Joanna Blythman: ‘Build back better’ is code for a top-down attack on democracy

Their offer is seductive. Someone other than us has such a clear vision and appears so confident that they can remedy matters, at last!

But then, with any luck, a warning bell goes off in our heads. Who are these chancers marketing miracle solutions? Would we be wise to trust them? What interests do they represent, other than their own greed?

And this is precisely how we should greet Boris Johnson when we turns up on our doorsteps waving his ‘Build Back Better’ prospectus. Let’s see the three Bs for what they are: the British wing of a coordinated, top-down attack on our democracy that started much higher up the world-power pecking order than our abysmal Prime Minister.

Johnson first insinuated the Build Back Better slogan into the public psyche in May last year, exploiting the opportunity afforded by Covid to convince us that life as we knew it was no longer possible. This was the dodgy salesman’s initial attention-grabbing foot in the door.

The BBB phrase did not originate with Johnson, but with Klaus Schwab, boss of the World Economic Forum (WEF), a gang of self-appointed billionaires and corporations that meets yearly in Davos, Switzerland. Familiar corporates around the table here include Microsoft, Facebook, Netflix and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, which was founded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Huawei, and McKinsey.

This Davos elite has decided that it knows best how the world should be run, and so is actively engaged in implementing Schwab’s vision.

Schwab is a ‘trans-humanist’, a technocrat who wants to hasten the day when humanity is ‘improved’ or even ultimately replaced, by artificial intelligence.

Stopping or even reversing ageing, and AI-enhanced IQs are two typical trans-human quests. WEF’s jaunty predictions for 2030 include, “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy”, and “Whatever you want, you’ll rent, and it’ll be delivered by drone”.

Sounds nutty? Indeed it does, yet Schwab has the ear of powerful people.

Since at least the 1990s, Schwab and his cabal have been working away to enlist world leaders to his grand project. Initially he referred to it as the Fourth Industrial Revolution then he renamed it the Great Reset. The BBB slogan is only his calling card for this master plan.

Schwab’s Great Reset envisages no less than a total makeover of society under a technocratic regime that would control how the world is run by manipulating human behaviour, through employing surveillance technologies commonly associated with repressive regimes.

Schwab was quick off the mark last year to take advantage of Covid to push his stratagem, co-authoring a book, COVID-19: The Great Reset, with economist Thierry Malleret, in which they state that “the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world”.

How uncanny that in an earlier act of spooky prescience, the WEF had already co-hosted with Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and the Gates Foundation “Event 201”, a high-level pandemic exercise on the 18th of October, 2019, in New York. What a coincidence that Event 201 modelled a global pandemic as a catalyst for resetting our lives!

Because the Great Reset is too big a concept for us little people to take in, the Great Resetters, with on-the-make, cash-strapped Johnson recruited to their ranks, are marketing the concept in a catchier, yet again alliterated form: the ‘New Normal’.

This New Normal already has boots on the ground. Since 1993, through its Global Leaders for Tomorrow programme, rebranded, in 2004, as Young Global Leaders, the WEF has identified then promoted future “global shapers”.

Alumni of this patronage scheme include Justin Trudeau in Canada, Emmanuel Macron in France, Angela Merkel in Germany, Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand, and Tony Blair. Professor Devi Sridhar, whose ‘zero covid’ ideology shaped the Scottish Government’s pandemic response, is yet another WEF protégé.

All these WEF influencers preached hard-line lockdowns, mask and vaccine mandates. It’s hard not to see their Covid counsels as a preliminary push for long-planned changes to our economy and society, notably Schwab’s vision of a socially distanced, stay at home existence where we do everything from our computers and phones.

The ‘Covid Pass’ or ‘health passport’, more accurately described as a health apartheid app, was the brainchild of yet another WEF Young Global Leader, Mustapha Mokass, aided by other YGLs across five continents.

Irrespective of where you stand on vaccines, if you care about personal freedom and the rights of the individual, you should be worried about these ‘passports’. They are the thin end of the Great Reset wedge, precursors to a digital ID that could become the key to accessing all aspects of our lives.

From financial services, healthcare, and travel, to voting, qualifying for benefits and using social media, these prototypes could become an instrument for tyranny and regime change by the back door. The Chinese social credit system is a foretaste of the dark road they lead us down.

As the political philosopher David Thunder warns, unless we understand what’s underfoot, we could find ourselves living in an illiberal surveillance and quasi-police state, as disenfranchised subjects of a much more intrusive style of global governance.

As he points out, the early signs are there.

The increasingly pervasive attitude that citizens cannot be trusted, thus personal discretion and choice should play only a residual role in deciding our behaviour, which must instead be coercively determined by officials acting in the name of the collective.

Heavy-handed censorship in mainstream and social media of anyone who inconveniently questions official sources of information.

Relentless use of mass media to inculcate fear, an effective mechanism for softening us up for ‘emergency measures’ that involve the long-term suspension of hard-fought civil rights.

See what’s coming our way, and resist.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.