2023-03-28
Will Bill Gates rule the world?
The UN-WEF partnership with elected governments around the world has reached an unprecedented level of disconnect from the people who supposedly elect their government (if we ignore all previous precedents such as enforced collective farming under the communists).
In a competitive market the people can decide with whom they want to do business, so they have a powerful economic weapon at their disposal - they can give their custom to whomsoever they judge worthy of it. Of course that assumes a diverse market with many independent suppliers in healthy and friendly competition, as at one time was the norm. Compared with casting a vote every five years for a politician that will then vote as directed by the party (and its donors) rather than in the interests of their constituents, that gives the people a truly powerful influence.
Or it used to, before the age of the mega-corporations, who seem to have by one means or another driven the small to medium enterprises out of business, and now assume the powers of a monopolistic supplier.
But surely competition still thrives? When corporate control resides primarily in only three major financial institutions (Vanguard, Black Rock, State Street) it's not hard to see that whichever brand name we choose to purchase in the supermarket, the ultimate ownership of the supplier is not as widespread as the brand namespace suggests. In fact it is now reasonably clear that the brand names are merely the facade behind which the corporate oligarchy operates, largely outside of public scrutiny, and through tiered business ownership, remote from the operations of the businesses that actually serve the market. Major decisions are taken at the top financial level rather than at an individual business level.
Then we have the "philanthropist" phenomenon whereby corporate oligarchs, under cover of largely unaccountable philanthropic tax-exempt status, can fund/influence the "good works" of unelected bodies such as the WEF and the United Nations and trade bodies such as GAVI to further their own interests in (for example) vaccine sales and distribution to world governments - who whilst nominally acting in the interests of their populations, hide behind commercial confidentiality clauses in their purchase agreements, and closely regulate the authorisation and use of medicines "for our safety".
Thus we the people are cut out of the supply loop (and cut off from our economic purchasing power acting as individuals) by the very governments that we elect to act in our interests.
People power in the market is dead, long live corporate-philanthropist-NGO-UN-WEF-NWO-government power.
That would be bad enough, but now we have the spectacle of a national government picking on its primary industry to buy out the means of production by compulsory purchase, in the name of "climate change", and threatening a significant reduction in the world's fresh food supply in the process.