Every year, the World Economic Forum (WEF) convenes in Davos, Switzerland. This article describes, based on peer-reviewed and grey literature, how Klaus Schwab as founder of the WEF succeeded in steering global politics in the last few decades.
The invention of the internet and the subsequent development of social media have opened up global communication. For those willing to investigate, it is easy to find that our world has been shaped throughout history towards ‘stakeholder capitalism’, heavily promoted by the Schwab and his WEF.
Stakeholder capitalism can be defined as politics, big industries, and corporatism working together for their own goals and benefits, subduing humanity in a stray jacket. Many think Klaus Schwab is the founder of this paradigm, but nothing is further from the truth. He just recites history and implements a very old realm to push his personal ideology.
Klaus Schwab is nothing less than an ideologist whose dream of a global government controlling the world’s population. His WEF is sponsored by over 1000 corporations seeking political influence.
Two Swedish scientists were able to attend the WEF meetings and describe their findings in the Journal of Global Governance in 2021. An interesting read, titled ‘Discretionary Governance: Selection, Secrecy, and Status within the World Economic Forum’. Let’s explore this scientific article by Garsten and Sobrom (2021).
Schwab started his campaign for global dominance in 1971 in Switzerland. The way Schwab pushes his agenda is nothing short of the same tactics that the Italian banking family, Di Medici, used in the 12th century, to gain control over all layers of decision-making. Hence, controlling not only governments, but also instating four consecutive family members as Pope’s of the Catholic Church (Holler and Rupp 2021).
Back to the research of Garsten and Sobrom (2021). They explain how Schwab invites only high-ranking politicians, business leaders, compliant opinion makers, selected press, and influencers that (at least partially) support his narrative.
Invitees are extremely well vetted before they are allowed to participate. Every guest is chosen for a certain reason and agenda. Guests are called ‘actors’, and most of them are western men.
Schwab has promoted these WEF-meetings, since its inception, as only accessible for ‘high profile people, academic top brains, and corporate elite’, exclusively catering the happy few. Actors engage in these events under the illusion of being someone of major impotance in global governance. Psychological entitlement.
By bringing people together who consider themselves superior to others, a group dynamic emerges and is being facilitated by secret meetings and the upholding of the Chatham House Rule (no word leaves the meeting room).
Addressing actors as ‘important’, ‘of value’, ‘top brain’, and lured into secrecy, boosts the ego until they blindly follow and promote Schwab’s ideology. Also, the network is used to help one another. I scratch your back when you scratch mine. Hence, an actor feels unique and lifted above the masses.
High-ranking businessmen get direct access to world leaders, and vice versa. This also explains why officials from all these supranational organisations easily shift from one entity to another through revolving door politics. All infesting the system with the same narrative on every level.
More than 600 (!!) WEF ‘screeners’ follow the actors 24/7, the whole year round, to evaluate how they ‘perform’ within society. Critique on the WEF leads to a ban. Once banned, the network dries up, and the network considers you a traitor. Often, banned people end up losing everything they have ever worked for (Garsten and Sobrom 2021).
This fear-based mechanism is a copy-paste of manipulation and leveraging assets, as we have seen before in different historical contexts.
McNeill (2023) argues the WEF is ambiguous and lacks any accountability which cast doubt on their overall legitimacy. This research concludes by stating: “It (cfr. WEF, SB) has clearly sought to increase the power of corporations in global governance at the expense, inter alia, of multilateral organisations such as the WHO.” The WEF is also a founding member of CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), way up their ally to secure control over the masses.
Moreover, Woodworth (2023) states in the research paper titled: “How the World Economic Forum damages the credibility of climate science”, the following:
“Since the WEF was a catalyst in the rush to judgment on COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates, this suggests that the WEF is primarily guided by political motives, not by science. In fact, the way the WEF approaches the climate issue—as an excuse to restrict freedom without promoting renewable energy sources—makes evident the true motives of the WEF. As a result of the WEF’s political use of the climate issue, the validity of climate science has been tarnished in the public mind.”
In ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ (Schwab and Malleret 2020), a book Schwab co-wrote early on in the pandemic, he warns his WEF actors of a declining western economy, losing up to 30% of western GDP, and a 30% rise in unemployment by 2030.
He proposes a shift towards a ‘Green Economy’. A green deal that citizens have to accept. To facilitate this, it is important to warn the global population of the potential disastrous effects of climate change. Hence, propagating climate fear to get the Green Deal launched and save some of the declining western economy.
Schwab promotes AI, wearables, and robotics uplifting the economy, but warns of the consequences for the population who will face massive job losses. A decline in GDP and rising unemployment may destabilise society. In turn, this leads to monetary uncertainty. Schwab fears potential uprisings in the global population. To counter this, bank accounts should be transferred to central banks, and central bank digital currencies have to be launched. This, combined with a digital ID that encompasses your whole life, gives you the ultimate social credit and control tool over an entire global population.
To counter unrest, he proposes to use helicopter money, or conditional basic income, to ease the population’s burden. If this gets combined with your social credit score, governments could raise or diminish that ‘extra income’ depending on your ‘behaviour’ (Schwab and Malleret, Schwab 2021).
The latter can be extrapolated following a quote derived from Schwab’s Great Reset:
“In this messy new world defined by a shift towards multipolarity and intense competition for influence, the conflicts or tensions will no longer be driven by ideology but spurred by nationalism and the competition for resources. If no one power can enforce order, our world will suffer from a ‘global order deficit’.”
Schwab and his acolytes apparently fear a multipolar world and call for a unipolar world government whereby all sovereign nation states transfer their powers to supranational organisations before the Global South takes over. At least, that is how I interpret this statement.
In facilitating the further build-up towards global governance, AI is considered one of the major solutions by the WEF. This is a dangerous discourse, in my opinion. AI can only develop based on what is being put into it as information. If this is distorted or one-sided, the response of AI will not be appropriate at all.
HOW THE WEF CONTROLS THE SCIENCE
You should ask the current online AI tools how safe and efficient the mRNA vaccines are. You only get to see the narrative of the WHO—the 3.400 peer-reviewed articles that claim serious issues are suppressed. The same manipulation can be detected when using online search engines, especially Google Scholar, which is commonly used by scientists. It also explains why scientists often get stuck in the same paradigm and assume ‘consensus’ on a certain issue as they are not confronted with sufficient dialectics in their own field of research. Google has been a WEF partner for years.
I urge you to find a dissenting academic article on Climate Change or the vaccines.
These articles are hard to find, suppressed by a guided AI-algorithm. Pose the same question in other scientific search engines or public engines like Brave or Yandex, and totally different results will show.
Dr. Patrick Brown, a climate researcher, admitted in the Wall Street Journal to have manipulated his recent climate research to get it in line with the narrative that top-scientific journal ‘Nature’ supports to get his study published. And it got published, although it did not represent the reality.
Excerpt of the article in the Wall Street Journal:
“Scientists were aghast last month when Patrick Brown, climate director at the Breakthrough Institute in Berkeley, Calif., acknowledged that he’d censored one of his studies to increase his odds of getting published. Credit to him for being honest about something his peers also do but are loath to admit.
In an essay for the Free Press, Mr. Brown explained that he omitted “key aspects other than climate change” from a paper on California wildfires because such details would “dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell.” Editors of scientific journals, he wrote, “have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives.”(Finley 2023).
Nature, one of the so-called most-reputed scientific journals, is governed by the Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, a partner of….you guessed it, the WEF.
Meta-research shows in between 50% to 80% of biomedical research is not falsifiable meaning the study and results cannot be reproduced. Hence, there is no secure proof of proposed scientific treatments (Ioannidis 2005, Fanelli 2009, Lose and Klarskov 2017, Topol and Ioannidis 2018).
Big Pharma is also a partner of the WEF. So, if you wonder how drugs companies are able to mingle in scientific publications steering and subsequently are able to control the WHO and governments….this is your answer.
It explains how humanity was subdued into unsubstantiated measures and coercion during the pandemic. All WEF partners had something to gain, and who became the victim? You, the citizen.
Luckily, the global population is starting to realise how they are being manipulated by all these capitalist stakeholders. If we all say no, their power will crumble.
REFERENCES
FANELLI, D. 2009. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PloS one, 4, e5738.
FINLEY, A. 2023. How ‘Preapproved Narratives’ Corrupt Science. Wsj.com. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-preapproved-narratives-corrupt-science-false-studies-covid-climate-change-5bee0844 (Accessed: January 23, 2025).
GARSTEN, C. & SÖRBOM, A. 2021. Discretionary Governance: Selection, Secrecy, and Status within the World Economic Forum. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 27, 540-560.
HOLLER, M. J. & RUPP, F. 2021. Power in Networks: The Medici. Homo Oeconomicus, 38, 59-75.
IOANNIDIS, J. P. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS medicine, 2, e124.
LOSE, G. & KLARSKOV, N. 2017. Why published research is untrustworthy. International Urogynecology Journal, 28, 1271-1274.
MCNEILL, D. The World Economic Forum: An unaccountable force in global health governance? Global Policy, n/a.
SCHWAB, K. & MALLERET, T. The great reset. World economic forum, Geneva, 2020.
SCHWAB, K. 2021. Stakeholder capitalism: A global economy that works for progress, people and planet, John Wiley & Sons.
TOPOL, E.J., IOANNIDIS, J.P.A. 2018. Ioannidis: Most research is flawed; Let’s fix it, Medscape. Available at: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/898405 (Accessed: January 23, 2025).
Disclaimer
The views and analysis expressed in this content (video, blog, article, etc.) are solely that of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of humani-well, the organisation, or other associated parties.
Medical disclaimer: you should not rely on the information on this website as a replacement for seeing a doctor or other qualified healthcare provider for a diagnosis or treatment. Nothing in this publication should be interpreted as a substitute for the advice of a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult a medical professional before using any information contained in this publication.
