Swiss banks. These assertions led to questions of whether the Federal Council – in light of fundamental support of the UN embargo, ought not to instigate the National Bank to stop authorising credits for ESCOM in the future.”
Swiss banks would help to fund the South African race to nukes and, by 1986, Sulzer Escher-Wyss were successfully producing special compressors for uranium enrichment.
The Founding of the World Economic Forum
In 1970, the young upstart, Klaus Schwab wrote to the European Commission and asked for help in setting up a “non-commercial think tank for European business leaders”. The European Commission would sponsor the event as well, sending French politician Raymond Barre to act as the forum’s “intellectual mentor”. Raymond Barre, who was at that time European Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, would later go on to become French PM and would be accused of making anti-Semitic comments while in office.
So, in 1970, Schwab left Escher Wyss to organise a two-week business managerial conference. In 1971, the first meeting of the World Economic Forum – then called the European Management Symposium – convened in Davos, Switzerland. Around 450 participants from 31 countries would take part in Schwab’s first European Management Symposium, mostly made up of managers from various European companies, politicians, and US academics. The project was recorded as organised by Klaus Schwab and his secretary Hilde Stoll who, later the same year, would become Klaus Schwab’s wife.
Klaus’s European symposium was not an original idea. As writer Ganga Jey Aratnam stated quite coherently in 2018:
“Klaus Schwab’s “Spirit of Davos” was also the “Spirit of Harvard”. Not only had the business school advocated the idea of a symposium. Prominent Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith championed the affluent society as well as capitalism’s planning needs and the rapprochement of East and West.”
It was also true that, as Aratnam also pointed out, this was not the first time Davos had hosted such events. Between 1928 and 1931, the Davos University Conferences took place at the Hotel Belvédère, events which were co-founded by Albert Einstein and were only halted by the Great Depression and the threat of looming war.
The Club of Rome and the WEF
The most influential group that spurred the creation of Klaus Schwab’s symposium was the Club of Rome, an influential think tank of the scientific and monied elite that mirrors the World Economic Forum in many ways, including in its promotion of a global governance model led by a technocratic elite. The Club had been founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King during a private meeting at a residence owned by the Rockefeller family in Bellagio, Italy.
Among its first accomplishments was a 1972 book entitled “The Limits to Growth” that largely focused on global overpopulation, warning that “if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century.” At the third meeting of the World Economic Forum in 1973, Peccei delivered a speech summarizing the book, which the World Economic Forum website remembers as having been the distinguishing event of this historical meeting. That same year, the Club of Rome would publish a report detailing an “adaptive” model for global governance that would divide the world into ten, inter-connected economic/political regions.
The Club of Rome was long controversial for its obsession with reducing the global population and many of its earlier policies, which critics described as influenced by eugenics and neo-Malthusian. However, in the Club’s infamous 1991 Book, The First Global Revolution, it was argued that such policies could gain popular support if the masses were able to link them with an existential fight against a common enemy.
To that effect, The First Global Revolution contains a passage entitled “The common enemy of humanity is Man”, which states the following:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
In the years since, the elite that populate the Club of Rome and the World Economic Forum have frequently argued that population control methods are essential to protecting the environment. It is thus unsurprising that the World Economic Forum would similarly use the issues of climate and environment as a way to market otherwise unpopular policies, such as those of the Great Reset, as necessary.
The Past is Prologue
Since the founding of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab has become one of the most powerful people in the world and his Great Reset has made it more important than ever to scrutinize the man sitting on the globalist throne.
Given his prominent role in the far-reaching effort to transform every aspect of the existing order, Klaus Schwab’s history was difficult to research. When you start to dig into the history of a man like Schwab, who sits aloft other shadowy elite movers and shakers, you soon find lots of information has been hidden or removed. Klaus is somebody who wants to stay hidden in the shadowy corners of society and who will only allow the average person to see a well-presented construct of their chosen persona.
Is the real Klaus Schwab a kindly old uncle figure wishing to do good for humanity, or is he really the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labour and helped the Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb? Is Klaus the honest business manager who we should trust to create a fairer society and workplace for the common man, or is he the person who helped push Sulzer Escher-Wyss into a technological revolution that led to its role in the illegal creation of nuclear weapons for South Africa’s racist apartheid regime? The evidence I have looked at does not suggest a kindly man, but rather a member of a wealthy, well-connected family that has a history of helping create weapons of mass destruction for aggressive, racist governments.
As Klaus Schwab said in 2006 “Knowledge will soon be available everywhere – I call it the ‘googlisation’ of globalisation. It’s not what you know any more, it’s how you use it. You have to be a pace setter.” Klaus Schwab considers himself to be a pace setter and a top table player, and it must be said that his qualifications and experience are impressive. Yet, when it comes to practising what you preach, Klaus has been found out. One of the three biggest challenges on the priority list for the World Economic Forum is the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, yet neither Klaus Schwab nor his father Eugen lived up to those same principles when they were in business. Quite the opposite.
In January, Klaus Schwab announced that 2021 is the year that the World Economic Forum and its allies must “rebuild trust” with the masses. However, if Schwab continues to hide his history and that of his father’s connections to the “National Socialist Model Company” that was Escher-Wyss during the 1930s and 1940s, then people will have good reason to distrust the underlying motivations of his overreaching, undemocratic Great Reset agenda.
In the case of the Schwabs, the evidence doesn’t point at simply poor business practices or some sort of misunderstanding. The story of the Schwab family instead reveals a habit of working with genocidal dictators for the base motives of profit and power. The Nazis and the South African apartheid regime are two of the worst examples of leadership in modern politics, yet the Schwabs obviously couldn’t or wouldn’t see that at the time.
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The last question that should be asked about the real motivations behind the actions of Herr Schwab, may be the most important for the future of humanity: Is Klaus Schwab trying to create the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or is he trying to create the Fourth Reich?
Listen to the audio version of Schwab Family Values:
Loading...
Related
Dr Klaus Schwab: or How the CFR Taught Me to Stop Worrying & Love The Bomb
March 14, 2022
In ""Featured""
The Proximal Origin of Johnny Vedmore With James Wells: Part 1 is Out Now!
March 19, 2022
In "Family History"
Johnny Talks Schwab on Geopolitics and Empire Podcast
February 24, 2022
In "Family History"
Tagged Atomic Bomb, Eugen Schwab, Family History, featured, Klaus Schwab, Nazi, Nuclear, Schwab, WEF, World Economic Forum
Published by Johnny Vedmore
Johnny Vedmore is an Investigative Journalist, Musician, Activist, Presenter of the Fungi Monkey Podcast, Video Creator, Writer for UnlimitedHangout.com, JohnnyVedmore.com and FungiMonkey.com View all posts by Johnny Vedmore
Post navigation
Previous postListen to Schwab Family Values
Next post10 Facts From the UK Government Pfizer Vaccine Guidance that Promote “Vaccine Hesitancy”
4 thoughts on “Schwab Family Values”
Pingback: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF OLIGARCHICAL COLLECTIVISM by Emmanuel Goldstein – Not The Grub Street Journal
Mike Brown
April 14, 2022 at 10:31 am
Very well researched and enlightening. Whith good journalism and investigations the truth will always out. Humanity is slowly waking up to the truth and it will be humanity that will save themselves and the planet.
Like
Hairstyles
March 20, 2022 at 9:11 am
One thing I have actually noticed is that often there are plenty of misguided beliefs regarding the financial institutions intentions if talking about property foreclosure. One delusion in particular is the fact that the bank needs to have your house. The lender wants your hard earned cash, not your house. They want the money they lent you with interest. Preventing the bank will simply draw a new foreclosed realization. Thanks for your publication.
Like
Pingback: The One’s Proclamation: It won’t end well for the World Economic Forum | i am a malaysian
Leave a Reply
Search
Go To Fungi Monkey Media for Vedmore Videos & Podcasts
Go To UnlimitedHangout with Whitney Webb
Tweets by JohnnyVedmore
Fungi Monkey Podcast #4 – Micah Dank’s Biblical Planetarium: Is the Bible Really a Farmers Almanac?
by Johnny Vedmore
The Fungi Monkey Podcast with Johnny Vedmore Episode #1: Dr Jaspal Singh
by Johnny Vedmore
The Fungi Monkey Podcast with Johnny Vedmore Episode #3: Wayne Tarquin Smith
by Johnny Vedmore
The Fungi Monkey Podcast with Johnny Vedmore Episode #2: The Monkfish
by Johnny Vedmore
Fungi Monkey Podcast #4 – Micah Dank’s Biblical Planetarium: Is the Bible Really a Farmers Almanac?
by Johnny Vedmore
The Fungi Monkey Podcast with Johnny Vedmore Episode #1: Dr Jaspal Singh
by Johnny Vedmore
Website Powered by WordPress.com. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
This informative video gives an overview of what is currently happening in the world in just 1 hour. It shows the modern global systems, and focusses on the situation in the Netherlands.
We believe though, that people from all over the world will recognise this situation.
In consultation with Tim Gielen, the maker of this video, and in cooperation with others who strive for freedom, we translated it into English. We think it is a very important video to share with the world, so we can change things for the better.
The maker sees this video as an open source project. Feel free to use parts of it, add to it or subtitle it into your own language. You can download it here: https://t.me/VvVmonopoly
Much Love,
Vrouwen voor Vrijheid
BLACKROCK & VANGUARD
These institutional investors are mainly investment firms banks and insurance companies. In turn, they, themselves are owned by shareholders and the most surprising thing is that they own each other’s stocks
Together, they form an immense network comparable to a pyramid. The smaller investors are owned by larger investors. Those are owned by even bigger investors. The visible top of this pyramid shows only two companies whose names we have often seen by now. They are Vanguard and BlackRock. The power of these two companies is beyond your imagination. Not only do they own a large part of the stocks of nearly all big companies but also the stocks of the investors in those companies. This gives them a complete monopoly.
A Bloomberg report states that both these companies in the year 2028, together will have investments in the amount of 20 trillion dollars. That means that they will own almost anything
Bloomberg calls BlackRock “The fourth branch of government”, because it’s the only private agency that closely works with the central banks. BlackRock lends money to the central bank but it’s also the advisor. It also develops the software the central bank uses. Many BlackRock employees were in the White House with Bush and Obama. Its CEO, Larry Fink can count on a warm welcome from leaders and politicians. Not so strange, if you know that he is the front man of the ruling company. But Larry Fink does not pull the strings, himself.
BlackRock, itself is also owned by shareholders. Who are those shareholders? We come to a strange conclusion. The biggest shareholder is Vanguard. But now he gets murky. Vanguard is a private company and we cannot see who the shareholders are. The elite who own Vanguard apparently do not like being in the spotlight but of course they cannot hide from who is willing to dig.
Reports from Oxfam and Bloomberg say that 1% of the world, together owns more money than the other 99%. Even worse, Oxfam says that 82% of all earned money in 2017 went to this 1%.
Forbes, the most famous business magazine says that in March 2020, there were 2,095 billionaires in the world. This means that Vanguard is owned by the richest families in the world. If we research their history, we see that they have always been the wealthiest. Some of them, even before the start of the Industrial Revolution, because their history is so interesting and extensive, I will make a sequel.
For now, I just want to say that these families of whom many are in royalty are the founders of our banking system and of every industry in the world, these families have never lost power but due to an increasing population, they had to hide behind firms, like Vanguard, which the stockholders are the private funds and non-profits of these families.
NGOs AND FOUNDATIONS AND THEIR OWNERSHIP OF BIG PHARMA
To clarify the picture, I have to explain briefly what non-profits actually are. These appear to be the link between companies, politics and media. This conceals the conflicts of interests a bit. Non-profits, also called “foundations” are dependent on donations they do not have to disclose who their donors are they can invest the money in the way they see fit and do not pay taxes as long as the profits are invested again in new projects. In this way, non-profits keep hundreds of billions of dollars among themselves according to the Australian government, non-profits are an ideal way of financing terrorists and of massive money-laundering.
The foundations and funds of the families that are the richest stay in the background as much as possible. For issues that get much attention, the foundation of philanthropists are used that are lower in rank but very rich.
Guardian columnist George Monbiot made the claims in his new book Regenesis
He described livestock farming as 'phenomenally profligate way' to make food
He suggested the world could turn to bacteria based foods for protein instead
But farmers have hit back at the suggestion accusing writer of 'anti-rural agenda'
By James Robinson for MailOnline
Published: 14:03, 18 May 2022 | Updated: 14:50, 18 May 2022
Environmental campaigner George Monbiot has claimed farming should be abolished because meat can be replaced with food made out of lab-grown bacteria.
Writing in his latest book, the Guardian columnist said the world must do away with meat and dairy production because it is a 'phenomenally profligate' way to produce food.
The writer, who describes farming as the 'most destructive force ever to have been unleashed by humans', argues meat producers will not be able to sustainably keep up with the increase in global food demand.
He suggests that the world should look at newer methods, including creating industrial quantities of protein powder using bacteria which can be used to make food such as 'protein pancakes' instead.
But farming groups have today hit out at Mr Monbiot's claims, accusing the Guardian writer of an 'anti-rural agenda'.
Farmers have also criticised the idea of ditching farming as the type of scheme popular with 'oat milk-drinking' city-dwellers who 'do not understand' the country.
Among those to criticise Mr Monbiot's latest book, Regenesis: Feeding the World Without Devouring the Planet, were campaign group the Countryside Alliance.
Chief executive, Tim Bonner, told MailOnline: 'Despite the hugely inaccurate description of the countryside painted by those with extreme, anti-rural agendas, the reality is that it’s admired globally because of, not in spite of, generations of farming.
Writing in his latest book, environmental campaigner George Monbiot (pictured at an Extinction Rebellion rally in 2019) said the world must do away with meat and dairy production - because it is a 'phenomenally profligate' way to produce food
Writing in his latest book, environmental campaigner George Monbiot (pictured at an Extinction Rebellion rally in 2019) said the world must do away with meat and dairy production - because it is a 'phenomenally profligate' way to produce food
Mr Monbiot suggests that the world should look at newer methods, including creating industrial quantities of protein powder using bacteria (pictured: A researcher works on bacteria protein during the Channel 4 documentary Apocalypse Cow) which can be used to make food such as 'protein pancakes' instead
Mr Monbiot suggests that the world should look at newer methods, including creating industrial quantities of protein powder using bacteria (pictured: A researcher works on bacteria protein during the Channel 4 documentary Apocalypse Cow) which can be used to make food such as 'protein pancakes' instead
The writer, who describes farming as the 'most destructive force ever to have been unleashed by humans', argues meat producers (pictured: Library image of a cow) will not be able to sustainably keep up with the increase in global food demand
The writer, who describes farming as the 'most destructive force ever to have been unleashed by humans', argues meat producers (pictured: Library image of a cow) will not be able to sustainably keep up with the increase in global food demand
'Farming is having to adapt to reflect wider concerns about the environment and it is doing so while balancing the important duty of providing food for the nation.
'Without farmers, our countryside risks becoming a wasteland. George Monbiot is welcome to eat sludge manufactured in laboratories to alleviate his hysteria, but the future of a healthy countryside lies in a buoyant domestic market here in the UK for sustainable, grass-fed red meat.'
Celebrity farmer and occasional BBC host Gareth Wyn Jones also took aim at Mr Monbiot's comments.
Food produced from 'thin air' - literally: How bacteria could be the food of the future
Scientists in Helsinki are hoping to create a new meat-free alternative using bacteria and 'thin air' - literally.
The Finnish scientists hope to use a type of bacteria found in soil to create or enhance food to make it rich with protein.
The process involves obtaining microbial protein (also referred to as single cell protein) obtained by growing proprietary bacteria harvested from nature.
That bacteria will be be fed hydrogen, which in itself will be split from water (H20) by electricity.
It is hoped that if the electricity comes from solar or wind power, the bacteria can be grown with near-zero greenhouse gas emissions - also helping to tackle global warming.
The end product will be a protein flour - named Solein after its makers Solar Foods.
This will be used to reinforce foods such as pies, ice cream, biscuits, pasta, noodles, sauces or bread.
The protein flour could also nourish cattle to save them eating soya raised on rainforest land.
In 2020, Solar received 5.5million Euros in investment to expand its business.
In that same year George Monbiot praised the technology behind the scheme, as part of a documentary, Apocalypse Cow.
He said at the time: 'Farmfree food creates astonishing possibilities to save both people and planet.
'By temporarily shifting towards a plant-based diet, we can help buy the time to save species and places.'
Last year the firm received nearly 25 million euros ($30 million) in government and private funding to commercialise Solein.
Solar Foods aims to introduce the product to the market in early 2023 and is applying for novel food approval globally.
Meanwhile, other meat-free alternatives are also being pushed, including lab-grown meat, eating insects and turning to fungi-based products.
Mr Wyn Jones, whose family have run a hill farm on the Carneddau mountain range in North Wales for more than 375 years, told MailOnline: 'George thinks we can produce enough food from gloop pulled up from bacteria in the soil. I think he's totally wrong.
'I respect George, he is an intelligent person, but he has spent his whole life trying to destroy indigenous people – and that's what farmers like me are –producing food across the UK.
Mr Wyn Jones, whose farm is organic and focuses on regenerative agriculture, added: 'These are indigenous people who have been working these lands for generations in an environmentally friendly way.
'My father always said to me that we are custodians of the land and we should leave it in a better state than we had it – that's what we should all be trying to do.
'We aren't perfect and we are always trying and finding new ways to be better. And we do need to talk about how we feed our country going forward.
'But farmers have to be a part of that conversation. Blocking farmers from everything won't help.'
Mr Wyn Jones, who is chairman of the grazing association in the area, also hit out at the type of people who were likely to agree with Mr Monbiot's arguments, saying they were likely city-dwellers who did not understand the country and where their food came from.
He said: 'We have a good phrase: "A bit of common sense is better than an Oxford or Cambridge education.'
'These people will be oat milk drinking Ivory Tower people. But we can't be flying in avocados from all round the world – that's not sustainable.
'We need a focus on seasonal produce, local produce grown in a sustainable way.'
His comments come after the release of Mr Monbiot's new book, which aims to raise the issues of food production in a ever-growing world.
It is estimated by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), that global agriculture production will need to increase by 60-70 per cent from the current levels to meet the food demand in 2050.
By that time the world's population will have ballooned from 7.9billion to 9.3billion.
Kensington-born Mr Monbiot, who now lives in Oxford and has been a leading voice on environmental and farming issues over the last 30 years, writes in his book that a sea-change is needed.
As part of his book, he travels 1,200 miles to Helsinki to see scientist and entrepreneur Pasi Vainikka who is inventing a way to create industrial quantities of high-quality protein from the bacteria Cupriavidus Necator.
He argues that bacteria farming could produce as much protein as would be produced by traditional farming on up to 1,700 times less land.
And that would mean almost all the world's farmland could be returned to the wild, he suggests, increasing biodiversity.
But his suggestion to scrap farming has not been warmly welcomed. Farmer John Lewis-Stempel, in a piece for Unherd, praised the book for taking on industrialised farming.
In a report published in 2020, the Land Coalition found 70 per cent of global farmland is now owned by just 1 per cent of 'farmers'.
Mr Lewis-Stempel said many traditional and organic farmers were also concerned about the impact of pesticides and insecticides on insects.
Among those to criticise Mr Monbiot's latest book, Regenesis: Feeding the World Without Devouring the Planet , is celebrity farmer Gareth Wyn Jones
Farmer John Lewis-Stempel, in a piece for Unherd, praised the book for taking on industrialised farming. But he hit out at Mr Monbiot's 'farmfree' future idea, writing: 'What will we eat? Bacterial soup, grown in vats. Such gloop can, apparently, be modelled into tasty dishes.'
Farmer John Lewis-Stempel, in a piece for Unherd, praised the book for taking on industrialised farming. But he hit out at Mr Monbiot's 'farmfree' future idea, writing: 'What will we eat? Bacterial soup, grown in vats. Such gloop can, apparently, be modelled into tasty dishes.'
Writing in Unherd, he said: 'Conventional, chemically-dependent agriculture a bonfire of the sanities, ecological and economic, being dependent on big (but barely scrutinised) public subsidy.'
But he hit out at Mr Monbiot's 'farmfree' future idea, writing: 'What will we eat? Bacterial soup, grown in vats. Such gloop can, apparently, be modelled into tasty dishes.
WHAT IS INSECT PROTEIN?
Insect proteins are derived from edible insects, of which there are some 2,000 worldwide.
They offer a more sustainable alternative to traditional proteins found in meat and soy.
Some high protein insects already discovered include black soldier fly larvae, mealworms, crickets and locusts.
The hope is that by shifting towards animal proteins, it could help to reduce the 64 million tons of carbon dioxide that is emitted each year from producing and the consumption of meat-based products.
Some companies say their insect farms only generate four per cent of the current emissions released each year by farms that maintain cows, pigs and chickens.
Using insect protein as a base requires far less feed, land and water, all of which generates fewer greenhouse gases per pound than those made with beef, pork or chicken.
'But any discussion of global food policy needs to begin with one plain fact: there is, as Monbiot concedes, no actual food shortage.
'Already, the planet's farmers produce enough food to cater for the projected 10 billion humans of 2050. The problem is waste, and distribution.'
He also hit out at Mr Monbiot's views at conventional farming, with the weekly Guardian columnist hitting out at organic livestock processes which he argues only allows a 'slightly wider range of wildlife to persist' while taking up more land to produce the same amount of food'.
Mr Lewis-Stempel, who is himself an organic farmer, added: 'As the high priest of British veganism, Monbiot really has it in the neck for farm animals, who do not feature in his eerily Orwellian 'farmfree' dystopia.
'The British countryside has been farmed for 3,000 years, and in those millennia developed distinct farmland habitats, with allied, dependent species.'
Scientists have repeatedly warned humans needed to drastically reduce the amount of meat they consume this decade to prevent climate change spiralling out of control.
In an open letter sent to the prestigious Lancet journal in 2020, a team of academics from around the world call on 'high and middle income countries' to hit 'peak meat' by 2030 as it is 'necessary' in order to halt the climate emergency.
This would mean that, by the end of the incoming decade, the number of livestock around the world should have peaked and started to decline.
The letter sets out a four-part plan, which scientists say will greatly help meet climate targets outlined in the 2015 Paris Agreement.
They believe that within the next 10 years it will become essential for humanity to move away from eating animals and rely more on vegetarian alternatives.
Of all farmland used to grow both crops and animals, more than 80 per cent of it is dedicated to livestock, but it produces only 18 per cent of the calories.
Scientists argue that cutting down on animal protein and dairy, especially red meat, will drastically reduce CO2 emissions and allows for trees to be planted to absorb some of the excess carbon dioxide in the air.
Swapping animal products for future foods such as insect protein or cultured milk could reduce global warming, water and land use by over 80 per cent, a new study suggests. This table shows how animal-sourced products compare to vegan diets and novel or future foods (NFFs) ¿ including cultured milk, insect meal or mycoprotein
Swapping animal products for future foods such as insect protein or cultured milk could reduce global warming, water and land use by over 80 per cent, a new study suggests. This table shows how animal-sourced products compare to vegan diets and novel or future foods (NFFs) — including cultured milk, insect meal or mycoprotein
Meat and dairy accounts for 57 per cent of food-based greenhouse gas emissions, a survey published in September found.
Overall, taking into account farmland, livestock and land use changes, global food production is responsible for 17.318 billion metric tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year, the authors say.
In all, 57 per cent of that figure, or 9.8 billion metric tonnes, comes from animal-based production and 29 per cent, or 5.1 billion metric tonnes, comes from plant-based foods.
Plant-based foods have become increasingly popular in recent years. Last year a record 500,000 signed up to go entirely plant-based for January as part of the 'Veganuary' - almost double the number who took part in 2019.
While much of the focus has been on soy-based products, other methods are also being explored, including the use of lab-grown meat. However the process remains expensive, with a single lab grown chicken nugget costing $50 in 2019.
Other suggestions put forward including swapping animal foods for insect protein or cultured milk.
A study by the University of Helsinki published earlier this year said turning to such products could reduce global warming, water and land use by over 80 per cent.
They found that if people in Europe replaced meat and dairy with foods produced through new technologies, such as making fake steak out of bovine cells, it could significantly reduce all environmental impacts.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next
The soaring cost of goods in 9% inflation Britain: Average...
'Britons are on the brink': Inflation soars to 40-YEAR high...
Share this article
Share
Not only that, but it would be nutritionally adequate and meet the constraints for what can be feasibly consumed, the experts said.
They said that alternative diets such as vegetarian, vegan or flexitarian, had demonstrated the health and environmental benefits of shifting towards lower meat consumption.
But novel or future foods (NFFs) — including cultured milk, insect meal or mycoprotein — can contain a more complete array of essential nutrients compared to currently available plant-based protein-rich (PBPR) options like legumes, pulses and grains, according to the researchers.
They said NFFs also tend to be more land and water-efficient than existing animal-sourced products.
Cultured milk is where it has been fermented with lactic acid bacteria such as Lactobacillus, Lactococcus, and Leuconostoc.
This increases the shelf life of the product, while also enhancing its taste and improving digestibility.
'Global food systems face the challenge of providing healthy and adequate nutrition through sustainable means, which is exacerbated by climate change and increasing protein demand by the world's growing population,' the researchers, led by lead author Rachel Mazac, wrote in their paper.
'Recent advances in novel food production technologies demonstrate potential solutions for improving the sustainability of food systems.
'We estimate the possible reductions in global warming potential, water use and land use by replacing animal-source foods with novel or plant-based foods in European diets.'
John Lewis-Stempel is a farmer and historian. His books include Six Weeks and Where Poppies Blow. He is currently working on a history of Paris and his latest book is The Sheep’s Tale.
JLewisStempel May 17, 2022
Ever since they rode out of the Book of Revelation circa 90AD, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have wreaked existential havoc. They may now finally be about to achieve the End Times. We are either going to starve to death, as the world population reaches 10 billion by 2050, or drown or scorch to death due to climate change soon thereafter.
The Devil has finally found the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. It is not, as you might suspect, a hurtling asteroid or Putin pushing the thermo-nuclear button; it is, apparently, farming. It is, according to the environmentalist and journalist George Monbiot, “the most destructive force ever to have been unleashed by humans”. This ancient activity takes up vast tracts of the planet and the gases emitted by its cows and sheep take up its atmosphere.
Credit where it is due, Monbiot presents in his latest book Regenesis:“Feeding the World Without Devouring the Planet” a damning case for farming being the Devil’s work. What the public understands as farming — carefully husbanded crops and moo moos attended to by a rosy-faced family — is increasingly absent from the landscape and confined to the board books the middle classes read to their toddlers. About 70% of global farmland is owned by 1% of “farmers”. Agri-business now rules the roost.
Four companies — Cargill, Archer Daniel Midland, Bunge and Louis Dreyfus — control 90% of the global grain trade. Similarly, four companies — ChemChina, Corteva, Bayer and BASF — control 66% of the world’s agricultural chemicals. These businesses are hardly renowned for their care of the environment. Likewise, politicians. The post-Second World War intensification of agriculture, promoted in the West by national governments and the nascent EU as a path to food security, has starved the soil and exhausted crops.
The litany of the woes caused by agriculture continues. Pesticide use on farmland has resulted in what Monbiot calls “Insectageddon”: even an eco-minded country such as Denmark has witnessed a drop of 70-80% of insects in the last 20 years. No fewer than 75% of antibiotics sold in Europe are used for treating farm animals, and perhaps 58% of those antibiotics are excreted, with some reaching water courses. I learned to swim in the River Wye, in the self-same stretch near Hay where Monbiot today fears to tread water, due to pollutant run-off from 590 chicken units. Soya fed to housed cattle requires the cutting down of the Amazon rainforest. Then there is wasted water from the tap left running. And those methane belches.
We in the West live in a careless and consumerist Sodom and Gomorroh, and the remainder of the planet is following in a handcart. By what is known as “Bennett’s Law”, consumption of fat and protein (read: “meat”) rises with income. As hitherto starving parts of the globe gain more currency in the pocket so they will, like us decadent Westerners, tuck into burgers, spare-ribs, entrecote, all of which come from the same pesky, methane-producing, land-hogging livestock who are already the principal cause agents of The End Times. “The biggest population crisis is not the growth in human numbers, but the growth in livestock numbers”, Monbiot declares.
More from this author
George Monbiot's farming fantasies
By John Lewis-Stempel
It might come as a surprise to Saint George of The Guardian, but many of us in agriculture would concur with his jeremiad against Big Farmer. Indeed, my book The Running Hare, an account of sustainably retro-farming an arable field, anticipates many of his sallies against the agri-industrial dragon. Conventional, chemically-dependent agriculture is a bonfire of the sanities, ecological and economic, being dependent on big (but barely scrutinised) public subsidy.
Monbiot’s solution is a ‘‘farmfree” future, in which our farmland has been re-wilded with exotic megafauna — think lions, elephants, giraffes. What will we eat? Bacterial soup, grown in vats. Such gloop can, apparently, be modelled into tasty dishes. In an aural irony a comedian would blush to construct, Monbiot’s damascene conversion to this ascetic diet came in Helsinki.
But any discussion of global food policy needs to begin with one plain fact: there is, as Monbiot concedes, no actual food shortage. Already, the planet’s farmers produce enough food to cater for the projected 10 billion humans of 2050. The problem is waste, and distribution. The West goes to fat, while Ethiopia hungers; worldwide, more than 10% of people are hungry, roughly 25% are overweight or obese. The United Nations’ figures for global food waste are somewhat fluid, but 33% is in the ballpark. The rich West throws away food, while the Third World lacks the storage to keep food preserved. I’d be more amenable to laments about farming by every George, Dick and Henrietta if the public stopped binning food, and government did its job of equitable distribution.
Suggested article
Octopus farms are the future
By Ellen Pasternack
Not that my views as a farmer will interest Monbiot. He has seen the light, and I am to be made extinct. Or I will be turned into a tourist guide for his wildlife park — which, after all, is what the British countryside will become under “farmfree”. Lions are apex predators, and quite capable of eating a human for lunch, so they will need to be fenced in when the Serengeti comes to Surrey. What used to be working countryside becomes an extended zoo where Nature is exterior to humans. A visitor attraction for city folk.
To justify his “farmfree” future Monbiot, after reasonably critiquing conventional, intensive agriculture, then traduces alternative, nature-friendly, climate-aiding farming methods. No-till, regenerative, and organic are all set up as Aunt Sallies, to be “demolished” in the proof that no farming model is sustainable. Not one.
But take organic farming (and I declare an interest). According to Monbiot, organic farming only allows “a slightly wider range of wildlife to persist” than conventional farming, and can inflict more damage on the overall environment because of its “lower yields”: it uses more land to produce the same amount of food. But as the same George Monbiot noted, in 2000, in a Guardian article called “Organic farming will feed the world“, organic farming of maize produces yields “identical to yields of maize grown with fertilisers and pesticides, while soil quality in the organic fields dramatically improves”. He goes on to explain the research of Professor Jules Pretty of Essex University, which demonstrated “how farmers in India, Kenya, Brazil, Guatemala and Honduras have doubled or tripled their yields by switching to organic or semi-organic techniques”.
More from this author
Humans are born to hunt
By John Lewis-Stempel
And does organic land really possess only a “slightly wider range of wildlife”? According to an Oxford University study, organic farms support 34% more plant, insect and animal species than conventional farms. I’d say 34% was more than “slight”, wouldn’t you?
As the high priest of British veganism, Monbiot really has it in the neck for farm animals, who do not feature in his eerily Orwellian “farmfree” dystopia. Curious, is it not, how some eco activists claim to love animals, but are happy to see farm breeds — some of which, like White Park cattle, have been around since Druid times — made extinct? Is there some sort of hierarchy, where wild animals are good, farm animals bad? I aver that our Ouessant sheep, a Viking-era breed from Brittany, are no less fascinating than their wild Mouflon ancestors. And I have observed both.
Sheep — usually Monbiot’s bete noire, for their supposed “sheepwrecking” of the uplands of Wales — get off lightly in Regenesis, in which the pasture-fed, organic cow becomes the “most damaging farm product” on Earth. Why? Because they are slow to grow to maturity, thus taking up more space, and emitting more methane.
But the organic cow will produce, from its back end, enough manure to feed over 2 million insects a year, the start of a wild food chain going all the way up to the fox and swallow. More organic cows might, then, end “Insectageddon”. Moreover, traditional hay meadows — the precise origin and purpose of which is the feeding of livestock like Ermintrude — are one of the most florally diverse habitats in the world, and can contain over 140 plant species.
More from this author
Why we shouldn't eat lamb
By John Lewis-Stempel
Arguments like this will fall on stony ground with Monbiot and his largely urban following of rewilders, whose experience of agriculture is that of the voyeur, the observer. Monbiot has no appreciation of farmland ecology, and for him Nature and Farming are absolutely discrete (as they are, ironically, for Big Farmer). He complains that 40% of global land use is given over to farming, whereas “Only 15 per cent of the world’s land, by contrast, is protected for nature.”
Is not a traditional, chemical-free hay meadow, with its meadow brown butterflies and meadow pipits, “protected for nature”? For The Running Hare, I took a chemically-lashed arable field and turned it into a Victorian-type cornfield, which as well as giving “yield” ran anew with poppies and hares, cornflowers and red-leg partridge.
The British countryside has been farmed for 3,000 years, and in those millennia developed distinct farmland habitats, with allied, dependent species. The clue is in the names of the flowers: Cornflower, Meadowsweet, Corn Marigold. Today, in Britain, it is these flora and fauna of traditional farmland that is most under threat. Since the industrialisation of agriculture in the Fifties, some 97% of traditional hay meadows have disappeared, and arable flowers, grown in fields since the Stone Age, have become extinct. As for the farmland birds, here’s the report of theDepartment of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Wild Bird Populations in the UK, 1970 to 2014:
“The long term decline of farmland birds in the UK has been driven mainly by the decline of those species that are restricted to, or highly dependent on, farmland habitats (the ‘specialists’). Between 1970 and 2014, populations of farmland specialists declined by 69 per cent … Four farmland specialists (grey partridge, turtle dove, tree sparrow and corn bunting) have declined by 90 per cent or more relative to 1970 levels.”
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
