World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders”

World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders”

Bill Gates and Justin Trudeau

By Jacob Nordangård

5 februari, 2022 Agenda 2030, Demokrati, ENGLISH, TeknokratiComments: 14

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)

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
  • Bono
  • Richard Branson (Virgin)
  • Jorma Ollila (Shell Oil), and
  • José Manuel Barroso (President of the European Commission 2004–2014).[1]
  • Bill Gates (Global Leader of Tomorrow 1992)
  • Justin Trudeau (Young Global Leader, unknown class)

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
  • 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 fascist 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.

References

Thanks to investigative journalist Cory Morningstar for the clip that inspired this blog article. Follow her blog Wrong Kind of Green.

[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

Totalitarian Elites Want to Extend Covid-19 Lockdowns Forever For Climate Change

Totalitarian Elites Want To Extend COVID-19 Lockdowns Forever For ‘Climate Change’

Totalitarian Elites Want To Extend COVID-19 Lockdowns Forever For ‘Climate Change’

Power-hungry government officials’ eyes have been opened to how far they can stretch their ’emergency powers,’ and climate change is their next frontier.By Connor Tomlinson

Sir David Attenborough’s upcoming documentary, “The Year Earth Changed,” romanticizes the global lockdowns in 2020 for proving how “the natural world” would “do much better if we weren’t there at all.” Similar attitudes have circulated on social media since last March: from the “nature is healing” meme toExtinction Rebellion stickers calling humanity a “disease” and COVID the “cure” plastered across the East Midlands.

An increasing number of liberal democratic governments are flirting with utilitarian approaches to policymaking, and removing any limiting principles on the scope of their overreach. With herd immunity on the horizon, COVID is expiring as a palatable justification to a paranoid public for intrusive nanny-statism. The next pretext they’re likely to use for controlling lives and livelihoods? Climate change.null

COVID-19 lockdowns produced a 2.4 billion ton (7 percent) decrease in CO2 emissions in 2020. This has informed a belief that lockdowns are a viable method of cutting carbon emissions by 2050. World Economic Forum, European Commission, and U.N. advisor Mariana Muzzucato has, therefore, hypothesized lockdowns may be enforced again to prevent climate change.

Move Goalposts, Stay Locked Down

Measures such as banning private transport, a moratorium on meat consumption, and ending fossil-fuel production would be mandated by governments worldwide. The World Economic Forum has since published other articles like Muzzucato’s, suggesting lockdowns are a “crucial dress-rehearsal”for addressing climate change by reducing consumerism and providing homeostasis for low-emission living.

Other voices promoted this policy in political spheres. Germany’s Social Democratic Party Member of Parliament Karl Lauterbach authored an op-ed urging environmental policies analogous to “the restrictions on personal freedom [imposed] to combat the pandemic.” The U.K.’S Green Party praised lockdowns for providing a vision of how “a different world might be possible.”

When debating the role of the market in environmentalism at Durham Union,Extinction Rebellion co-founder Claire Farrell pushed for replicating COVID-19 lockdowns to instigate revolutionary economic redistribution and reduce Britain’s carbon emissions.null

Of 180 nations, the U.K. has imposed the sixth most stringent COVID-19 lockdowns on its subjects. Recently, the prime minister stated it was his lockdown policies — not Britain’s exemplary vaccine rollout program — that reduced COVID-19 cases and related deaths. Neither the facts nor the principles behind the prime minister’s “data not dates” approach have been presented to the British public. Instead, the prime minister seems to be hard-selling lockdowns as a policy worth repeating.

Parliament appears to have bought this line of argument. A bipartisan majority of members voted to extend “draconian” “Emergency Powers” until October. This is despite six of England’s nine regionsreporting no deaths with COVID-19 that week, and the World Health Organisationcondemning the use of lockdowns as a “primary control method” for pandemics. With the government repeatedly moving goal-posts — from “Protect the NHS. Save lives” to a crusade to immunize Brits from death itself — there’s no longer any set criteria on which reopening the country is contingent.

Negative externalities produced by the U.K.’s three successive lockdowns have inflicted irreversible damage on society. Taxpayer money funded a “covert,” “unevaluated psychological experiment”run on the British public, with sage advising the government “use media to increase the sense of personal threat.”

Lockdowns’ combination of prohibited commercial operations and the furlough scheme is costing Britain £1.5 billion daily. Banning small businesses causedincome disparity to increase; and wealth and influence monopolistically consolidate in international companieslike Amazon, which accrued record profitsdue to stay-at-home orders.null

It’s financially unsustainable and morally untenable to involuntarily confine anybody — let alone healthy people — to their homes, and deprive them of opportunities to interact or earn a living. However, when halting what Greta Thunberg called “the fairy-tale of eternal economic growth” is the goal, lockdowns become an enticing tool for ending both capitalism and climate emissions.

Climate Change as Eugenics

Climate lockdowns also aid in reinforcingMalthusian anti-natalist narratives. A “Lifeboat Ethicist” attitude is percolating throughout collectivist environmentalism.

British professor Patricia McCormack’s “Ahuman Manifesto” urges gradual depopulation according to intersectional feminism. Echoing Simone De Beauvoir’smetaphors of a feminine Earth violated by masculine instruments of industrialization. Sen. Bernie Sandersendorsed abortion as a method of lowering carbon emissions through population control. Some women have taken to surgical sterilization, believing “going child-free [is] the answer to our climate crisis.”

Lockdowns aid in suppressing population growth. Despite initial predictions of aquarantine “baby boom” — when we have, as Dostoyevsky said, nothing to do but “sleep, eat cakes and busy [ourselves] with [the] continuation of the species” — the West is heading for a “baby-bust”. Increases in self-reported anxiety and suicidality have depreciated libido.null

A 2020 survey of European couples’ fertility plans demonstrated dire economic straits have influenced 50 percent of couples to postpone having children, even indefinitely. Both economic and individual depression produced by lockdowns will depreciate birth rates for a generation.

Where did these lockdown policies come from? As Professor Neil Ferguson, whoseerroneous epidemiological models for Swine Flu caused thousands of unnecessary livestock deaths, explains, his advice to the U.K. government was based on actions taken by “a communist one-party state”: China. Ferguson cited China’s totalitarian lockdowns where families were welded into their homes as the precondition for Britain realizing “We [could] get away with it.”

If China is the standard for morally legitimate policies, what is the limiting principle on governments’ intervention into lives and livelihoods the pretext of other “existential threats”?

Emulating the European Union, the prime minister has proposed ransoming normality back to us with oxymoronic “Freedom Passports”: promoting pub chains to tie pulling pints to theircustomer’s vaccine status. This program has been critically compared to China’s Social Credit System: a surveillance software that consolidates citizens’ medical history, biometric data, and social media so the government can blacklist dissidents from purchasing property, using transport, and accessing vital goods and services. (This was satirized by “Black Mirror.”)

Tying one’s ability to own and exchange property and engage with civil society to one private medical history is an inexcusable intrusion on inviolable rights. And what’s to stop penalties being tied to a digital carbon footprint down the line?

The World Locks Down and China Races Ahead

The biting irony of lockdowns is that China lifted restrictions as early as March 2020. China has accelerated its timeline of global dominance by five years in 2020, due to a combination of using slave labor and the economic damage lockdowns inflicted on competitors. It would be ludicrous for climate lockdown advocates to assume China — the leading global producer of carbon emissions andocean plastic pollution — would adopt lockdown policies at the expense of their economic growth and role as top dog of the global hegemon.

Fortunately, non-authoritarian measures are both more moral and more effective at addressing climate concerns.Environmental Kuznets curvesdemonstrate the wealthier a nation is, the more environmentally conscious decisions are made over time. Prior resource scarcity prophecies from the likes of Paul Ehrlich were also predicated on embarrassing underestimations of human ingenuity.

Markets and families, not depopulation and ending innovation, are the best mechanisms for combating climate change. There’s no imperative to improve or conserve the Earth without a generation to inherit it. Both ethics and efficacy expose lockdowns as unsustainable, inefficient, and immoral, regardless of pretext.

Whether for planet or pandemic, lockdowns, health passports, and sterilization narratives should be opposed as long as they remain voluntary and resisted if ever made mandatory.Connor Tomlinson is the policy director for the British Conservation Alliance and a Young Voices UK contributor. His work can be found at Daily Express, Spiked, and CapX. Follow him on Twitter: @Mass_Effected