Debunking Reuters Attacks On The Great Reset

Reuters is at it again, this time ‘debunking’ ‘conspiracy’ ‘theories’ about the Great Reset.  In January, Reuters published this piece ‘factchecking’ the idea that the Great Reset is linked to the Covid pandemic.  So this article is now debunking Reuters attacks on the Great Reset.

Despite repeated misinformation being shared online about the “Great Reset”, this sustainability plan proposed by the World Economic Forum is not a secret plot to end private property or create a totalitarian state. Read more here: https://t.co/8IkEIoulCU, https://t.co/m3vsZKiONT pic.twitter.com/I4r1yjSaf4

— Reuters Fact Check (@ReutersFacts) January 19, 2022

The Reuters article begins by laying out the fact to be checked, namely: “An hour-long documentary being shared on social media makes numerous suggestions about the pandemic, global current affairs and the potential of a new world order.”

It then goes on to list in this order the claims it says the video makes:

• Bill Gates: “The footage directs attention to Event 201, a pandemic simulation held in October 2019 … There is a suggestion in the documentary that Gates and others had prior knowledge of the COVID-19 pandemic due to the similarity with Event 201.”
• Animal trials: “A lengthy clip of a previously debunked video shows doctors suggesting animal trials were skipped before manufacturing the vaccine (here). This is not true.”
• 5G allegations: “The documentary moves on to suggest lockdowns may have been imposed to ensure the smooth rollout of 5G networks. COVID-19 and 5G are not related to one another.”
• The Great Reset – which I deal with in detail below.

Reuters concludes: “VERDICT: Misleading. The video includes various references to suggest the COVID-19 pandemic was devised to push forward with a new world order envisioned by society’s elite. There is no evidence this is true.”

The documentary in question is this hour long video, The New Normal, made by happen.network and released a year ago. It begins by looking at the impact Covid-19 had in 2020. At 3:24 the narrator says:

“Since Covid-19 was declared a pandemic many have speculated that it’s been planned by a group of tech elites who are dictating to governments globally but do these ideas carry any weight and what might their motives be for orchestrating a global pandemic? To understand, we must first explore a significant shift that’s been taking place in our economy – one that only a minority of people are aware of. It’s called the Fourth Industrial Revolution.”

Suggestedreading

How Florida’s ‘Parental Rights in Education’ Law protects children from Woke sexualisation

April 10, 2022

440

The United Nations at the Crossroads: Irrelevance or Renewal?

April 4, 2022

407

Will the Ukraine war help Orban win again?

April 3, 2022

451

Life Without Fossil Fuels Post 2030

March 27, 2022

631

So the video isn’t about the Great Reset at all, it’s about the Fourth Industrial Revolution (which are heavily interlinked, but not identical).

The video begins by explaining aspects of the fourth industrial revolution before introducing Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum and author of books titled Covid 19: The Great Reset and  The Fourth Industrial Revolution.

The narrator then says (at 8:48):

“In June 2019 the UK government published details about their partnership with the World Economic Forum in a policy called Regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. One year later in June 2020 the World Economic Forum released this promotional video entitled the Great Reset.” (The white paper for that policy is on the UK government’s website here.)

So right off the bat, the documentary makes a clear link not between the Great Reset and Covid per se, but the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It then makes the case that the Covid pandemic was invoked in order to roll out the Great Reset, which will move us into the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

In short, the Fourth Industrial Revolution gives context to the whole documentary and the claims within it. Yet Reuters makes no mention of it, cherry picking topics within the video to pass them off as spurious.

Hmm.

Now let’s look in more detail at Reuters’ factchecking of the documentary’s claims on the Great Reset specifically.

Referring to a WEF clip included within the documentary, Reuters claims:

“The World Economic Forum pitched the idea of a “great reset” on capitalism in June 2020 after noting the pandemic was increasing inequality (here). It encourages three components, including asking governments to improve fiscal policy, implement overdue reforms (such as on wealth taxes), and push for the efforts that boosted health sectors in 2020 to be replicated across other sectors and bring about an industrial revolution.

“The social media clip, meanwhile, is from 2016 (here) and has nothing to do with the Great Reset. It is a video formulated after members of the WEF’s Global Future Councils made various predictions about the world in 2030 – whether good or bad (here). Danish politician Ida Auken, who wrote about the prediction that people would no longer own anything (here), added an author’s note to her piece to stress it was not her vision of utopia.

It is true that the ‘you’ll own nothing’ claim is from 2016, and so predates the roll out of WEF’s Great Reset agenda. However, the claim that the two are therefore not linked is absolutely false. Instead, the clip is evidence of the opposite: that the WEF were pushing toward the Great Reset agenda long before Covid came on the scene.

The Reuters link above clicks through to this article on the WEF website. It was written to accompany the video, and lays out each of the predictions in a little more detail.

In the section on Auken’s “You’ll own nothing” prediction, the WEF includes a link to the article she wrote – but that link is dead. It’s dead too in Reuters’ piece, suggesting they either copy-pasted and didn’t click through to read it, or they did click it, they know it goes nowhere, but they hope that you won’t click it and will instead just take their word on what it says. However, we can actually read Auken’s article despite the dead links as it’s available on the WayBack Machine – an internet archive site. You can read it by clicking here.

It’s a strange piece, written from the point of view of someone who welcomes this ‘own nothing and be happy’ lifestyle. For example, the hypothetical ‘author’ imagined by Auken writes “It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us;” and “When AI and robots took over so much of our work, we suddenly had time to eat well, sleep well and spend time with other people;” and “My biggest concern is all the people who do not live in our city.”

After it came in for a great deal of criticism, Auken did indeed – as Reuters mentions above – add a disclaimer. It reads in full:

Some people have read this blog as my utopia or dream of the future. It is not. It is a scenario showing where we could be heading – for better and for worse. I wrote this piece to start a discussion about some of the pros and cons of the current technological development. When we are dealing with the future, it is not enough to work with reports. We should start discussions in many new ways. This is the intention with this piece.

Yeah, alright Ida. Sure you weren’t cheerleading madly for the vision of the future contained in the article. With lines like “All in all, it is a good life. Much better than the path we were on …” how could anyone mistake think this was anything but an impartial appraisal? A mere ‘discussion starter’? I just don’t know…

Putting that criticism aside however, let’s ask ourselves: does the future Auken imagines have anything to do with the Great Reset?

Reuters says ‘no’.

I’m going to go ahead and fact check that claim as ‘False.’

Let’s take just one of the sections in Auken’s article, subtitled: “Environmental problems seem far away.” In that section, she writes:

“Once in awhile, I will choose to cook for myself. It is easy – the necessary kitchen equipment is delivered at my door within minutes. Since transport became free, we stopped having all those things stuffed into our home. Why keep a pasta-maker and a crepe cooker crammed into our cupboards? We can just order them when we need them.

“This also made the breakthrough of the circular economy easier {my emphasis]. When products are turned into services, no one has an interest in things with a short life span. Everything is designed for durability, repairability and recyclability. The materials are flowing more quickly in our economy and can be transformed to new products pretty easily. Environmental problems seem far away, since we only use clean energy and clean production methods [also my emphasis].”

On June 14, 2020, the World Economic Forum broadcast a discussion panel with Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret, authors of COVID-19: The Great Reset. Also on the panel was Sardia Zahidi, Head of New Economy and Society at the WEF.

At the 18:29 mark, the panel chair, Adrian Monk, asked Zahidi: “how is the forum’s work going to help support this theme of the Great Reset?”

Zahidi replies (all emphases mine):

“The regional action groups that the forum has set up are dealing with a lot of the elements of regional and global cooperation. The industry action groups that we have set up in the last months are dealing with the need for new business models within various industries.

Our solutions platform on the Fourth Industrial Revolution is looking at how to harness and disseminate better some of these technologies in the service of positive societal outcomes.

Our solutions platform on global public goods is looking at deploying more solutions around water, around the circular economy, around forestation.

And then finally the solutions platform on the new economy and society is looking very much at what to do in terms of the economic growth and revival; 2 – wages work and safety nets; 3 – on education skills and lifelong learning and; 4 – on diversity equity and social justice.”

Later on at the 44:27 mark, Monk asks: “Going forward we’re going to continue to see fallout from this crisis [the pandemic] and some of the structural changes that it brings about for better and worse. What are the principal positive structural changes that you expect to see?”

Klaus Schwab replies (all emphases mine again):

“I think for me it’s the final transition from short-term thinking to more long-term thinking and from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism. I think it’s also the transition as it has been mentioned from looking at material improvement of life to a more generalized concept of well-being translated on a corporate level into ESG measurement – Environmental, Social, and Good governance criteria – and one of the big, as an example, one of the big projects which we have in the framework of this Great Reset initiative is to come up with a more unified measurement system to allow to evaluate companies not only on the basis of short-term financial returns but how they perform in terms of social, environmental, and good governance criteria.”

To summarise, then. In 2016 Ida Auken imagined a world in which the circular economy will be in place, and environmentalism will be a central concern. In 2020, unveiling their Great Reset, Klaus Schwab and Sardia Zahidi explain that projects are already underway to put in place a circular economy, in a society in which environmentalism is a central concern. Not only that, but Zahidi explicitly links these projects to the Fourth Industrial Revolution – exactly the charge being examined in the documentary, which Reuters glosses over entirely.

Reuters’ claims that sceptics of the Great Reset are being “misleading” when they link the World Economic Forum’s 2016 predictions to its 2020 plans for the Reset, claiming that they were “not what the Great Reset proposes.” Yet according to Schwab and co., not only is the world portrayed in Auken’s article exactly what the Great Reset proposes, they are already well on the way to constructing that world – the world of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

So given this, let’s take another look at central premises of both the documentary, and the Reuters’ article.

Here’s the documentary’s central question: Since Covid-19 was declared a pandemic many have speculated that it’s been planned by a group of tech elites who are dictating to governments globally but do these ideas carry any weight and what might their motives be for orchestrating a global pandemic?

And here’s Reuters’ answer: Misleading. The video includes various references to suggest the COVID-19 pandemic was devised to push forward with a new world order envisioned by society’s elite. There is no evidence this is true.

Reuters is, of course, being extremely disingenuous. It is true that there is no smoking gun. To the best of my knowledge, there is no direct and indisputable evidence that Klaus Schwab and friends released the virus in order to justify a Great Reset, which will usher in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

But the documentary never claims there is. It merely asks whether the speculation that this might have happened carries any weight, and if so, what the motives might be. And the answer to that question must be a resounding ‘YES!’, given that the World Economic Forum has indeed spoken in advance of wanting to create the world of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (at length!) and after the pandemic rolled out the Great Reset to achieve that aim.

Why does any of this matter? After all, we know that Reuters and the BBC are, along with CNN, the premier cheerleaders of the globalist agenda. We hardly need to pick apart this factchecking article to figure that out.

Well, it matters for a few reasons.

It matters because it means we have no true journalism in the West left to speak of, and that’s a problem. As I mentioned in my previous post, the wheels have been falling off the official Covid narrative lately as the media have begun to realise that, far from keeping the populace captive and supine, they’re haemorrhaging viewers while truth-seekers like Joe Rogan are busy waking everyone up. Reuters’ and the BBC’s attack on the Great Reset is part of this damage control – why else go after a year old documentary?

It matters because the abrogation of the function of journalism has left an information vacuum which has not yet been filled in any meaningful way.

There are many excellent podcasters, independent journalists. and commentators asking very pertinent questions about this pandemic, just as this documentary does. The best of them to my mind, like Joe Rogan and the Dark Horse podcast, focus on the asking, presenting information and letting their audiences to take what they want from it.

It matters because journalism matters.

People are turning to Joe Rogan and documentaries such as The New Normal in such droves because the function of journalism is precisely to ask questions.

People think journalism’s role is to give answers. They see the role of the journalist as being to go out, collect information, and tell everyone about what they’ve found so that we don’t have to do all that hard work ourselves. And it is hard work. In fact good journalism starts with asking a question, continues with collecting and publishing the evidence, and ends with people making up their own minds.

As things stand, no one really knows whether the pandemic was created as an excuse for the Great Reset. It looks that way from one angle, but from another it’s equally plausible that the World Economic Forum saw a great opportunity in the pandemic. After all, there are other characters such as Anthony Fauci who equally had motive to release a pandemic, and of course it could just have easily been an accidental lab leak.

You could argue that these questions aren’t particularly important. After all, the policies put in place were real. The deaths caused by those policies which are myriad by now – deaths due to withholding early treatment for Covid, deaths due to ventilators, deaths due to non-treatment of other illnesses, deaths due to job loss and depression, deaths due to the vaccine – are all very real.

Unpicking why those policies were put in place will take years, and given the complexity of the interactions between governments, industry and the quasi governmental organisations that inhabit the twilight area between the two, the reasons are likely to be protean.

But making sense of this all starts with asking questions. If we can’t do that, we’re doomed.

This article was able to be published on LIBERTATIO SUBSTACK members Page