‘Woven City’: Toyota Joins Utopia Club With Startup Smart City
Global corporations with Technocrat leadership are drawn to create autonomous smart cities from scratch that will be run by AI. They will be based on Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, and will provide a model guide for future smart cities. Toyota is the latest entry. ⁃ TN Editor
Toyota has started building a “smart city” which will include self-driving cars, robotics and AI homes.
Construction began this week at the base of Japan’s Mount Fuji, and has been dubbed the “Woven City.”
The 175-acre city, around 62 miles from Tokyo, is set to function as a technological testing ground, with 360 residents to test and develop the tech.
This includes inventors, senior citizens, families and children, who will test technologies like robotics, artificial intelligence and smart homes.
Eventually, the city will be home to around 2,000 Toyota employees, reports Business Insider.
Other aspects of the Woven City include hydrogen fuel cells and it is reported the city will be fully sustainable.
In order to be fully sustainable, building will be made out of wood to minimise carbon footprint.
The smart homes will assist with daily living and use sensor-based AI to monitor health and take care of basic needs, according to Toyota.
The 2,000 residents are expected to eventually include employees, retired couples, retailers and scientists as well as families.
The plans for the city was first unveiled last year at CES, a tech trade show in Las Vegas, but news of the updated plans were released this week.
The company released artist impressions of what the city is set to look like when it’s finished.
After construction began this week, on the site of one of Toyota’s former manufacturing plants named Higashi-Fuji, the organisation did not disclose who the first residents will be.
However, the cost of the project is unknown and Toyota has not yet given a date for completion, although residents will be able to move in the next five years.
Understanding Eisenhower’s Warning Of Technological Elite Takeover
This article explores the revolving door between private companies and top government positions, many of which are fraught with conflicts of interest and yet rarely in the national interest. Eisenhower warned of the dangers posed by a “technological elite”. ⁃ TN Editor
In June 2019, Susan Gordon stood on a stage at the Washington Convention Center. Behind her loomed three giant letters, “AWS,” the abbreviation for Amazon Web Services, the cloud computing division of the giant Internet retailer. After three decades at the Central Intelligence Agency, Gordon had risen to one of the top jobs in the cloak-and-dagger world: principal deputy director of national intelligence. From that perch she publicly extolled the virtues of Amazon Web Services and the cloud services the tech giant provides the CIA.
She told the crowd that the intelligence community’s 2013 decision to sign a multi-year, $600 million contract with AWS for cloud computing “will stand as one of those that caused the greatest leap forward. … The investment we made so many years ago in order to be able to try and harness the power of the cloud with a partner who wanted to learn and grow with us has left us not only ready for today but positioned for tomorrow.”
The agreement was also a “real game-changer,” said André Pienaar, founder and CEO of a tech firm called C5 Capital, whose business includes reselling AWS services. “When the CIA said they were going adopt the AWS cloud platform,” Pienaar said at another AWS event. “People said if the U.S. intelligence community has the confidence to feel secure on the AWS cloud, why can’t we?”
Gordon left government in August 2019, two months after her AWS summit talk. In November 2019 she became senior advisor to a consultancy with close Amazon connections and in April joined the board of defense contractor with extensive AWS business.
Gordon is one of scores of former government officials who have landed lucrative work in Big Tech.
The synergy between Washington and Silicon Valley can be seen as the latest manifestation of the Beltway’s revolving door. But the size and scope of Big Tech – and the increasing dependence of government on its products and talent – suggest something more: the rise of a Digital-Intelligence Complex. Like the Military-Industrial Complex that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against in 1961, it represents a symbiotic relationship in which the lines between one and the other are blurred.
Gordon’s history illustrates this development. Her endorsement of Amazon was important to the company: AWS touted the success of the CIA deal as a prime reason it believed the Pentagon should award the company a 10-year, $10 billion contract for cloud computing for the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI. That bid has been mired in litigation as competing tech companies have accused the government of insider dealing, political interference, and other improprieties in considering and awarding the contract.
The web services side of Amazon is believed to be the most profitable part of the mammoth company. Illustrating the pride of place AWS enjoys within Amazon, Jeff Bezos recently announced he is stepping aside from his role as CEO, making room for Andy Jassy, who has been in charge of the AWS subsidiary. It’s also a prime reason Amazon chose the D.C. suburbs for the company’s new HQ2: “The D.C. tech sector is one of the fastest growing in the world,” Teresa Carlson, AWS vice president for Worldwide Public Sector and Industries, told Washington Life magazine last year. That growth is “largely driven by big U.S. government projects,” she added.
As Amazon has built that government business, AWS has had no bigger cheerleader than Gordon, who has made repeated presentations praising Amazon. In 2018, she appeared at a government/industry confab called “FedTalks.” She shared the stage with AWS Vice President for Engineering Bill Vass, who interviewed her about the work they had done together.
“Can you talk a little bit about the partnership that you’ve had with the cloud provider in this case?” Vass asked, and then added, “It’s been very tight.”
“Throughout my career, which is long, all the great advances we’ve made have been in partnership with industry,” Gordon replied. “We’ve had a partner who is as committed to our needs as we were.”
Vass said that the work with government had made AWS more attractive to private sector companies buying cloud services: “I’ve found it very satisfying to also take input from the intelligence agencies and put that into our commercial products. So, our commercial products–”
“We’re demanding,” Gordon interjected with a laugh.
“Yes, you are demanding, and that’s a good thing because it causes us to raise the bar continuously and I think that has enabled us to put those features into our commercial products,” Vass said. “And a lot of the security requirements that you’ve had just exist on our commercial products that our commercial customers can now leverage.”
“Right,” said Gordon.
“Right,” agreed Vass. “So, they sort of had that same level of security that you have, which is pretty exciting for all of our customers.
“Yeah,” Gordon enthused, “so, if you believe in the engine of a great society, you’ve just described it.”
‘I Cannot Wait to See What We Do’
Gordon also appeared in a “customer spotlight” on Oct. 7, 2015, at a gathering called the AWS re:Invent conference, where she provided Amazon with a testimonial: “With the help of partners like AWS, I cannot wait to see what we do.”
A former top federal ethics official says that if he had been asked to okay Gordon’s participation in AWS events, he would have required that she explicitly tell the audience she was not endorsing Amazon. The former official told RCI that executive branch employees have to be careful not to run afoul of regulations that prohibit “the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise.”
RealClearInvestigations attempted to contact Gordon multiple times for comment; she did not reply. RCI also asked the Office of the Director of National Intelligence whether Gordon’s speech had been approved by government lawyers. “ODNI has a process in place to ensure that all engagements … are appropriately reviewed and vetted, including by ODNI ethics officials,” an ODNI spokesperson said. ODNI did not make available any materials documenting such review or vetting.
For years, AWS has been making the same argument for its cloud services that Gordon repeatedly offered: that the intelligence community’s choice of the product showed the way forward for adoption by the public and private sector alike. But Gordon was hardly the only person connected to government with strong ties to Amazon.
Sally Donnelly is a former Time magazine reporter who left journalism and who would become director of the Washington office of U.S. Central Command. She left the Department of Defense in 2012 and formed a consulting practice called SBD Advisors. One of her first clients was C5 Capital, the tech firm founded and run by André Pienaar. Soon, SBD added Amazon Web Services to its roster of customers. Donnelly’s SBD advised AWS on how to sell its services to the Pentagon.
Donnelly helped guide Secretary of Defense nominee James Mattis through his Senate confirmation hearing in 2017, and was offered a position as senior adviser to Mattis. To accept, she had to sell her business. Also joining Mattis, as his deputy chief of staff, was Tony DeMartino, who had worked on the Amazon account at Donnelly’s consultancy.
Donnelly found a ready buyer for her consultancy in Pienaar’s C5 Capital, which already owned 20% of SBD. Donnelly was paid $1.56 million for her remaining 80% stake. Donnelly received the payments in $390,000 chunks, the majority during her time at the Pentagon.
While Donnelly and DeMartino were working for Defense Secretary Mattis, the Pentagon was considering and comparing the companies competing for all or part of the $10 billion JEDI contract. Among the competitors was AWS. Two of the other companies vying for JEDI business, Oracle and IBM, each complained to the Government Accountability Office that they had been cut out of a fair chance at the contract. That would lead to an investigation by the DoD’s inspector general, the details of which were published last April. “The complaints we received alleged, among other issues, that Secretary Mattis and Ms. Donnelly provided preferential treatment to Amazon,” the IG said.
One of the events Amazon’s cloud computing competitors complained about was a March 31, 2017, private dinner Mattis attended in London. Hosted by retired British general Graeme Lamb at 5 Hertford Street (a private club regularly described as “secretive”), the dinner had fewer than a dozen guests. Among them were Donnelly, Amazon Web Services V.P. Carlson, and C5 Capital’s Pienaar.
Interviewed by the inspector general about the dinner, Mattis described Pienaar as a “friend.” As for Carlson, he said he had never met her before the London gathering and was “not certain why Teresa Carlson was included,” but offered that “Sally [Donnelly] knew Teresa.” Donnelly told the IG that she had no “insight” into why Carlson was at the dinner.
But the notion that Carlson was an unknown mystery guest is not supported by sworn testimony given to the DoD Inspector General, transcripts of which have been acquired by RealClearInvestigations. Six weeks before the London dinner, DeMartino had emailed Carlson, writing, “We obviously would like all our friends around us going forward.” Asked by the Inspector General what he had meant, DeMartino explained the Secretary had “a list of the people to fill jobs in the Department of Defense.” The White House had its own list, and “there was a negotiation” going on. “So,” DeMartino answered the I.G., “that note to Teresa was that she was on Secretary Mattis’ list for a potential job.” RCI reached out to Mattis, asking why Carlson was on his list for a “senior position” at the DoD if he did not know her and had never met her. Mattis did not respond.
The dinner’s host, Lamb, is a partner at C5 Capital. The dinner opened the door to Amazon with Mattis. A few weeks later, someone from Amazon called Mattis’ staff and told them that at the dinner in London, the secretary of defense had “expressed interest in meeting with [Jeff] Bezos.”
There was a question among the military bureaucrats whether Mattis should meet with Amazon’s founder. So Donnelly prepared an internal memo listing reasons for going ahead with the proposed get-together. Among them: “Bezos owns the Washington Post.” Donnelly touted his accomplishments: “Amazon is one of the most successful start-ups in the history of the US economy,” she wrote. “Amazon has revolutionized delivery and consumer service.” And then there was the product: “The Amazon cloud is the foundation of all Amazon’s businesses and allows unprecedented speed.” She also made the argument top intelligence official Sue Gordon repeated at Amazon sales conventions — that the CIA uses Amazon’s cloud.
Mattis met with various tech executives, including Bezos, on a West Coast trip. But he also met privately again with Bezos, over dinner in Washington the evening of Jan. 17, 2018. The only others at the dinner were Carlson and Donnelly.
The inspector general concluded in April 2020 that, even with their connections to Amazon, neither Donnelly nor DeMartino had acted unethically. The IG seemed more persuaded that illegitimate influence, if there had been any, had come from a Bezos-hating President Trump, who reportedly told Mattis to “screw Amazon.”
By the time the IG report came out, Mattis was no longer secretary of defense. And Sally Donnelly and Tony DeMartino had already left the Pentagon to start up a new consulting firm, Pallas Advisors. Teresa Carlson subsequently married André Pienaar.
The JEDI contract was eventually awarded to Microsoft. Amazon is asking a federal court to overturn the Pentagon’s decision. An AWS spokesperson told RealClearInvestigations that the DoD is attempting “to avoid a meaningful and transparent review of the JEDI contract award.”
In August 2019, Sue Gordon resigned as principal deputy director of national intelligence. Her private sector career has flourished. Last April, she joined the board of defense contractor CACI. According to its website, “CACI is an Amazon Web Services (AWS) Premier Consulting Partner, Public Sector Partner, and Authorized Reseller.” The company brags of its “healthy revenue-generating consulting business on AWS.”
It’s arguable that, given the far reach of AWS in Washington, it would be hard for Gordon to find post-government employment without there being some connection with Amazon or AWS. That said, Gordon is not entirely in the AWS orbit. She consults with Microsoft. Still, the most interesting private company Gordon has gone to work for is one founded by “consultants” with longstanding AWS connections. Gordon is now a senior adviser for the company Sally Donnelly and Tony DeMartino formed after they left the Pentagon: Pallas Advisors.
If it appears there is a steadily revolving door between tech companies and national security workers and officials, it may be because Gordon is in favor of exactly that. In an interview with Wired magazine when she was still in office, Gordon advocated what Wired described as “more of a revolving door.” Gordon was characterized as envisioning “a new paradigm for sharing talented workers between the government and the private sector.” According to Wired, she claimed that techies should start in government where they can learn what the problems and challenges are. They should move over to the private sector where they will have more freedom to innovate. “And then when they are ready to slow down and leave the rat race,” Wired quotes her as saying, “they can return to government.”
Gordon calls this “cross-pollination” and “talent-sharing.”
Critics of tech industry power and influence point out that Big Tech is now among the biggest employers of lobbyists, hiring primarily those who formerly worked for government. In 2010 Amazon fielded eight lobbyists. Last year the company flooded the zone with 118, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
This may or may not be good for government, which can’t afford to fall behind on the latest technologies. But it is clearly good for government workers who leave for the private sector, especially those who had been vocal “partners” and advocates of tech.
Technocracy Set To Compete With US Rule Of Law In Nevada Desert
This is essentially a high-tech autonomous zone where federal, state and local law and sovereignty will be negated in favor of technocrat rule by blockchain, where everything in your life is recorded. If one such zone gets “approved”, then how many more will quickly follow? ⁃ TN Editor
In the Nevada desert, a cryptocurrency magnate hopes to turn dreams of a futuristic “smart city” into reality. To do that, he’s asking the state to let companies like his form local governments on land they own, which would grant them power over everything from schools to law enforcement.
Jeffrey Berns, CEO of Nevada-based Blockchains LLC, envisions a city where people not only purchase goods and services with digital currency but also log their entire online footprint — financial statements, medical records and personal data — on blockchain. Blockchain is a digital ledger known mostly for recording cryptocurrency transactions but also has been adopted by some local governments for everything from documenting marriage licenses to facilitating elections.
The company wants to break ground by 2022 in rural Storey County, 12 miles (19 kilometers) east of Reno. It’s proposing to build 15,000 homes and 33 million square feet (3 million square meters) of commercial and industrial space within 75 years. Berns, whose idea is the basis for draft legislation that some lawmakers saw behind closed doors last week, said traditional government doesn’t offer enough flexibility to create a community where people can invent new uses for this technology.
“There’s got to be a place somewhere on this planet where people are willing to just start from scratch and say, ‘We’re not going to do things this way just because it’s the way we’ve done it,’” Berns said.
He wants Nevada to change its laws to allow “innovation zones,” where companies would have powers like those of a county government, including creating court systems, imposing taxes and building infrastructure while making land and water management decisions.
The prospect has been met with intrigue and skepticism from Nevada lawmakers, though the legislation has yet to be formally filed or discussed in public hearings. Most in the Democratic-controlled Legislature are eager to diversify Nevada’s tourism-dependent economy, but many fear backlash against business incentives as they struggle to fund health care and education.
This proposal differs from the big tax rebates they have grown wary of offering, like the $1.3 billion given to Tesla to build its northern Nevada battery factory or the billions New York and Virginia offered Amazon to build new corporate headquarters.
But it raises deeper issues about increasing tech companies’ grip on everyday life at a time when antitrust regulators and Democrats in Congress allege tech giants like Facebook and Google are controlling markets and endangering people’s privacy.
Blockchains LLC and so-called innovation zones were a key part of Gov. Steve Sisolak’s January State of the State address, when he outlined plans to rebuild a more diversified economy after the coronavirus pandemic.
Sisolak, whose campaign and affiliated political action committee received a combined $60,000 from the company, said the proposal would transform Nevada into “the epicenter of this emerging industry and create the high-paying jobs and revenue that go with it.”
The governor’s office declined to comment further on innovation zones. But with Sisolak’s backing, the idea could garner serious consideration in the Legislature.
“I don’t know enough yet to say whether I’m comfortable with this as the next step or not. But, look, it’s a big idea and Nevada has been built on big ideas, so let’s hear it out,” said state Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, a Republican who sponsored blockchain-related legislation in 2017 and 2019.
If lawmakers back the proposal, technology companies with 50,000 acres of land (200 square kilometers) that promise a $1 billion investment could create zones governed by three people like county commissioners. The draft legislation says two of them initially would be from the company itself.
In Storey County, which is home to Tesla’s factory, officials are waiting for more information before offering opinions but say questions still need to be answered.
Commissioner Lance Gilman, who owns the Mustang Ranch brothel and bought most of the county’s land to turn it into an industrial park decades ago, has supported luring technology companies to the area and growing its population. But Gilman, who worked in marketing for Blockchains LLC from 2018 to 2019, said there are many unknowns about ceding control to a new jurisdiction that falls within county borders.
”(The bill) wants the host county to let it form, become successful, not pay them very much money, and eventually let them take over the whole county and all the operations, if it becomes successful,” Gilman said. “If it doesn’t become successful, who becomes responsible for all the stuff that was built in the meantime?”
Putin Gets It: Tech Giants Are Becoming Competitors To Nation-States
Putin is the first national leader of prominence to verbalize the idea that Big Tech companies are in direct competition with national governments to control societies. In America, the government still thinks it exercises control over Big Tech as part of society. ⁃ TN Editor
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday warned against the increasing influence of large technology companies, which he said are “competing” with states.
His comments came as Russia ramps up pressure on the activities of foreign internet companies, which are not subject to state censorship unlike the majority of the country’s media outlets.
“These are not just economic giants. In some areas they are already de facto competing with the state,” Putin said during his address to the Davos virtual economic summit.
The Russian leader said it is unclear where the line is between a “successful global business” and “attempts to crudely, at their own discretion, control society”.
“We just saw it all in the United States,” he added, referring to riots earlier this month in Washington led by supporters of then US President Donald Trump.
Moscow earlier this week accused US tech giants of interfering in Russia’s internal affairs, in particular during anti-government protests led by supporters of jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny on Saturday.
Ahead of the rallies, Russia’s media watchdog Roskomnadzor ordered several online platforms, including YouTube and Instagram, to delete posts by users calling for protesters to attend demonstrations.
On Wednesday, the chairman of the lower house State Duma’s foreign interference committee, Vasily Piskaryov, said that the head of TikTok’s Russian branch had been invited to parliament for a conversation.
Saudi Arabia To Build Futuristic Technocratic Utopia
Saudi Arabia envisions building futuristic cities in the desert that are reminiscent of Technocracy’s Technates in the 1930s, that is, fully engineered cities designed to control the people who live in them. “The Line” is the latest announcement and has to be seen to be believed. ⁃ TN Editor
To the rest of the world, Saudi Arabia may look like a quasi-medieval kingdom where women still struggle for basic rights, where bearded clerics run the courts and where convicts are routinely beheaded by sword in public. But the Saudi monarchy — like its neighbors in Dubai and Abu Dhabi — has long cherished dreams of leapfrogging into a high-tech future. The last Saudi king created plans for six new cities in the desert, all billed as transformative steps toward a world beyond oil.
Now the Saudis have announced a fantasy that makes all their previous efforts look tame. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler, released a short film in January outlining his plans for the Line, a postmodern ecotopia to be built on the kingdom’s northwest coast. It will be a narrow urban strip 106 miles long with no roads, no cars and no pollution. M.B.S., as the crown prince is known, plans to pour $500 billion into the Line and related projects, which is a lot of money even by Saudi standards. He calls the Line a “civilizational revolution” to be inhabited by one million people “from all over the world.” Why anyone would want to move there, and why a city should be shaped like a strand of capellini, is anyone’s guess.
To watch the crown prince’s promotional video is to be immersed in a distinctively Saudi form of arrogance, blending religious triumphalism and royal grandiosity. The film begins with a fast-moving montage of the 20th-century’s greatest scientific and technical breakthroughs, including an incongruous image of Saudi Arabia’s founding king — as if he’d been a Steve Jobs-style innovator rather than a camel-riding desert warrior. Dates flash on the screen in a vintage font as we see images of the first commercial radio broadcast (1920), the first color TVs (1953), the first successful kidney transplant (1954), the first man on the moon (1969), the birth of the internet. After flicking past the glories of YouTube and virtual reality, the screen goes blank and the words appear, white on a black background: “What’s next?”
Cut to M.B.S. on a stage in his floor-length white gown. He delivers a brief TED-style talk, while behind him we see a topographic model of what looks like blackened lunar crust. A thin stream of glowing green fire cuts through it, and for a moment I almost expected Godzilla to appear and do battle with the prince. The Japanese film monster, born of post-World War II fear and excitement about the power of technology, would be oddly appropriate here. But no: That green beam is meant to represent the Line.
As M.B.S. conjures this brave new world — no journey will take more than 20 minutes! zero carbon emissions! — you get the sense that his chutzpah is nothing short of metaphysical. He appears to believe that nature itself is at his command. This shouldn’t be entirely surprising, because M.B.S. has been promoting equally outlandish ideas since 2017, when he first introduced Neom, the broader futurist development of which the Line forms a part. (The name is a portmanteau of Greek and Arabic words for “new” and “future.”) The Neom prospectus described “a new way of life from birth to death reaching genetic mutations to increase human strength and I.Q.,” according to a 2019 article in The Wall Street Journal. Cloud-seeding would bring rain to the desert. The project includes serious, realistic planning on desalination, alternative energy and desert agriculture, I was told by Ali Shihabi, a member of the Neom advisory board. But those ideas were overshadowed by wild-eyed talk of super-high-speed trains, robotic maids and beaches with glowing sand.
The hubris underlying these proposals, nourished by generations of yes men (including well-paid Western consultants), will be familiar to anyone who has spent time in Saudi Arabia. Still, you might have expected a bit more circumspection from M.B.S., at least right now. This is the man who stands accused of ordering the gruesome murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist who was lured to the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul in 2018, then strangled and dismembered with a bone saw by a team sent from Riyadh. Khashoggi dared to write mildly critical columns in The Washington Post. The details of his brutal killing shocked the world and made M.B.S. a pariah. He has condemned the murder and denies any role in it. (The C.I.A. begs to differ.)
Humility is not in M.B.S.’s genes, for better and worse. He continues to harass and jail his critics as if the Khashoggi murder never came to light. But his brashness has allowed him to hem in Saudi Arabia’s religious establishment, putting an end to the kingdom’s longtime promotion of poisonous Islamist doctrine. He is relaxing the rigid constraints on cultural life, and that has made him immensely popular, especially among the young.
Saudi Arabia plans 170km city without roads in Neom economic zone
Global Construction Review
Muhammad Bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, has announced plans to build a car-less, zero-carbon city with 1 million inhabitants and no roads, laid out as a 170km-long belt with services and transport infrastructure built underground.
Called “The Line”, the idea is part of Neom, the futuristic economic zone earmarked for the country’s northwest, on the coasts of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aqaba. According to the Saudi Press Agency, the city will be “built around nature” as “a response to some of the most pressing challenges facing humanity today, such as legacy infrastructure, pollution, traffic and human congestion”.
The absence of roads, and vehicles, will not inconvenience the city’s inhabitants since “all essential daily services, such as schools, medical clinics, leisure facilities and well as green spaces will be located within a five-minute walk”. A graphic produced by Neom, the company that Salman chairs, shows trains and autonomous freight vehicles running in “an invisible layer of infrastructure” beneath the city.
For longer distance travel, inhabitants will have access to “ultra-high-speed transit and autonomous mobility solutions” with “no journey longer than 20 minutes”.
The city, which is being badged as part of the kingdom Vision 2030 strategic plan, will be run by artificial intelligence, enhanced by machine learning and 5G systems, that “predicts ways to make life easier” – for example, but subcontracting service and maintenance work to robot maids and gardeners.
Energy will come entirely from renewable sources and its physical infrastructure will be built “around nature, instead of over it”, which means in practice that 95% of what was there before the city is built will still be there after work is completed.
Bill Gates Is Shocked That People Don’t Like Or Trust Him
Bill Gates is the perfect model of a Technocrat mind, that is, absolutely clueless as to why most people would not embrace his Utopia view of the world. In his mind, there is only one answer to global problems, namely, his. ⁃ TN Editor
Microsoft co-founder turned philanthropist Bill Gates says he has been taken aback by the volume of “crazy” and “evil” conspiracy theories about him spreading on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic, but said on Wednesday he would like to explore what is behind them.
In an interview with Reuters, Gates said the millions of online posts and “crazy conspiracy theories” about him and about top U.S. infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci had likely taken hold in part because of the combination of a frightening viral pandemic and the rise of social media.
“Nobody would have predicted that I and Dr. Fauci would be so prominent in these really evil theories,” Gates said.
“I’m very surprised by that. I hope it goes away.”
Gates, a billionaire who stepped down as chairman of Microsoft Corp in 2014, has through his philanthropic Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation committed at least $1.75 billion to the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. That includes support for some makers of vaccines, diagnostics and potential treatments.
Since the pandemic began a year ago, millions of conspiracies have spread over the Internet, fuelling misinformation about the coronavirus, its origins and the motives of those working to fight it.
They include claims that Fauci and Gates created the pandemic to try and control people, that they want to profit from the virus’ spread, and that they want to use vaccines to insert trackable microchips into people.
“But do people really believe that stuff?,” Gates asked.
“We’re really going to have to get educated about this over the next year and understand .. how does it change peoples’ behaviour and how should we have minimized this?”
Xi Jinping Opens WEF In Davos, Pledges Support For The “Great Reset”
As a Technocracy, China is one-hundred percent behind the World Economic Forum’s so-called “Great Reset” that will throw the world into Technocracy and Scientific Dictatorship. China knows something about this as it very efficiently represses 18.5% of the world’s population in its own country. ⁃ TN Editor
Speaking virtually on the first day of Davos’ World Economic Forum on Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave his first major public address since Joe Biden entered the White House, tailoring his message toward calming tensions among global rivals and urging a return to “mutual respond” but also emphasizing Beijing is ready to forge its own path regardless.
Underscoring that nations must “abandon ideological prejudice” and immediately abandon a dangerous “Cold-War mentality” he called on world powers to “stay committed to international law and international rules instead of staying committed to supremacy.”
“Difference in itself is no cause for alarm, what does bring alarm is arrogance, prejudice and hatred,” Xi told the Davos Agenda event, following four years of the Trump administration’s anti-China policies which brought Sino-US relations to their lowest point in decades. “Confrontation will lead us to a dead end.” It should be noted that there’s previously little doubt that Davos attendees pretty much despised Trump, and now this year Xi of China’s Communist Party is opening the Davos agenda.
“To build small circles and start a new Cold War, to reject, threaten or intimate others, to willfully impose decoupling, supply disruptions, or sanctions, or to create isolation or estrangement, will only push the world into division and even confrontation,” he said.
Recall this is similar language to his “warnings” of rising anti-globalization and protectionism during his prior 2017 Davos speech, where he said, “Pursuing protectionism is like locking oneself in a dark room. While wind and rain may be kept outside, that dark room will also block light and air. No one will emerge as a winner in a trade war.”
Except now the world has been ravaged by the continuing slow burn of the global pandemic, which originated in Wuhan, China last year—making the Davos Agenda 2021 a dubiously hoped-for ‘great reset’ year, as Rabobank quips sarcastically:
Today kicks off the annual World Economic Forum, which this time round is online and so can’t charge anyone $43 for a hotdog. Expect various iterations along the theme of “Builders’ Bums Better” from the talking heads as the ‘Great Reset’ slash ‘Great Reflation’ is dangled before markets.
“We’re going through the worst recession since the end of World War II. For the first time in history economies of all regions have been hit hard at the same time…” Xi said
“Despite the trillions of dollars in relief packages worldwide, global recovery is rather shaky and the outlook remains uncertain… Macroeconomic policy support should be stepped up to bring the world economy out of the woods as early as possible,” the Chinese president added.
EU To Implement Block-Wide Vaccine Passport Standard
Technocrats pushing the Great Reset, total surveillance and social engineering are moving at high speed to lock in gains at the expense of real science and thousands of statements from health and medical professionals to the contrary. Anyone who thinks this madness will not come to America isn’t paying attention. ⁃ TN Editor
The European Union is set to recognize a standard for vaccine passports in a what is being pitched as a move to reignite travel within the bloc.
While admitting that the use of such passports at the moment would be “premature” due to low vaccination rates amongst total populations, the EU says that plans to implement a bloc wide standard will likely be picked up in the near future.
EU commission vice-president Margaritis Schinas told the Daily Mailit was “perfectly imaginable that this can open avenues for other use, including facilitating travel.”
“We feel that now this is the time for these vaccine certificates to be recognized across the European Union, and even beyond the European Union,” he added.
EU Health Commissioner, Stella Kyriakides, is claiming that the bloc is in “active discussion” about how to implement the idea.
It isn’t hard to image the EU setting a standard for mandatory vaccine passports as numerous European countries have already committed to issuing such a document to its citizens for the purpose of travel.
Spain and Poland are the latest countries to announce that vaccine passports/certificates will be issued to those who receive the COVID-19 vaccination.
The London Telegraphreporting last week that biometrics firm iProov and cybersecurity firm Mvine have developed a vaccine passport which will be optionally provided as a smart phone app for Brits vaccinated against COVID-19.
“Regardless of how any of us feel about the idea of ‘vaccine passports’ for travel, they will ultimately be unavoidable,” Dawood said, adding:
“Once countries begin insisting on proof of Covid immunity from arriving travelers, there will be little option but to embrace the challenge.
We all long for travel to return to normal. But entry requirements will remain as long as countries feel insecure, perhaps until most people have been vaccinated worldwide. Social distancing, sanitisers, face masks on flights, delays, red tape, and last-minute changes of plan, will stay a fact of travel until then.”
Neo-Feudalism: The Great Reset Is Not Great And Not New
This article originated in Scotland, a nation that historically understands something about serfs and serfdom. The Great Reset is merely that latest installment in a 50 year-old plan to eradicate private property and dominate the entire planet. ⁃ TN Editor
The Great Reset is just the latest installment of the grand agenda to completely reorder global society by the end of the 21st century. Prior to the Great Reset for instance, the United Nations (UN) Agenda 21 was adopted by 178 governments in Rio in 1992, taking the form of a “comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”
Global, unelected special interests have a vision of what your future is going to look like, and these international networks of power ideally want you to blindly accept every aspect of your life being controlled by experts, with this system known as technocracy, or rule by experts (technicians).
Before we delve deeper into the insidious nature of the neo-slavery world order, a little context on the organization behind the reset is needed. It is the brainchild of the World Economic Forum (WEF) at Davos, led by Professor Klaus Schwab, the founder and Executive Chairman of the WEF, with other global organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the UN pushing this initiative.
You Will Own Nothing
Back in 2016, the WEF featured a ridiculous article written by Ida Auken, that described a system akin to neo-feudalism:
Welcome to the year 2030… I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.
A system where you, as an individual, do not own anything, is a system where everything you have can be taken away from you at a drop of a hat. It essentially describes a neo-feudal, or neo-slavery, system.
In feudal systems in medieval Europe (5th to 15th century approximately), the serfs, who were the lowest class of people in a hierarchical system, were slaves in many ways. Serfs were bound to land and the lords who owned the land, and had little-to-no rights. A serf could not marry, move somewhere else, or change occupation without permission from their lord. So, keep all this in mind when you hear about how supposedly great this reset is going to be.
The Great Reset Explained
Yet what exactly is the Great Reset? As Schwab explained in a WEF article in June of 2020:
To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism. There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset, but the most urgent is COVID-19.
In other words, Schwab is calling for the complete reordering of life on this planet. From the chaos generated by the response of governments to Covid-19, Schwab wants to impose his, and the elite networks of power intertwined in the WEF, version of order. As he writes:
The COVID-19 crisis is affecting every facet of people’s lives in every corner of the world. But tragedy need not be its only legacy. On the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.
Considering that the Great Reset is being pushed on the world in an opportunistic way in response to Covid-19, it is important to highlight that the WEF was one of the main organizers of Event 201. This event took place in October, 2019, and it simulated, or war-gamed, a scenario where a coronavirus pandemic, that began in bats, engulfed the world.
Schwab and Kissinger Sitting in a Tree
It is also important to note how connected Schwab and the WEF are to key individuals and organizations that help shape the world. Schwab has known Henry Kissinger, one of the most globally connected individuals on the planet, for 50 years for instance. In a 2017 interview at Davos, Schwab gushed over Kissinger:
I’m delighted to see you Dr. Kissinger on the screen. For me it’s a very moving moment because actually I met Dr. Kissinger for the first time exactly 50 years ago at Harvard (from 0.07 into video).
In the same interview, when talking about a speech made by the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, Kissinger talks about globalization and the construction of a new international order:
I think that President Xi’s speech was of fundamental significance. It laid out a concept for globalization and some specific challenges and roads to a solution. But to me the most important aspect was that it was an assertion by China of participating in the construction of an international order. One of the key problems of our period is that the international order with which we were familiar, is disintegrating in some respects, and that new elements from Asia and the developing world are entering it. What President Xi has done is to put forward a concept of international order in the economic field that will have to be the subject of conversation and the substance of the creation of an evolving system (2:33 into video).
Kissinger has been a long-term member of an organization that has represented elite networks of power for around 100 years, an organization with a fascinating and intriguing history: namely, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Dr. Carroll Quigley, who was a Professor of History at Georgetown University for many years, and who also taught at Harvard and Princeton, wrote a book called Tragedy and Hope in 1966. In the book, he described a future system that has many similarities to our system today. Quigley noted that he had been given access to the private records and secret papers of the network behind the CFR (Quigley, 1966: 950). In relation to the potential of a future feudal-like system in the hands of elite networks of power, Quigley wrote that:
In addition to these pragmatic goals, the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements(BIS) in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.
Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong the New York Federal Reserve, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the busines world (Quigley, 1966: p.324).
Carroll Quigley (1966) Tragedy and Hope (MacMillan Company, New York; Collier-MacMillan Limited, London – Third Printing, 1998, by George S. Gabric, GSG & Associates Publishers, San Pedro – p. 950, p.324 and p.866).
Deutsche Bank: Green New Deal Requires ‘Certain Degree Of Eco-Dictatorship’
The Great Reset, aka Green New Deal and Technocracy, requires the complete transformation of all elements of society, from legal frameworks to trade to population control. The global Deutsche Bank has revealed that it will take a “certain degree of eco-dictatorship” to get there. Scientific dictatorship is the key outcome of Technocracy is a civilizational trap of no return. ⁃ TN Editor
An analysis published by Deutsche Bank sharply criticises the “dishonest debate” with which the EU is selling its “Green Deal” to the people of Europe. The massive risks of the project for prosperity, the economic system and democracy itself should not be concealed, but should be addressed openly.
Eric Heymann, a senior economist at Deutsche Bank Research, warns that Europe’s Green Deal and its goal of climate neutrality by 2050 threatens a European mega-crisis, leading to “noticeable loss of welfare and jobs”. And he warns: It won’t work without “a certain degree of eco-dictatorship”.
The analyst describes it as dubious that the Green Deal is being touted across the board as “a new growth strategy” which would allow the EU to become a “fair and prosperous society.” While this may look good on paper, Heymann writes, in order to achieve carbon neutral by 2050, Europe’s economy and its entire political and legal systems will have to be changed fundamentally.
For the time being, the revolutionary consequences of the EU’s climate agenda for everyday life are “still relatively abstract” and for most households “still acceptable.” Soon, however, the path towards climate neutrality will require drastic interventions in the choice of means of transport, the size of housing, the means of heating, the possession of electronic consumer goods, as well as restrictions in the consumption of meat and tropical fruits.
And he warns these restrictions and infringements will inevitably trigger “massive political resistance.”
Some parties will find arguments against strict climate protection policies if the latter lead to a significant increase in energy prices or to restrictions of personal freedom or ownership rights. And let us not fool ourselves: these parties will find voter support. At the EU level, there will be major conflicts about distribution, which may contribute to (further) divisions within the bloc. Are we ready to deal with this polarisation?
Below are excerpts of Eric Heymann’s (Deutsche Bank Research) analysis.
A certain degree of eco-dictatorship will be necessary
The impact of the current climate policy on people’s everyday lives is still quite abstract and acceptable for many households. Climate policy comes in the form of higher taxes and fees on energy, which make heating and mobility more expensive. Some countries have set minimum energy efficiency standards for buildings or similar rules in other areas. However, climate policy does not determine our lives. We take key consumption decisions, for example whether we travel at all, how much we travel and which means of transport we use, whether we live in a large house or a small apartment and how we heat our homes, how many electronic devices we have and how intensely we use them or how much meat and exotic fruit we eat. These decisions tend to be made on the basis of our income, not on climate considerations.
If we really want to achieve climate neutrality, we need to change our behaviour in all these areas of life. This is simply because there are no adequate cost-effective technologies yet to allow us to maintain our living standards in a carbon-neutral way. That means that carbon prices will have to rise considerably in order to nudge people to change their behaviour. Another (or perhaps supplementary) option is to tighten regulatory law considerably. I know that “ecodictatorship” is a nasty word. But we may have to ask ourselves the question whether and to what extent we may be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship (in the form of regulatory law) in order to move towards climate neutrality. Here is an example: What should we do if property owners do not want to turn their houses into zero-emission buildings; if they do not have the financial means to do so; if doing so is not possible for technical reasons or if the related investments do not pay off?