The Great Reset

Dionaibh

Since about June the World Economic Forum has been heavily promoting what they are calling The Great Reset (https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/). They plan to reset the planet. The head of WEF, Klaus Schwab co-authored a book entitled The Great Reset (https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/dp/2940631123/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2WK0KDQLEC2DY&dchild=1&keywords=the+great+reset+klaus&qid=1599836414&sprefix=the+great+reset%2Caps%2C172&sr=8-1). One of the reviews of the book on Amazon quotes from the book. It makes for grim reading, in my opinion.

The conspiracy, according to what I've read, is that COVID-19 is being used a cover for ushering in a techno tyranny and sustainability on steroids. I have heard people argue that countries are deliberately destroying their economies so that they can be rebuilt according to the vision WEF has for the world.

What are your thoughts on The Great Reset?

Dionaibh

Dionaibh wrote: »

The conspiracy, according to what I've read, is that COVID-19 is being used a cover for ushering in a techno tyranny and sustainability on steroids. I have heard people argue that countries are deliberately destroying their economies so that they can be rebuilt according to the vision WEF has for the world.

What are your thoughts on The Great Reset?

This stuff has been claimed about every single pandemic and major event for the last 3 decades.

They also use the same tactic of taking innocuous terms, twisting facts and quoting stuff out of context to make it sound sinister.

For example, people using Amazon reviews of the book rather than the book itself.

Dionaibh wrote: »

One of the reviews of the book on Amazon quotes from the book. It makes for grim reading, in my opinion.

What do you believe will be the immediate effects of this "Great Reset" and when will we see them in a way that will confirm or disprove the conspiracy theories.
Given previous experience in these types of claims I believe your answers will be "vague non specific effects, in the future, but around the corner within a non specific period of anywhere between months and years."

Personally I think this makes the conspiracy theories unfalsifiable and ultimately useless. And this batch will be forgotten like the rest just in time for the next world event.

Dionaibh

The review I'm talking about:

I bought this book to gain some knowledge about the mindset of globalists, who are the selfproclaimed "elite" of this world, while nobody has ever voted for them to govern our lives. This book is good evidence that these people are living in a bubble, having lost all connection to reality. I will now summarize the main problems I have figured out about the author's perception of reality depicted in this book:

1) The free market is responsible for all evil, what we need is stronger governments, preferably such a 'democratic' one as in China. Consequently, the book is full with praise for the Chinese way of life. An assumption which cannot be made by reasonable people who want to live in a free and sustainable world in which the individuum's rights are protected, and not exposed to constant surveillance, which we have in Chinese communism today. Here are some quotes from the book:

"[The situation might provoke changes such as] an augmented search for the common good as a policy objective, the notion of fairness acquiring political potency, radical welfare and taxation measures, [...]" (p.18)
"the Confucianism prevalent in so many Asian countries places a sense of duty and generational solidarity before individual rights; it also puts high value on measures and rules that benefit the community as a whole." (p.88)
"The Covid-19 pandemic has made government important again. Not just powerful again, but also vital again[...]" (p.89, the author quoting John Micklethwait)
"Acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state. It's always been the case and there is no reason why it should be different with the Covid-19 pandemic." (p.89)
"[...] the role of the state has shrunk considerably. This is a situation that is set to change because it is hard to imagine how an exogenous shock of such magnitute [...]could be addressed with purely market-based solutions." (p.91)
"On the dial that measures the continuum between the government and the markets, the needle has decisively moved towards the left." (p.92)
"For the first time [...] governments have the upper hand. [...] Rather than simply fixing market failures when they arise, they should, as suggested by the economist Mariana Mazzucato: 'move towards actively shaping and creating markets that deliver sustainable and inclusive growth.' " (p.92)
"A significant element of new "bigger" government is already in place with the vastly increased and quasi-immediate government control of the economy." (p.92)
"Looking to the future, governments will most likely [...] decide that it's in the best interest of society to rewrite some of the rules of the game and permanently increase their role." (p.93)
"the role of the state will increase and, in doing so, will materially affect the way business is conducted. [...] business executives in all industries and all countries will have to adapt to greater government intervention. [...] Taxation will increase, particularly for the most privileged" (p.94)
"While in the past the US was always the first to arrive with aid where assistance was needed, this role now belongs to China" (p. 123)

2) The author is also totally in love with the concept of mass surveillance. He writes:
"The containment of the coronavirus pandemic will necessitate a global surveillance network" (p.33)
"We will see how contact tracing has an unequalled capacity and a quasi.-essential place in the armoury needed to combat Covid-19, while at the same time being positioned to become an enabler of mass surveillance." (p.153)
"An important lesson can be learned from the countries that were more effective in dealing with the pandemic (in particular Asian nations): technology in general and digital in particular help. Successful contact tracing proved to be a key component of a successful strategy against Covid-19." (p.159)
"Contact tracing and tracking are therefore essential components of our public-health response to Covid-19" (p.160)
"China, Hong Kong SAR and South Korea implemented coercive and intrusive measures of digital tracing. They took the decision to track individuals without their consent, through their mobile and credit card data, and even employed video surveillance" (p.160)
"The digital tracing solution most lauded and talked about was the TraceTogether app run by Singapore's Ministry of Health. It seems to offer the "ideal" balance between efficiency and privacy concerns[...]" (p.160)
"No voluntary contact-tracing app will work if people are unwilling to provide their own personal data to the governmental agency that monitors the system" (p.164)
"[...]the corporate move will be towards greater surveillance; for better or for worse, companies will be watching and sometimes recording what their workforce does." (p.165)
"[...] any digital experience that we have can be turned into a "product" destined to monitor and anticipate our behaviour." (p.166f)
"Then, when the crisis is over, some may realize that their country has suddenly be transformed into a place where they no longer wish to live." (p.167)

Even after mentioning all the dangers of constant surveillance, the author concludes that "the genie of tech surveillance will not be put back into the bottle." (p.171)
He also really thinks that "Dystopian scenarios are not a fatality."(p.171)
How we can avoid this dystopia, he does not explain in the book. But that does not seem to be the aim of the book anyway - it is rather a praise of mass surveillance and privacy does not concern the author very much.
At the same time the author admits that "the consequences of Covid-19 in terms of health and mortality will be mild compared to previous pandemics. At the end of June 2020, Covid-19 has killed less than 0,006% of the world population." (p.247) And admitting that "the average age of those dying of Covid-19 is almost 80 years [in Italy]" (p.221) But that does not change his mind, he still propagates mass surveillance and the necessity of lockdowns.

4) While I understand that it is good to also see the advantages to this worldwide disaster, the author is using surprisingly positive language during his analysis of the situation:
"The possibilities for change and the resulting new order are now unlimited and only bound to our imagination" and "We should take advantage of this unprecedented opportunity to reimagine our world" (p.19)
Later he even uses phrases like "not letting the crisis go to waste" (p.145 or p.142f) and "making good use of the pandemic" (p.145). My personal impression is that the author is very happy about the coronavirus and its induced opportunities. He even says that this crisis is "accelerating progress towards the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals" (p.248f). He is certainly not concerned much about the whole situation.

5) Paradoxical are also the author's statements concerning unemployment, work and poverty. On one page he is praising the new jobs created by the crisis in the digital/online/robotic industry, but on other pages he also sees the danger of millions of people being put out of work. But his book does not sound like a warning, it sounds like an advertisement for the first group of industry which is profitting from the crisis. It sounds like this: "It is good that the ship is sinking, because we will create some jobs, when the shipwreck has to be lifted out of the water."
During the whole book the author keeps talking about "social safety nets" necessary to prevent uproars and riots, because of all the unemployment, which will be the result of the lockdowns. The idea sounds good, but who is going to pay the safety net when huge amounts of people rely on the state? The powerful state, propagated in this book needs massively high taxes anyway, which is putting even higher pressure on the working population. It does not look realistic to me. The book does not really give different answers to all the massive problems, except for "the state saving us". Which I personally find ridiculous, because the state never cares about individuals as we can clearly see in China.

6) The underlying message of the book is: We need a global governance to be better prepared for such situations. The virus, the C02 problem, climate change etc. could only be tackled with a global leadership. The idea sounds ridiculous to me - how would a world government have changed the spreading of a virus? By more surveillance and more lockdowns? How would it reduce C02 emission? By forbidding certain industries and putting 80% of the world's population into unemployment? How would this reduce climate change? By more laws and regulations? I think these are all just excuses to install a world leadership and many people can see that by now.

7) While writing about how the virus and the lockdown messed up the "whole world", he completely forgot to mention countries which did not have a lockdown at all. Many of his thesises can be debunked by simply looking at Sweden. This country has successfully avoided destroying its own economy while having no lockdown, no masks, no social distancing etc. at all. No need for surveillance, technology etc. It is no surprise that the author does not mention this country a single time in the whole book. On page 45 he is talking about two studies that "modelled what could have happened without lockdown", instead of simply looking at the real example of Sweden, I guess it did not fit the narrative.

8) The author often talks about "clean energy" (e.g. p.145) and he is obviously condemning fossile fuels, while wishing for a future full with (electric) sensors and "remoted devices", surveillance cameras etc. which all need energy. He nowhere explains where this energy should come from. Solar and wind power are long debunked. They are inefficient and not stable sources of energy. Nuclear and coal most propably are not appreciated by the author either, so what is left? (Maybe the author knows something, we do not know). I also like to remind the fans of electric devices how batteries are made, with huge environmental damage. Here is one more quote about the author's idea of energy supply: "A group of green activists could demonstrate in front of a coal-fired power plant" (p.149)

9) The author is so entangled in his vision of the future, economics, numbers and science, that he makes a lot of unreasonable assumptions in this book. Especially when it comes to human, social behaviour. Here are some of them, which are particularly entertaining:

"As consumers may prefer automated services to face-to-face interactions [...]" (p.55)
"changing course will require a shift in the mindset of world leaders to place greater focus and priority on the well-being of all citizens and the planet" (p.58)
"The idea [of helicopter money] is appealing and realizable" (p.68)
"[Central bankers] will have to define an upper limit at which inflation becomes disruptive and a real concern." (p.69)
"The post-pandemic era will usher in a period of massive wealth redistribution, from the rich to the poor [!!] and from capital to labour." (p.78)
"In America as in many other countries, African Americans are poorer, more likely to be unemployed or underemployed and victims of substandard housing and living conditions. As a result they suffer more from pre-existing health conditions like obesity, heart disease or diabetes" (p.80f) (Obesity, heart disease and diabetes are mostly caused by overeating, bad diets, or unhealthy livestyle and not by social inequality.)
"the three things that matter most to a great majority of us: housing, healthcare and education" (p.96)
How about family, friends, peace or a good job?
"calls for more spending (and therefore higher taxes) will get louder" (p.99)
"An increasing number of scientists have shown that it is in fact the destruction of biodiversity caused by humans that is the source of new viruses like Covid-19" (p.138) (of course it has nothing to do with the Wuhan lab...)
"bicycling and walking instead of driving to keep the air of our cities as clean as it was during the lockdowns, vacationing nearer to home[...]could lead to a sustained reduction in carbon emissions." (p.142) (I can already imagine the author on a bicycle... Well, I guess it is only the solution for the poor masses which cannot afford a car any longer due to taxes and green unemployment?! It is also ironic that the author mentions somewhere else in the book that most carbon emission comes from the industry and other sources anyway, not from cars or home applications - as long as you do not have a smart house full of sensors, I guess...)
"[Mobile devices] helping us on many different fronts, anticipating our needs, listening to us and locating us, even when not asked to do so..." (p.152) (Sounds like a great "help" to me...)
" [Instead of] driving to a distant family gathering for the weekend" using "the WhatsApp family group" which "is not as fun but, again, safer, cheaper and greener" (p.155)
"[Robots] saving nurses as much as three hours' work per day." (p.159) (Which leads to more unemployed nurses)
"just as the terrorist attacks of 9/11 triggered greater and permanent security in the name of public safety." (p.168) (So that's what it was good for, thanks for letting us know.)
"This won't happen, because it can't happen." (p.173) (Author talking about industry leaders which might want to go back to the old way of making business.)
"It is likely that the markets or the consumers, or both, will punish those companies that performed poorly on social issues (p.188) (Good example is the big website on which I publish this review)
"Simple pleasures like smelling a melon or squeezing a fruit will be frowned upon and may even become a thing of the past." (p.198) (For the sake of hygiene...)

10) The author's ideological understanding of human beings is also very interesting:
"if, as human beings, we do not collaborate to confront our existential challenges, we are doomed. Thus, we have no choice but to summon up the better angels of our nature." (p.217) On other occasions the author is talking about man as "a social animal" showing a Darwinian mindset, but here it sounds quite religious. A typical contradiction of utopian thought. He further speculates: "if in the future we abandon the posture of self-interest that pollutes so many of our social interactions, [...]" (p.224) This has not happened for the last thousands of years and no ideology will change this. I therefore highly question the author's knowledge about the character of human beings and ask him to be more realistic, please.

11) After elaborating on the devastating psychological effects of isolation and fear, because of the lockdown, incl. high suicide rates, depressions, mental disorders etc. , he still dares to see something positive in that:
"What the pandemic has achieved with respect to mental health [...] heightened public awareness of the severity of the problem. [...] In the post-pandemic area, these issues may now be given the priority they deserve." (p.231)
What a great comfort for all the mentally sick people. Especially, when the unemployment rate is going to be so high, that most people will not be able to afford getting professional help. (But I guess the state is going to finance that with helicopter money, because money solves all problems...) Maybe there will be a "kind" robot "listening" to their problems?
But the author gives us even more reasons to "cheer up":
He writes that in times of high pressure and need a lot of good world literature has been written, because such times are so "inspiring". (No joke, see p.234f)
Afterwards he reminds us of the good effect of having more time now, since many of us are unemployed or in home office (p.236f) and how some of us might learn to appreciate being in nature again. (For those who forgot about the forests out there - they still exist.)
Then he is advertising a minimalistic livestyle (Marie Kondo style), which most probably soon will not be the free choice of some people, but an obligatory adjustment to poverty.

But it is also possible that I am all wrong in my criticism and instead of living in a "dark future of techno-totalitarian state surveillance" (p.170) we are all going to enter "a new era of prosperity" (p.249)

12) Problems with the printing itself. The font has bad quality (you can easily see the resolution of the letters, which makes it harder to read the book). On page 24 there is a graphic which is supposed to be in colour, because the text says that certain elements are represented by red, green, purple and so on, yet the graphic is black and white, rendering its description quite useless. Another graphic on page 199 is hard to read, too, because of bad printing resolution. This does not look very professional.

PS: I would still encourage you to buy this book. It will be a valuable witness of contemporary, utopian madness.

Dionaibh

King Mob wrote: »

This stuff has been claimed about every single pandemic and major event for the last 3 decades.

They also use the same tactic of taking innocuous terms, twisting facts and quoting stuff out of context to make it sound sinister.

For example, people using Amazon reviews of the book rather than the book itself.


What do you believe will be the immediate effects of this "Great Reset" and when will we see them in a way that will confirm or disprove the conspiracy theories.
Given previous experience in these types of claims I believe your answers will be "vague non specific effects, in the future, but around the corner within a non specific period of anywhere between months and years."

Personally I think this makes the conspiracy theories unfalsifiable and ultimately useless. And this batch will be forgotten like the rest just in time for the next world event.

But the review quotes from the book.

The aim of The Great Reset is to reset capitalism. WEF started pushing it in June and now it's been delayed until September of next year. They'll have been working on it for over a year by the time the event is held in Davos.

I believe that they'll push for health passports (already being trialled in Ireland) and immunity passports. They'll push climate change heavily and try to keep us in a permanent 'new normal'.

JJayoo

Any dip**** posting a book review that long on amazon has clearly nothing better to do than talk ****r

Dionaibh

JJayoo wrote: »

Any dip**** posting a book review that long on amazon has clearly nothing better to do than talk ****r

But did you read the review? What about the quotes from the book? Are they not horrifying?

Dionaibh

Dionaibh wrote: »

But the review quotes from the book.

Yes. And? It's an anonymous review on the internet from someone who believes in a conspiracy theory.
It's not the book itself and not a source I would take very seriously.

Dionaibh wrote: »

The aim of The Great Reset is to reset capitalism. WEF started pushing it in June and now it's been delayed until September of next year. They'll have been working on it for over a year by the time the event is held in Davos.

So the effects will be seen when?

Dionaibh wrote: »

I believe that they'll push for health passports (already being trialled in Ireland) and immunity passports.
They'll push climate change heavily and try to keep us in a permanent 'new normal'.

How will they "push" it? Why?
What about the "new normal" is beneficial for them? How will they maintain it?

Overheal

Dionaibh wrote: »

But the review quotes from the book.

Dionaibh wrote: »

But did you read the review? What about the quotes from the book? Are they not horrifying?

Have you read this book or are you just basing this thread off of a partial, 3-page review of the book?

What are your thoughts on The Great Reset?

As OP, what are your thoughts on the topic?

Dionaibh

King Mob wrote: »

Yes. And? It's an anonymous review on the internet from someone who believes in a conspiracy theory.
It's not the book itself and not a source I would take very seriously.


So the effects will be seen when?


How will they "push" it? Why?
What about the "new normal" is beneficial for them? How will they maintain it?

But the reviewer quotes from the book. You hardly think he made up the quotes, do you? Do you find the quotes horrifying?

Another article on The Great Reset: https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/504499-introducing-the-great-reset-world-leaders-radical-plan-to

As soon as the pandemic began they world's leaders seemed to be following a script. All going on about "new normal". The "new normal" allows them to control people. That's why it's beneficial to them.

Dionaibh

Overheal wrote: »

Have you read this book or are you just basing this thread off of a partial, 3-page review of the book?



As OP, what are your thoughts on the topic?

I haven't read the book, and am going by the quotes from the book in the review.

I find it very worrying. It's being heavily pushed and it seems to be me to be a desire to change the world and how we live.

NIMAN

Does this book actually say how this great reset is going to happen?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dionaibh wrote: »

I haven't read the book, and am going by the quotes from the book in the review.

I find it very worrying. It's being heavily pushed and it seems to be me to be a desire to change the world and how we live.

Between book reviews worrying you and Bill Gates smiling "perturbing" you, it seems you're living in fear of the slightest things.

Dionaibh

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Between book reviews worrying you and Bill Gates smiling "perturbing" you, it seems you're living in fear of the slightest things.

But you keep leaving out the context. I find it perturbing that one of the most powerful men on the planet smiled after saying that the next pandemic would get people's attention. I compared it with someone smiling after saying there'd be a gigantic earthquake. Why on earth are either a reason to smile or smirk?

And the reason I mentioned the book review is because the reviewer quotes from the book.

WEF had its COVID action plan ready to go the day after WHO declared a pandemic.

JJayoo

A cat smiled at me yesterday......god what does it all mean.

ohnonotgmail

JJayoo wrote: »

A cat smiled at me yesterday......god what does it all mean.

was it a black cat?

Dionaibh

JJayoo wrote: »

A cat smiled at me yesterday......god what does it all mean.

Okay, well if you think appearing to be happy about the idea of a future pandemic getting people's attention is something to joke about then that's up to you.

Timberrrrrrrr

Dionaibh wrote: »

Okay, well if you think appearing to be happy about the idea of a future pandemic getting people's attention is something to joke about then that's up to you.

And there is your issue right there, he "appears" to be happy (to you) and therefore you are convinced he is up to no good. No matter what anyone says from here on will convince you otherwise.

Dionaibh

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And there is your issue right there, he "appears" to be happy (to you) and therefore you are convinced he is up to no good. No matter what anyone says from here on will convince you otherwise.

So if a person smiles or smirks is it because they're very upset?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dionaibh wrote: »

So if a person smiles or smirks is it because they're very upset?

I often smile when no one is around, I often smile in meetings, I often smile at strangers. It doesn't mean I am happy, it means I felt like smiling.

To you a smile means evidence of some (unknown) nefarious activity.

Dionaibh

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I often smile when no one is around, I often smile in meetings, I often smile at strangers. It doesn't mean I am happy, it means I felt like smiling.

To you a smile means evidence of some (unknown) nefarious activity.

I never said it did. I said that I found it odd that people would smile after saying that the next pandemic would get people's attention. Do you think it's reasonable for me to find it odd?

Guy:Incognito

Wasnt Covid definately, 100% , absolutely, with proof, just a cover to roll out 5g? Or have we moved from that and just forget all about it because theres a new shiny theory?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dionaibh wrote: »

I never said it did. I said that I found it odd that people would smile after saying that the next pandemic would get people's attention. Do you think it's reasonable for me to find it odd?

I find it strange that you would read so much into it.

Dionaibh

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I find it strange that you would read so much into it.

I don't think I'm reading too much into it. All I'm saying is that I found it disturbing for two people to smile about a future pandemic getting people's attention. That's all. The reason I mentioned is to try to understand why people are suspicious of Gates. And millions of people are. And I'm not saying I am. I'm just trying to see where they are coming from.

Timberrrrrrrr

Dionaibh wrote: »

I don't think I'm reading too much into it. All I'm saying is that I found it disturbing for two people to smile about a future pandemic getting people's attention. That's all. The reason I mentioned is to try to understand why people are suspicious of Gates. And millions of people are. And I'm not saying I am. I'm just trying to see where they are coming from.

From peturbed to disturbed, you should maybe have a lie down.

4068ac1elhodqr

Any 'great reset' concept is a bit too vague, and likely far too difficult to organise.
Then again who knows what discussions or plans are to be had at the yearly Bilderberg meetup whatsits.

Instead or more likely might be something more simple such as unified UBI rollout (for destroyed economies and new masses of unemployed {thanks coivd & automation}). Of course to receive this bonus payment, you'd have to meet all and every possible requirement.

Even more likely is the simple realisation that if you want to get things done
e.g. massive economic growth, low crime, low protests, and stringent covid controls, then replicating China's style is yer only man.

They're heading for 7% GDP this year, and covid deaths per millions so far this year, well they are about 3.0 (yes, three), per million.

The only down side is that you have to scan a darn QR code when you buy a coffee, and then again, when you want to phiss it out again, do another scan, and likely a complimentary face scan, oh and a bluetooth tracking beacon broadcast, all to authenticate it was your own phiss that was deposited.
Else negative social point scoring, and no soup for you.

Dionaibh

Gianni Scrawny Steroid wrote: »

Any 'great reset' concept is a bit too vague, and likely far too difficult to organise.
Then again who knows what discussions or plans are to be had at the yearly Bilderberg meetup whatsits.

Instead or more likely might be something more simple such as unified UBI rollout (for destroyed economies and new masses of unemployed {thanks coivd & automation}). Of course to receive this bonus payment, you'd have to meet all and every possible requirement.

Even more likely is the simple realisation that if you want to get things done
e.g. massive economic growth, low crime, low protests, and stringent covid controls, then replicating China's style is yer only man.

They're heading for 7% GDP this year, and covid deaths per millions so far this year, well they are about 3.0 (yes, three), per million.

The only down side is that you have to scan a darn QR code when you buy a coffee, and then again, when you want to phiss it out again, do another scan, and likely a complimentary face scan, oh and a bluetooth tracking beacon broadcast, all to authenticate it was your own phiss that was deposited.
Else negative social point scoring, and no soup for you.

I don't whether it'd be too difficult to organise. I imagine they've been planning this reset they're heavily promoting for some time. And they've postponed their annual get together in Davos until September of next year to give themselves more time to work on it. And they can see from the reaction of the vast majority of people to Covid that as long as they justify their policies as being for "people's safety" that people will go along with it. Every day people are losing their mind over cases of a virus and calling for lockdowns all over the place. Imagine what the reaction would be if the media every day announced the number of people diagnosed with cancer in the country.

UBI is coming, absolutely. And that will allow the government even more control over people's lives. And I imagine a social credit system is on the way as well. Again for people's safety. And health passports for people's safety etc.

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

So if a person smiles or smirks is it because they're very upset?

No it means there is a nefarious conspiracy afoot and they are engaging in a secret laugh about the whole thing - like scrupulous villains from a movie

Because, let's face it, this is literally your line of thinking

Dohnjoe

Gianni Scrawny Steroid wrote: »

The only down side is that you have to scan a darn QR code when you buy a coffee, and then again, when you want to phiss it out again, do another scan, and likely a complimentary face scan, oh and a bluetooth tracking beacon broadcast, all to authenticate it was your own phiss that was deposited.
Else negative social point scoring, and no soup for you.

lol

Dionaibh

Dionaibh wrote: »

But the reviewer quotes from the book. You hardly think he made up the quotes, do you? Do you find the quotes horrifying?

But reviews, especially from rando conspiracy loons on the internet can be misleading.
They could be twisting things and implying things the book doesn't say because they decided there's a conspiracy.
Or in this case they take quotes out of context to make them seem sinister when they aren't.

You guys did the same thing with other stuff before. This is not new.

Which quotes do you find"horrifying" and why?

Again I suspect it is like your claims of "disturbing smiles" and you're going to have trouble explaining what your issue here is.

Gianni Scrawny Steroid

Gianni Scrawny Steroid wrote: »

The only down side is that you have to scan a darn QR code when you buy a coffee, and then again, when you want to phiss it out again, do another scan, and likely a complimentary face scan, oh and a bluetooth tracking beacon broadcast, all to authenticate it was your own phiss that was deposited.
Else negative social point scoring, and no soup for you.

And is this before or after the good people acsend to heaven?

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

And is this before or after the good people acsend to heaven?

Say whaaaaa? (very strange the way you athiest guys shoehorn religion into every one of their posts, reckon they're just curious for advice in these troubling times).

But you do of course realise than in the coming weeks across Ire & the uk (and many other states), test and trace programs will require you to scan a QR codes before entering public places. It's pretty simple concept and process to grasp, see China for a very good example.

So... after scanning the QRcode you will be prompted to enter your personal details for 21 day db storage. E.g. If you're a hipster cafe in Landan, make and print out your poster now, there is less than 2weeks to do this: https://www.gov.uk/create-coronavirus-qr-poster

Gianni Scrawny Steroid

Gianni Scrawny Steroid wrote: »

Say whaaaaa? (very strange the way you athiest guys shoehorn religion into every one of their posts,

But it's the basis for your conspiracy beliefs.
You believe that the bible predicted all of this, and that the mark of the beast is a real program that people are trying to make.

Why wouldn't I bring that up when it highlights that your beliefs aren't very well thought out and aren't based on anything sound?

Timberrrrrrrr

Gianni Scrawny Steroid wrote: »

Say whaaaaa? (very strange the way you athiest guys shoehorn religion into every one of their posts, reckon they're just curious for advice in these troubling times).

But you do of course realise than in the coming weeks across Ire & the uk (and many other states), test and trace programs will require you to scan a QR codes before entering public places. It's pretty simple concept and process to grasp, see China for a very good example.

So... after scanning the QRcode you will be prompted to enter your personal details for 21 day db storage. E.g. If you're a hipster cafe in Landan, make and print out your poster now, there is less than 2weeks to do this: https://www.gov.uk/create-coronavirus-qr-poster

That's a lie, I live in the UK, Most bars/restaurants etc do have Q.R codes up already and you CAN scan them if you wish, No one forces you to though, you will not be refused service if you refuse.

Dionaibh

King Mob wrote: »

But reviews, especially from rando conspiracy loons on the internet can be misleading.
They could be twisting things and implying things the book doesn't say because they decided there's a conspiracy.
Or in this case they take quotes out of context to make them seem sinister when they aren't.

You guys did the same thing with other stuff before. This is not new.

Which quotes do you find"horrifying" and why?

Again I suspect it is like your claims of "disturbing smiles" and you're going to have trouble explaining what your issue here is.

Why is the reviewer a "random conspiracy loon"? Is anyone who doesn't believe that this is the worst pandemic since the Spanish Flu a "conspiracy loon", in your opinion?

I agree that the internet can be misleading, but unless he made the quotes up, which is extremely unlikely because another person could call him out for it, no amount of context could make what Schwab is pushing any less horrifying. If you don't think those quotes are horrifying then I don't know what to say. I don't think I need to explain why I find them horrifying. They speak for themselves.

If the quotes aren't made up, do you think they are at least troubling?

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

Why is the reviewer a "random conspiracy loon"? Is anyone who doesn't believe that this is the worst pandemic since the Spanish Flu a "conspiracy loon", in your opinion?

Most reviews seem generally positive about the book. Then there is a clear sub-section of "loon" reviews by conspiracy theorists and anti-globalists

for example:

strange how all the reviews have the same robotized drone line/comment ill leave you to figure that out, wonder if it will mention the populous being culled using "the flu shot" well you can shove ya vaccinations up ya poo chute, between the urine takers who wrote this and the likes of that cnut who owns micro$oft with his African vacine test experiment, this should be an alarming wake up for the ones who don't know they don't know but unfortunately its a case of if ninimb then they will roll over and go back to sleep, pay attention to putin and trump they appear to e anti agenda 2025, research the Bilderberg's , still think conspiracy theorists or a phrase i prefer critical thinkers are still tinfoil hatters? go on go and search for a cheap 5g contract and go back asleep.

The Great Reset of structure within society. The 100+ year old plan to bring in a New World Order and the 1000 years of peace mentioned in the Bible.

I used it to keep my dog entertained, opened the book having read all the robot like reviews praising it and it scared the life out of me to think people actual have ideas like this and wish to inflict them on humanity! Climate change is also a hoax

Loony stuff, most of these aren't even book reviews, they are conspiracy rants. Unfortunately certain books and publications pull these types of people out of the woodwork. Write a solid scientific book about climate change? you'll get climate change hoaxers "reviewing" it.

Dionaibh

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Most reviews seem generally positive about the book. Then there is a clear sub-section of "loon" reviews by conspiracy theorists and anti-globalists

for example:







Loony stuff, most of these aren't even book reviews, they are conspiracy rants. Unfortunately certain books and publications pull these types of people out of the woodwork. Write a solid scientific book about climate change? you'll get climate change hoaxers "reviewing" it.

But the positive reviews do look suspicious. Almost all of them begin with 'a very timely book'. But the one review that quotes directly from the book is rubbish for some reason. It doesn't make sense.

If the quotes are accurate, and I don't see why the reviewer would go to the trouble of inventing quotes, do they horrify you?

So the conspiracy is built off of a review that selectively quotes in an out of context way. The op didn't actually bother reviewing the book. Right so...

Dionaibh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So the conspiracy is built off of a review that selectively quotes in an out of context way. The op didn't actually bother reviewing the book. Right so...

I mentioned the review in addition to linking to WEF's own website.

What kind of context could make those quotes okay? They're horrifying.

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

But the positive reviews do look suspicious.

To you

But the one review that quotes directly from the book is rubbish for some reason

That one reviewer is clearly some conspiracy loon, their first line literally gives it away. These types of people typically always use selective and out of context quotes, for example

"2) The author is also totally in love with the concept of mass surveillance. He writes:
"The containment of the coronavirus pandemic will necessitate a global surveillance network" (p.33)"

Ooohh sounds scary to you right? but what's the context. I haven't read the book, but I would wager a lot of money that the author is referring to surveillance of the disease, it's spread, etc.

And this "reviewer" does it again

"Contact tracing and tracking are therefore essential components of our public-health response to Covid-19"

We use contact tracing and tracking to find people who may have been in contact with someone who had Covid-19, it's a normal common sense procedure. Yet he's trying to maliciously conflate it with the "mass surveillance" boogeyman

His entire review just does that repeatedly.

Again, I haven't read the book, but this "reviewer" is just twisting stuff to fit some narrative he already had in his head. You could probably do the same with a high-school economics book, make it sound like "New World order manifesto" with enough creative quoting.

The paragraph with 2)

A pandemic is a complex adaptive system comprising many different components or pieces of information (as diverse as biology or psychology), whose behaviour is influenced by such variables as the role of companies, economic policies, government intervention, healthcare politics or national governance. For this reason, it can and should be viewed as a “living network” that adapts to changing conditions – not something set in stone, but a system of interactions that is both complex and adaptive. It is complex because it represents a “cat’s cradle” of interdependence and interconnections from which it stems, and adaptive in the sense that its “behaviour” is driven by interactions between nodes (the organizations, the people – us!) that can become confused and “unruly” in times of stress (Will we adjust to the norms of confinement? Will a majority of us – or not – abide by the rules? etc.). The management (the containment, in this particular case) of a complex adaptive system requires continuous real-time but ever-changing collaboration between a vast array of disciplines, and between different fields within these disciplines. Just to provide a broad and oversimplified example, the containment of the coronavirus pandemic will necessitate a global surveillance network capable of identifying new outbreaks as soon as they arise, laboratories in multiple locations around the world that can rapidly analyse new viral strains and develop effective treatments, large IT infrastructures so that communities can prepare and react effectively, appropriate and coordinated policy mechanisms to efficiently implement the decisions once they are made, and so on. The important point is this: each separate activity by itself is necessary to address the pandemic but is insufficient if not considered in conjunction with the others. It follows that this complex adaptive system is greater than the sum of its parts. Its effectiveness depends on how well it works as a whole, and it is only as strong as its weakest link.

Dohnjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

The paragraph with 2)

A pandemic is a complex adaptive system comprising many different components or pieces of information (as diverse as biology or psychology), whose behaviour is influenced by such variables as the role of companies, economic policies, government intervention, healthcare politics or national governance. For this reason, it can and should be viewed as a “living network” that adapts to changing conditions – not something set in stone, but a system of interactions that is both complex and adaptive. It is complex because it represents a “cat’s cradle” of interdependence and interconnections from which it stems, and adaptive in the sense that its “behaviour” is driven by interactions between nodes (the organizations, the people – us!) that can become confused and “unruly” in times of stress (Will we adjust to the norms of confinement? Will a majority of us – or not – abide by the rules? etc.). The management (the containment, in this particular case) of a complex adaptive system requires continuous real-time but ever-changing collaboration between a vast array of disciplines, and between different fields within these disciplines. Just to provide a broad and oversimplified example, the containment of the coronavirus pandemic will necessitate a global surveillance network capable of identifying new outbreaks as soon as they arise, laboratories in multiple locations around the world that can rapidly analyse new viral strains and develop effective treatments, large IT infrastructures so that communities can prepare and react effectively, appropriate and coordinated policy mechanisms to efficiently implement the decisions once they are made, and so on. The important point is this: each separate activity by itself is necessary to address the pandemic but is insufficient if not considered in conjunction with the others. It follows that this complex adaptive system is greater than the sum of its parts. Its effectiveness depends on how well it works as a whole, and it is only as strong as its weakest link.

Thanks

Dionaibh

Deleted User wrote: »

The paragraph with 2)

A pandemic is a complex adaptive system comprising many different components or pieces of information (as diverse as biology or psychology), whose behaviour is influenced by such variables as the role of companies, economic policies, government intervention, healthcare politics or national governance. For this reason, it can and should be viewed as a “living network” that adapts to changing conditions – not something set in stone, but a system of interactions that is both complex and adaptive. It is complex because it represents a “cat’s cradle” of interdependence and interconnections from which it stems, and adaptive in the sense that its “behaviour” is driven by interactions between nodes (the organizations, the people – us!) that can become confused and “unruly” in times of stress (Will we adjust to the norms of confinement? Will a majority of us – or not – abide by the rules? etc.). The management (the containment, in this particular case) of a complex adaptive system requires continuous real-time but ever-changing collaboration between a vast array of disciplines, and between different fields within these disciplines. Just to provide a broad and oversimplified example, the containment of the coronavirus pandemic will necessitate a global surveillance network capable of identifying new outbreaks as soon as they arise, laboratories in multiple locations around the world that can rapidly analyse new viral strains and develop effective treatments, large IT infrastructures so that communities can prepare and react effectively, appropriate and coordinated policy mechanisms to efficiently implement the decisions once they are made, and so on. The important point is this: each separate activity by itself is necessary to address the pandemic but is insufficient if not considered in conjunction with the others. It follows that this complex adaptive system is greater than the sum of its parts. Its effectiveness depends on how well it works as a whole, and it is only as strong as its weakest link.

Thank you.

Dionaibh

Dohnjoe wrote: »

To you



That one reviewer is clearly some conspiracy loon, their first line literally gives it away. These types of people typically always use selective and out of context quotes, for example



Ooohh sounds scary to you right? but what's the context. I haven't read the book, but I would wager a lot of money that the author is referring to surveillance of the disease, it's spread, etc.

And this "reviewer" does it again



We use contact tracing and tracking to find people who may have been in contact with someone who had Covid-19, it's a normal common sense procedure. Yet he's trying to maliciously conflate it with the "mass surveillance" boogeyman

His entire review just does that repeatedly.

Again, I haven't read the book, but this "reviewer" is just twisting stuff to fit some narrative he already had in his head. You could probably do the same with a high-school economics book, make it sound like "New World order manifesto" with enough creative quoting.

Thank you.

The reason I find the reviews suspicious is because they all begin with 'timely'. It's as though they were written by the same person.

But a lot of the other quotes are worrying. The one about not smelling fruit, for example.

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

Thank you.

The reason I find the reviews suspicious is because they all begin with 'timely'. It's as though they were written by the same person.

But a lot of the other quotes are worrying. The one about not smelling fruit, for example.

This line:

"Simple pleasures like smelling a melon or squeezing a fruit will be frowned upon and may even become a thing of the past."

Can you explain what you think that means, and why it scares you?

endacl

Dionaibh wrote: »

But did you read the review? What about the quotes from the book? Are they not horrifying?

Yes.
What about them?
No.

Dionaibh

Dohnjoe wrote: »

This line:



Can you explain what you think that means, and why it scares you?

I don't know what he means by that. Why would smelling fruit become a thing of the past?

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

I don't know what he means by that. Why would smelling fruit become a thing of the past?

If you don't know what it means, then why are you scared of it?

I know what it means.

Think, see if you can figure out what it means (clue: we're in a pandemic, germs)

Dionaibh

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If you don't know what it means, then why are you scared of it?

I know what it means.

Think, see if you can figure out what it means (clue: we're in a pandemic, germs)

Yes, but he's saying that post-pandemic people won't do it. It all points to wanting to control what people do.

Dohnjoe

Dionaibh wrote: »

Yes, but he's saying that post-pandemic people won't do it. It all points to wanting to control what people do.

Yeah and people might not do these things so much in the future, shaking hands might become a thing of the past, likewise squeezing bread or feeling fruit in supermarkets. Its down to people changing their habits.

People in this country used to spit all the time, but after large bouts of tuberculosis, and common sense advice, that died down

You seem to have this bizarre personal belief that there is some shadowy force trying to "control people" just for the sake of it. If that's true, then explain why this shadowy force wants people to stop feeling fruit in supermarkets? what sense does that make? You seem to be scared of your own interpretation of stuff

Dionaibh

Dionaibh wrote: »

Yes, but he's saying that post-pandemic people won't do it. It all points to wanting to control what people do.

At a guess, the horrifying point he's making is that fruit and veg will be packed for reasons of hygiene. This hasn't actually happened but wouldn't be the worst tbh. Also you'll be perfectly free to do it when you get home. You're easily horrified.

Dionaibh

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yeah and people might not do these things so much in the future, shaking hands might become a thing of the past, likewise squeezing bread or feeling fruit in supermarkets. Its down to people changing their habits.

People in this country used to spit all the time, but after large bouts of tuberculosis, and common sense advice, that died down

You seem to have this bizarre personal belief that there is some shadowy force trying to "control people" just for the sake of it. If that's true, then explain why this shadowy force wants people to stop feeling fruit in supermarkets? what sense does that make? You seem to be scared of your own interpretation of stuff

Thank you. That makes sense. I'm overthinking things, but the words 'Great Reset' frighten me for some reason.