Public, in-person discussion of the Great Reset feels long overdue, distracted as we have been by lockdowns, masks, vaccines, climate and the ever-increasing difficulties of simply living an ordinary life. But do all these things need to be seen in the context of a global technocratic agenda to remove the relevance of the nation state, and to remove politics, justice, due process and individual choice?
On October 24th there was an in-person event to discuss the Great Reset organised by the Together Foundation and titled “#Together Talks: Is a ‘Great Reset’ inevitable?“
Foundation founder Alan Miller introduced proceedings with a stirring and engaging talk about the foundation, which supports robust free speech, democracy, freedom and our individual rights. He outlined the situation in British politics today, where a Government with a huge majority nonetheless seems to be under the control of ‘The Markets’. The events of the previous few days he described as a “technocratic seizure of Government” via the installation of Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt, and reinforced by Keir Starmer. He mentioned the power of the World Economic Forum (the WEF, also known as Davos), the WHO, Gates Foundation, Blair Foundation, the technocratic elite and many more NGOs. In all this, what is the role of the public? Can we do anything?
Matt Gubba was the first of the panellists to speak. In his view the Great Reset is far from inevitable, and “lives and dies with public compliance”. He thinks the technology to put in place the digital ID, digital currency and social credit scoring system is many years away from being ready to go live. One danger we face is that these are being developed on the quiet, while our attention is diverted by other matters, and we need to keep fighting it.
Alan Miller described the way many of his followers argue that ‘it’s all done’ and so they don’t fight back and might as well just lie down in a ditch. Yet, he continued, we have done much good already, such as resisting the vaccine passport and mandatory vaccination for NHS staff. We can and must keep going, he said – to the quiet but obvious approval of everyone in the room (roughly 200 people).
Frank Furedi discussed the authority of the technocratic elites (the Science, the Experts). The only other authority is that of the people, he said, but instead the big decisions are made by distant and abstract institutions (IMF, WEF and others). There is no debate and no choice presented to the people, Net Zero being a case in point. The central problem we face, he argues, is the ‘national collaborators’ in each country. These encourage a type of snobbery which washes its hands of politics, pontificating that ‘politics is bad, it’s for idiots, it’s not for good people like us’. This is fundamentally wrong, he says, and we ‘the people’ must be dynamic makers of politics, not spectators or “voyeurs”.
Nick Hudson drew attention to the sheer volume of terrible work done by the WEF, including the false premise of a fixed capacity of the planet, and the generation of ‘global crises’ needing ‘global solutions’. ‘Stakeholder governance’ is especially bad, being a blending of monopoly companies and governments – the very definition of fascism, he suggested. The WEF may well not be the ultimate power in this, he argued, but it does generate the narrative, and the narrative drives reality. In a situation of mass propaganda, we need to get better at explaining its anti-human ideas to the public.
Michael Driver and Frank Furedi both drew attention to the relevance of the ‘culture wars’ in undermining our confidence, agency and individuality. We need to fight that directly and also develop our imagination, intuition, understanding, creativity and appreciation of beauty.
Ben Pile pointed out that Keir Starmer’s Green Prosperity Plan is exactly the same as Boris Johnson’s 10 Point Plan. There is no democratic legitimacy for Net Zero since all the large and medium parties included it in their manifesto so it was all but impossible to cast a vote against it. If you follow the money, every single green movement, from Extinction Rebellion to academics in major universities, are all connected via the funding that stems from the billionaires, he argues. The same individuals and organisations have pushed ‘divestment’ from energy companies, and this lack of capital investment has inevitably led to a scarcity which is entirely artificial and unnecessary, there being no lack of coal, oil and gas available for extraction. The WEF is not central to this agenda, he said, and we should not accept that it’s all written, done and dusted.
Tara McCormack revisited the question of how we got to where we are now, a situation where the Great Reset unfortunately appeals to quite a lot of people. When New Labour came to power in 1997 one of their slogans was “what matters is what works”. But ‘works for whom?’ is the relevant question that wasn’t addressed, she said. In reality, there was a systematic transfer of manufacturing capability away from Britain and Europe, and the demos has steadily been removed from decision-making and control. The setting of interest rates was transferred from politicians to the Bank of England’s technocrats. Outsourcing of public services meant an end to public involvement and oversight, with legitimacy derived from contracts not from the demos. PPP (Public-Private Partnerships) handed infrastructure as well as public services to private companies, who gained the profit while the public was left with the risk, at enormous ongoing cost. We need to “repoliticise” the economy, McCormack argues, but she can find no answers as to how we ‘the people’ can get back to the centre of decision-making.
Several speakers discussed the influence of Black Rock and other ‘woke’ asset management companies, vested interests and lobbyists.
Alan Miller next invited questions and comments from the audience. These led to discussion of the obscene levels of national debt and transfers of wealth brought about via Covid and the Ukraine war, and the power and influence of China, specifically the CCP (Chinese Communist Party). Matt Gubba described the CCP as a very dangerous and insidious threat, as big as any other threat, reminding the audience that Jeremy Hunt’s wife works for them.
Other topics included the importance of supporting and buying from small and medium businesses, many now saddled with huge Covid debts at 17-18% interest rates, and of paying by cash rather than electronic transfer; education morphing into indoctrination via a controlled syllabus; and the WHO executive takeover, signed up to by both Biden and Johnson, which nobody voted for.
On the psychological side, a mental health worker described the dire impacts on ordinary people of the constant stream of fear pumped out by the Government and media. In fighting back against the Great Reset, we need to stay positive and loving and put out a positive energy, he said. Many speakers commented that most of the general public remain oblivious to the technocratic agenda. Tara McCormack explained that the Behavioural Insight team has created a transferable model on how to create consensus, whether regarding Covid, Ukraine, or whichever crisis, they convey a message that ‘this is how all right-minded people think’, which is depressingly successful. The panel agreed that we need to keep talking to people, starting with their immediate concerns and then helping them to join just a few of the dots into the bigger picture.
Another speaker emphasised the importance of engaging in local events and community campaigns, even if on other matters we might disagree.
Another speaker suggested that part of the problem is that we lack a positive agenda of our own. I agree with this point, and think that many of us do have clear ideas that we need to articulate together, but Frank Furedi put his finger on it in his reply – that we are always playing catchup and reacting to the latest blow inflicted on us. But even that is better than giving up, he said.
Alan Miller concluded by calling on us to act with courage and to be inspiring and effective.
Towards the end I felt that there was a missed opportunity. The event was advertised as being from 7pm to 9.30pm. Although it started promptly, it finished at 9pm. At £25 a person, I admit I felt short-changed. The people who attended were highly committed; for example, a lady near me had travelled up from the South Coast for the event and was staying the night in a hotel. Another person had come from as far away as Cornwall. This half hour could have been used as an active planning session, with time to go around the audience and find out what they could contribute to the campaign, or to divide into several smaller groups to focus on a specific aspect.
Overall it was an excellent event, not just talking about the need for free speech and freedom of association, but actually doing it. I found that listening in person made things clear in a way that no amount of online videos can achieve, and the unusual perspectives on politics I found especially insightful and motivational. Without politics all we have left is tyranny. The full video is available on YouTube.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
‘…where was the consent procedure, where was the control group and where was the evaluation?’
And where was the cost/benefit analysis (central to any application of the ‘precautionary principle’) that only Jesse Norman, out of the entire cabinet, asked for?
Does this admission mean that that they won’t do it again? Since it’s a ‘failed’ experiment? In chemistry or physics, if an experiment fails, you don’t do it again. I think they’ll try. It’s just a matter of time waiting for the perfect moment. Like another pseudo health emergency. What gets me is that this ‘experiment’ was carried out throughout the world bar a few exceptions without much thought or any oversight about any of the possible consequences. It therefore follows that either our leaders were working to a plan or not very bright. I would say it’s both. The plan was to see if they could do it. And they succeeded in that and subsequently ruined lives, businesses, relationships, hopes and dreams. That was the plan, in my view, to set us on a course of destruction. Destroy society, cut the ties, break us on a wheel. Drakeford and his ilk, in fact the whole rotten lot of them, deserve nothing but jail and no parole.
Next time they want to ‘experiment’ on us, I suggest they show us how it’s done first and when they’re in their homes with their masks on, twitching at the net curtains, we’ll weld them in and feed them insect burgers down the chimney.
Absolutely bang on the money Aethelred.
Cheers HP!
People do repeat failed experiments, sometimes they give a different p value. That is why CERN, having been bitten in the past, uses a very low p value. There is a behaviour called p value hacking in which people try to reduce their p value so that they can get published, get their drug approved, etc.
Point taken, Zeb!
I think he just means that local lockdowns weren’t “enough”, and we should have been in an earlier, longer and tougher national lockdown instead. But the nasty old Tories wouldn’t let Wales have one!
I’m sure you are right
His handlers, if he has any, will not be happy with his choice of words, but I think the damage is limited. People will think the experiment was worth it. The implication is that the national “lockdowns” were not an experiment but were based on solid science. Interestingly the only “evidence” I’m aware of for “lockdowns” came from China and that one was local, but an actual lockdown, unlike ours which were a dog’s breakfast. Assuming that what we saw from China actually happened.
I think “covid” had experimental aspects but these were nothing to do with public health but rather to discover what control measures they could get away with. I think “covid” is best thought of as an exercise rather than an experiment.
Did Wales even have local lockdowns anyway? The main controversy I remember was the ridiculous two week “circuit breaker” Wales had in Autumn 2020 (I think, it’s all a blur), which had zero effect on anything much but was used to highlight how reckless the English were for not doing the same thing. He is not even admitting that circuit breakers were pointless, and if Wales didn’t even do local lockdowns anyway then all he is doing is further criticising English policies (I believe Leicester was the first to enjoy being locally locked down by Wancock, for months on end while its case rate stayed stubbornly high…).
That’s a lie. In reality it was a failed policy, and gross abuse of power. Within that, they lost the plot and led to establish organisations losing their reputation, with various follow on problems via that route. Some might say that Drakeford should spend time with his kid in the slammer to start with.
Malfeasance in a Public Office – an Offence under Common Law.
Those responsible should be charged.
Carries a maximum sentence of Life Imprisonment.
Just charge one of the pro lockdown brigade aka most of SAGE. They touted themselves as “experts”. They persuaded a too willing Government to implement lockdowns. They wheeled themselves into and were lauded by the MSM. They traduced anyone who disagreed with the “Science.”
So may I offer up the one and only Sir (Christ) John Edmunds as one who most certainly should face trial. Oh, and as an added incentive, never forget that he vociferously advocated on/in the MSM that schools should be closed to children until vaccinated.
It seems he has very little knowledge of immunology/vaccinology/mRNA therapies. Personally I’d have thought some knowledge thereof must be an essential prerequisite for any epidimiologist.
Apparently not.
Never forget that people like him are direcly responsible for a large part of the utter mess the western world is in.
Power without responsibility does not mix well.
SAGE needs to be made an example of.
By redefined as a Prohibited Organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000, perhaps.
Covidians were/are extremists!
“SAGE needs to be made an example of.”
I don’t disagree but it is the height of naivety to believe that the people nominally running this scam were actually in charge. Bozo and his bunch of murderous traitors were simply order takers for the likes of the WEF, UN, World Bank, IMF and the Blackrock gang. Put this lot in court and their defence will be “only taking orders m’lud.”
The same destructive actions occurred in Lockstep throughout the West. Thousands of establishment persons didn’t arrive at the same murderous enterprises at the same time without a high degree of coordination. Such a belief defaults to cock-up theory and what has happened since March 2020 is certainly not cock-up. Some conspiracy realists prefer to borrow Charlie Chuckles’ terminology and refer to it as the Great Reset.
I agree wholeheartedly but unfortunately there’s zero chance of the RPTB meeting justice on this earth.
But it is perfectly possible to charge the bag carriers in the UK but at the moment the justice system is still in clown world.
When it emerges, those in a Public Office should begin to worry….a lot.
In 1840 Dr Farr said that epidemics do not grow exponentially. In 1927 Kermack-McKendrick said the growth was logistic – their work was the basis for the computer models during Covid-19.
The Common Cold Unit said masks don’t work before they closed in the 1980s. The Cochrane Review said and continues to say they don’t work.
And that unit in Salisbury did a lot more good work. They actually invented the term “coronavirus” following electron microscopy studies, and realised that vaccination (using the older definition) was unlikely to be effective, given the number of various viruses, both a group of coronaviruses, and many more rhinoviruses, that have a habit of mutation as they develop. But as you say, it was obvious given the small physical size of the viruses that masks were a useless idea.
Thank you.
Short, sharp, brutal but not nearly brutal enough.
Thank you Professors Heneghan and Jefferson for all you have done and continue to do.
Hear hear.
My modelling, of last year, shows that flattening the curve leads to extended duration and reduced acquired immunity so that when you unlock you get another wave – unless you extinguish the virus or have an effective vaccination programme. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4kWbYlopN4
Surely the paid advisers could have told Drakeford the same thing at the time?
“unless you extinguish the virus or have an effective vaccination programme.”
It is not possible to vaccinate away from a viral respiratory infection.
The evidence agrees with you, the modelling is neutral as it is only a SIR model so it has no knowledge of vaccination. If it did then you would have to guess at extra parameters and then it could be pushed one way or another.
Indeed and they knew that
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/vaccination-video-is-emotional-blackmail-and-dishonest-too/
Not exactly giving up are they? Still cynically using indoctrinated children to manipulate parents in to taking their youngsters for a dangerous jabbing. And when June Raine is in charge we know this is as crooked as F.
Despite all the deaths and miseries unleashed by the C1984 fake injections they are still pushing poisons.
“Lessons will be learned” is definitely NOT an excuse this time.
Rather cringeworthy than evil, although the intent behind it doubtlessly is. I’ve been vaccinated against polio and smallpox when I was a child. At that time, measles was considered a benign childhood disease children will invariably get sooner or later. Whooping cough was a bit more exotic but still nothing seriously out of the ordinary, such as scarlet fever (I got the latter, my brother the former).
Apparently, readily available vaccination products cause illnesses to become much more dangerous.
This is a plain lie. At the height of Corona madness, all of the measures were marketed as tried and trusted NPIs whose value had been proven in the real world and was obvious to everyone but conspiracy theorists. Drakford wasn’t experimenting when he prohibited the sale of non-essential goods in supermarkets in Wales, he claimed to be following the scientific consensus of the finest minds on the planet re: infection control when being confronted with an extremely dangerous disease.
Experts also advised that women should not be allowed access to sanitary products in shops! This idiocy alone showed the “experts” were clueless and no idea of unintended consequences.
Clueless idiots? I don’t think so. These are criminals who were making it up as they went along; all the time laughing up their sleeves at the ‘plebians’ and ‘useless eaters’ sucking up their maniacal evil agenda. They still are. It must be hilarious for them, watching the masses blindly foxtrotting to their delirious composition.
Mr. Drakeford why not just go the whole hog and admit that you and your silly collectivist government and every other central planning bunch of busy body’s are all “failed experiments”, and to show some contrition why not tear down all those daft 20mph signs.
We could perhaps experimentally hit Drakford with 20mph signs for some time, just to see if this will improve his health and well-being.
Anyone remember this?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-54662795
Indeed. Bloody unbelievable then. Off the scale now.
Yes. Like it was yesterday! It’s long past time these criminals were made to face the consequences of their crimes.
On May 7th 2020 I wrote to my member of the Welsh Senedd and my Westminster MP saying that we needed to stop lockdowns etc immediately and gave a list of 10 reasons. I will NOT accept “in hindsight” excuses from these officials and so-called experts.
*10 reasons based on those put forward by Dr John Lee at the time.