I despise the World Economic Forum (WEF) and everything it represents. “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age” — A Euphemism for Technocratic Control?
It is the epitome of elitist arrogance, a self-appointed council of unelected billionaires and bureaucrats who convene under the pretence of solving global problems while serving their own interests.
Opinion
I despise the World Economic Forum (WEF) and everything it represents. To me, it is the epitome of elitist arrogance, a self-appointed council of unelected billionaires, technocrats, and bureaucrats who convene under the pretence of solving global problems while serving their own interests. The WEF has become a toxic nexus of power, greed, and hubris, where policies are crafted not to empower the many, but to entrench the dominance of the few. It is a platform where freedom, democracy, and national sovereignty are traded for centralised control, all wrapped in the deceptive language of collaboration and progress.
The leaders of the WEF, from Klaus Schwab to his deputies and lieutenants, epitomise the worst kind of technocratic paternalism. They see themselves as architects of humanity’s future, but their plans resemble a dystopian nightmare. Their initiatives, from the so-called “Great Reset” to the relentless push for digital IDs and centralised financial systems, are designed to strip individuals of their privacy, autonomy, and agency. They call it progress; I call it control.
And then there are the “sock puppets” — the politicians, corporate executives, and bureaucrats who flock to Davos to bask in the glow of this globalist cabal. These attendees are not there to represent their constituents or uphold democratic values. They are there to align themselves with the interests of multinational corporations and unelected global bodies, to receive their marching orders and return home ready to implement policies that benefit the elite at the expense of the average citizen. In the case of one particular Minister of Health, to reduce the health of the population.
What infuriates me most is the WEF’s hypocritical facade. They preach sustainability while flying private jets. They claim to champion equity while consolidating wealth and power into fewer hands. They talk about inclusion while crafting policies that marginalise dissenting voices. This is not collaboration; it is domination disguised as dialogue.
The WEF represents everything I oppose: the erosion of sovereignty, the marginalisation of the common individual, and the replacement of democratic accountability with corporate and technocratic rule. I believe participation in the WEF should carry severe consequences. Politicians who attend should be voted out, bureaucrats should be stripped of their positions, and corporations that fund or partner with the forum should face boycotts and divestment campaigns.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos has long been a lightning rod for controversy, gathering the world’s elites under the guise of shaping a better future. This year’s theme, “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age,” sounds forward-thinking, even noble. But when examined critically, the title seems to camouflage a deeper agenda — one that raises pressing questions about power, control, and the role of technology in our societies.
The term "Intelligent Age" ostensibly refers to the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and digital transformation. Yet, while intelligence might imply progress, the darker undertones are hard to ignore. In the WEF lexicon, “intelligent” often translates to an automated, data-driven world where decisions about health, economics, and even governance are increasingly dictated by algorithms and technocratic elites.
This raises critical concerns: whose intelligence is being prioritised, and to what end? If the past is any indication, the beneficiaries of such “intelligent” systems are not the masses but the corporations and governments who design and control them.
The emphasis on “collaboration” appears designed to inspire confidence in collective action. Yet, in the context of the WEF, collaboration often means the coordination of the world's most powerful entities — Big Tech, Big Pharma, Big Food, global financial institutions, and government bureaucracies. This is not collaboration as ordinary citizens understand it, but rather consolidation: a tightening grip of centralised power under the pretext of solving global challenges like health, clean water, inequality, and digital governance.
The WEF’s history of partnerships with major tech firms — from Google and Microsoft to OpenAI — raises the spectre of a future where technological solutions become mandatory, whether through surveillance systems, digital currencies, or “smart” cities that prioritise control over autonomy.
An “Intelligent Age” governed by technology risks sidelining the very essence of humanity. Algorithmic decision-making, while efficient, often lacks nuance, compassion, and context. When coupled with the WEF's apparent eagerness to endorse centralisation, there’s a clear danger that human voices — especially dissenting ones — could be drowned out in favor of “smart” systems that prioritise data over democracy.
Consider the growing movement toward digital IDs and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), both championed by WEF-aligned entities. While these tools are often marketed as innovative solutions to global challenges, their potential for abuse is absolutely staggering. In the wrong hands, they erode privacy, restrict freedom, and create a dystopian system of technocratic governance.
It’s worth asking who gets left behind in the Intelligent Age. Technological advances often exacerbate existing inequalities, as those without access to resources or education are excluded from the benefits of progress. Collaboration, as defined by the WEF, rarely includes these marginalised groups. Instead, the forum’s initiatives often perpetuate a top-down model where decisions are made by those far removed from the realities of ordinary people.
Moreover, the environmental impact of this “Intelligent Age” cannot be overlooked. The WEF has consistently supported the expansion of technologies that require vast amounts of energy and resources, often at the expense of the planet and under the banner of sustainability.
The theme of “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age” is a polished veneer for what may be a broader push toward centralised control under the guise of progress. While the WEF claims to champion global cooperation, its agenda often aligns with the interests of the wealthiest and most powerful, leaving little room for grassroots voices or genuine democratic input.
While cloaked in benevolent rhetoric, the forum’s actions consistently reveal its priorities: centralising power, advancing technocratic control, and privileging corporate interests over democratic accountability. It’s time to confront the uncomfortable truth — the WEF has become an anti-democratic institution that undermines sovereignty, and participation in its activities should carry real consequences.
The WEF operates outside of democratic frameworks, yet its influence over public policy is profound. It serves as a platform for powerful and ofttimes bad actors to shape global agendas without public scrutiny or input. The infamous “Great Reset” initiative is a stark example. Marketed as an opportunity to "reimagine capitalism," it is, in reality, a blueprint for consolidating wealth and control into the hands of an elite few while eroding individual freedoms and national sovereignty.
No one elects WEF participants, yet their decisions ripple across the globe, affecting billions. From the promotion of centralised digital currencies to influencing climate policies that disproportionately harm all nations, the WEF’s initiatives often prioritise top-down control while excluding ordinary citizens from decision-making processes. By attending, politicians and bureaucrats signal their allegiance not to their constituencies but to a globalist agenda divorced from democratic accountability.
Participation in the WEF should be seen for what it is: a betrayal of democratic principles. Politicians and bureaucrats who attend Davos prioritize the interests of multinational corporations and global elites over their own citizens. They return with policy ideas shaped not by local needs but by the interests of unelected billionaires and technocrats. Such behavior is incompatible with public service and warrants severe consequences, including blackballing from political and corporate spheres.
Corporations, too, bear responsibility. Many of the largest WEF partners, including Big Tech giants and financial institutions, use their influence to drive policies that concentrate wealth and control. These corporations push for regulations and technologies that benefit their bottom lines while stifling competition and eroding personal freedoms. Consumers and investors should hold these companies accountable by boycotting their products, divesting from their stocks, and demanding transparency.
Abandoning the WEF is not just a symbolic gesture but a practical necessity to preserve democracy and human dignity. If left unchecked, the forum’s influence will continue to exacerbate the following dangers:
1. Erosion of Sovereignty: By promoting supranational governance structures and centralised digital systems, the WEF undermines the autonomy of nations and their ability to represent the will of their people.
2. Expansion of Surveillance and Control: The WEF has championed initiatives like digital IDs, universal basic income tied to behavioural compliance, and centralised data systems. These tools could be weaponised to create a system of mass surveillance and social credit as in China.
3. Marginalisation of the Majority: The WEF’s policies often benefit the elite at the expense of ordinary people. For example, green energy transitions advocated by the forum frequently ignore the economic realities of working-class citizens, while corporations reap government subsidies.
4. Technocratic Authoritarianism: By positioning unelected experts and corporations as the arbiters of progress, the WEF promotes a system where democratic debate is replaced by top-down mandates.
True collaboration does not require secretive meetings in luxury resorts. Instead, the global community should prioritise transparent, decentralised forums where nations and local communities can work together on shared challenges. These platforms should emphasise subsidiarity, respecting the autonomy of individual nations and empowering grassroots movements. Technology, while a powerful tool, must be guided by ethical principles and democratic oversight. A counterbalance to the WEF’s technocratic agenda could be found in initiatives that promote open-source solutions, individual privacy, and localised decision-making.
The WEF thrives on the complicity of those who attend its meetings and implement its agenda. It is not enough to critique the organisation — there must be tangible consequences for participation. Politicians who align themselves with the WEF should be voted out of office. Bureaucrats who attend should lose their positions. Corporations that fund or partner with the forum should face consumer boycotts and investor scrutiny.
The future of humanity cannot and should not be decided by an unaccountable elite meeting in secret. Their vision of progress is a Trojan horse for control, and their promises of a better world ring hollow when weighed against the damage they leave in their wake. The WEF, its leaders, and its enablers must be held accountable for the dystopian trajectory they champion. It is not collaboration or progress — it is the subjugation of the many for the benefit of the few, and it must be stopped.
As the world hurtles into this so-called Intelligent Age, it is critical to ask: ‘collaboration for whom, and at what cost?’ Without transparency, accountability, and a commitment to human dignity, this new era risks becoming a dystopia where technology serves power, not people. The challenge for ordinary citizens is to ensure that intelligence is not just artificial but also ethical — and that collaboration is truly inclusive, not just a euphemism for consolidation.
If the WEF represents a dystopian future of centralised control, then rejecting it is a necessary step toward reclaiming democracy, sovereignty, and human freedom. By blackballing those who enable its influence, we send a clear message: the future of humanity cannot be decided in secret by you, an unaccountable elite.
To build a peaceful and healthy civilisation on Earth, we must unite around principles that prioritise humanity’s well-being, autonomy, and harmony with the environment. This vision requires integrating several elements: rejecting elitist and technocratic control, embracing local and democratic governance, fostering global cooperation based on mutual respect, and advancing education and population growth to empower humanity’s potential
Sovereignty and democracy must remain central to any vision of a better future. Decision-making must be decentralised, empowering local communities to determine their own paths while cooperating on shared challenges. Transparency, accountability, and active civic participation are essential to ensure governments act in the best interest of their citizens, not global elites or multinational corporations.
We must reject the technocratic vision that prioritises centralised control and surveillance over individual freedoms. Technology should serve humanity, not the other way around. Open-source solutions, privacy-respecting innovations, and decentralised systems can ensure that progress aligns with ethical principles and human dignity.
A cornerstone of this vision is the recognition that we need more people (nor less Bill) and better education to achieve our potential. The narrative that the world is overpopulated is a dangerous myth; the real issue is the mismanagement of resources and opportunities. Education is the most powerful tool to uplift societies, unlock human creativity, and foster innovation. By investing in universal education and nurturing a culture of lifelong learning, we can create a population equipped to solve global challenges and build a thriving civilisation.
Good health is fundamental to a peaceful and productive society. We must embrace nutritional, integrative and environmental medicine, which addresses the root causes of disease and promotes preventive care. A healthcare system grounded in these principles would drastically reduce illness, improve quality of life, and ensure that future generations can thrive without reliance on profit-driven pharmaceutical models.
Global cooperation is essential to address challenges like climate change, ‘pandemics’, and inequality. However, this collaboration must respect the sovereignty and diversity of nations. A fair and transparent framework for international dialogue can replace forums like the WEF, ensuring that solutions are developed collectively and democratically rather than dictated by a privileged few.
Humanity’s survival depends on living in harmony with nature. Environmental stewardship must focus on practical, locally adaptable solutions rather than centralised mandates. This approach allows communities to address environmental issues in ways that respect their unique ecosystems and cultural contexts.
Creating the ideal human existence is no small task, but it is achievable through a shared commitment to justice, freedom, and compassion. This vision demands rejecting the centralised, elitist control championed by the WEF and embracing a model that empowers individuals and communities. By prioritising education, population growth (not depopulation Bill), and decentralised governance, humanity can unlock its full potential and create a civilisation that is peaceful, healthy, and sustainable for generations to come.
Ian Brighthope
While writing this piece, I couldn’t help thinking of the hominids at the beginning of the film - “2001: A Space Odyssey” and their discovery of a tool used for their defence against the enemy and the sheer joy they derived from that discovery at its first use in an act of violence. The music is inspirational, not only the beginning but the entire composition. We have the tool of our intellect and we must make it work to either destroy the WEF or we the people beat the WEF with another system.
Richard Strauss's "Also sprach Zarathustra" was chosen for the opening of *2001: A Space Odyssey* because it perfectly encapsulates the themes of evolution, transcendence, and humanity's quest for understanding its place in the cosmos. The piece’s inspiration and structure align seamlessly with the philosophical underpinnings of the film.
The tone poem is based on Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophical work of the same name, ‘Also Sprach Zarathustra’ (‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’). Nietzsche's concept of the Übermensch (Overman or Superman) represents humanity's potential to transcend its current state and achieve a higher existence. Kubrick’s film explores similar ideas, depicting humanity’s evolutionary leaps — from primitive apes discovering tools to advanced beings exploring space, and ultimately, to the mysterious transformation represented by the Starchild.
The triumphant opening fanfare, "Sunrise," mirrors the awakening of intelligence in the hominids and humanity's enduring drive to reach beyond its limitations. The music’s progression from quiet anticipation to overwhelming grandeur parallels the evolutionary leap triggered by the Monolith, a moment of profound change and discovery.
"Also sprach Zarathustra" is not just a musical accompaniment; it is an integral part of the storytelling in ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’. It encapsulates the film's central themes — the mystery of existence, the inevitability of progress, and the transformative power of intelligence — while creating an unforgettable cinematic moment. The choice of this piece is a testament to Kubrick's genius in blending music, imagery, and philosophy to elevate the art of filmmaking.
Don't worry, they dispise us more and have for far longer.
We're all the useless eaters they want culled and we wake up the masses or drown under them or perhaps even by them.
Every minute spent posting online reaching new names that were oblivious is what wins this. Obviously people with credentials are also critical because it gives our information credibility.
Keep up the good work
I cannot agree more. We did not vote for these people. For instance, PM Trudeau, a staunch YGL, like Macron and Starmer, who Canadians elected, imposes the WEF agenda on us, which is foreign to what was expected from the promises made to us by our elected officials. In other words, this is fraud and high treason. But people like him will surely leave parliamentary life scot-free.