New book: The Great Reset

in progress...

Here is the Introduction. Please feel free to comment! I will be publishing this on Amazon.

Introduction: The Great Reset and the Future of Western Values

The Great Reset, as proposed by the World Economic Forum (WEF), represents a bold and ambitious vision for the future of global governance and economic restructuring. Initiated in response to the global disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Great Reset seeks to reshape the world’s economies, societal norms, and political frameworks under the guise of sustainability, inclusivity, and technological advancement (Schwab, 2020). At its core, however, this initiative raises profound concerns regarding the preservation of the social values that have underpinned the success and prosperity of Western civilization.

Perhaps the most famous prediction from the World Economic Forum regarding the world after the Great Reset in 2030 is, “You will own nothing and be happy,” which raises the question: Who will own everything?

The WEF does not specify, but it appears a ruling class will own all the means of production, and the rest of the population will be subjugated to serf status in a neo-feudalistic society. All this is hidden in a tsunami of idealistic propaganda about equity, inclusion, climate change, and ostensibly beneficial transhumanism. Essential books by Hughes (2022) and Webb (2023) describe the desired outcomes and how the elites intend to achieve them.

Hughes (2022) describes the Great Reset as a class struggle of a plutocratic elite that intends to immiserate and effectively enslave the rest of the population in a digital money social credit system. Webb (2023) describes how the elites plan to expropriate the masses of their wealth, first by concentrating wealth in a few institutions that will be deemed “systemically significant financial institutions” (SSFIs) controlled by the elites.

In The Great Taking, David Rogers Webb suggests that a global financial system overhaul is underway designed to expropriate assets from the majority of people by transferring them to SSFIs. This process is facilitated through various legal, financial, and technological mechanisms developed and refined over decades.

When a global financial crisis occurs, only the SSFIs controlled by the elites will survive.

One key aspect of "The Great Taking" is the transformation of traditional securities ownership. Webb argues that ownership has been effectively replaced by what he calls a "security entitlement," which legally diminishes the rights of individuals over their assets. Instead of direct ownership, individuals now hold these assets through intermediaries like Central Clearing Parties (CCPs) and Depository Trust Companies (DTCs), which pool these assets and use them as collateral. In the event of financial crises or institutional failures, these pooled assets are prioritized to satisfy the claims of secured creditors, leaving individual investors with limited recourse.

Webb highlights the role of the legal and financial infrastructure that has been harmonized globally, ensuring that these rules apply universally, at least within Western jurisdictions. This framework allows secured creditors—often large financial institutions—to claim a disproportionate share of assets during financial downturns, exacerbating wealth inequality and effectively stripping ordinary citizens of their investments and savings.

The "Great Taking" is further enabled by the potential collapse of CCPs, which manage the counterparty risks in derivatives markets. In a major financial crisis, these CCPs are expected to fail, triggering a sweep of collateral assets into the hands of secured creditors. The implication is that the financial system is rigged to favor a small elite at the expense of the general population.

Webb's analysis draws parallels to the Great Depression, during which similar strategies were employed, such as the confiscation of gold. However, he argues that the upcoming expropriation will be on a much larger scale, facilitated by modern financial technology and legal constructs.

Also central to the Great Reset is the aspiration to implement a global digital currency and social credit system modeled on the system currently utilized in China. This system, which Klaus Schwab has openly praised, relies on advanced technology to monitor, regulate, and control economic and social behavior, thereby offering an unprecedented level of state oversight and intervention (WEF, 2021). In parallel, Schwab’s admiration for figures such as Vladimir Lenin and his public appreciation for certain aspects of Communism suggests a philosophical orientation at odds with the foundational principles of Western democracy and individual liberty (Schwab, 2017).

Implementing a Chinese-style system of digital currency and social credit in the West would significantly depart from the values historically defining Western societies. These values—personal freedom, privacy, autonomy, and the rule of law—are deeply ingrained in the cultural and political fabric of the West. They have driven the development of liberal democracies, free markets, and civil liberties, fostering environments where innovation, individualism, and human rights are paramount.

A shift towards a system characterized by digital currency and social credit would necessarily entail an erosion of these values. In such a system, the state—or a centralized authority—would wield enormous power over the individual, dictating economic opportunities, social standing, and even personal behavior based on compliance with prescribed norms (Morozov, 2020). This level of control is antithetical to the Western ideal of the individual as a sovereign being, free to make choices and shape their destiny within the bounds of law.

Moreover, the potential for abuse in a system where economic and social privileges are contingent upon state approval is vast. History has shown that when power concentrates in the hands of a few, the rights and freedoms of the many are often compromised. The Western tradition, rooted in the separation of powers, checks and balances, and the protection of individual rights, stands as a bulwark against such concentrations of power (Fukuyama, 1992). Introducing a digital currency and social credit system would undermine these safeguards, leading to a society where conformity is rewarded and dissent is punished—a scenario reminiscent of authoritarian regimes rather than liberal democracies.

As a decision scientist who spent much of his career working on models for the first social credit system, personal credit scores, I hope that regulators would apply equally stringent restrictions to social credit scores as are applied to personal credit scores. Credit scoring models are permitted to include payment history and debt. They must not include race, gender, religion, marital status, national origin, age (except in regulated scenarios like determining if someone is a minor, income (although it may be considered in approving credit applications), occupation or employment status, and zip code (to avoid “red-lining”).

Social media data are not allowed in credit scoring models in the US or the EU. And it should be unthinkable in any Western nation that one’s political views or criticism of the government should be grounds for a lower score, as is the case in China. But as we have seen in the UK with Nigel Farage, in Canada with the protesting truckers, and in the US with Joseph Mercola and JP Morgan Chase, financial institutions can invoke their rights as private entities to discriminate politically. This type of abuse requires immediate correction.

Schwab's admiration for Lenin and aspects of Communism further compounds these concerns. While Leninist and Communist ideologies may espouse equality and social justice, they have often resulted in totalitarianism, economic inefficiency, and the suppression of individual freedoms (Service, 2000). The Western experience has demonstrated that prosperity and social harmony are best achieved not through coercive state control but through the free exchange of ideas, the protection of private property, and the rule of law.

In advancing the Great Reset, the WEF proposes a future that may significantly diverge from the principles that have made the West a beacon of freedom and innovation. As this vision gains traction among global elites, it is imperative to examine the potential consequences for Western values critically. Will pursuing sustainability, inclusivity, and technological progress justify the sacrifice of personal liberty, privacy, and the rule of law? Or will the Great Reset lead to a future where the West loses the attributes that have made it great?

Or is the Chinese system the answer? I will address this question in subsequent chapters.

These questions lie at the heart of the current debate surrounding the Great Reset. As we delve deeper into the implications of this global initiative, it is crucial to maintain a clear-eyed perspective on the values we stand to lose and to carefully weigh them against the promised benefits of a reimagined world order.

---

References:

Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press.

Hughes, D. (2022). The Great Reset: The Global Elite’s Plan to Radically Remake Our Economic and Social Systems. Independently published.

Morozov, E. (2020). The Techno-Totalitarian State. The New Republic.

Schwab, K. (2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Crown Business.

Schwab, K. (2020). COVID-19: The Great Reset. Forum Publishing.

Service, R. (2000). Lenin: A Biography. Macmillan.

Webb, D. R. (2023). The Great Taking. Independently published.

WEF. (2021). Digital Currency Governance Consortium White Paper. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/publications/digital-currency-governance-consortium-white-paper-series/

---

Have a great Labor Day weekend!