Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Great Reset

Dr. Robert Malone reacts to Klaus Schwab’s resignation: ‘Resistance is not futile’


6 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Robert Malone M.D.

They will try to become a behind-the-scenes power player once again after Schwab’s rule has ended. It is our job to not let that happen.

The leader and founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, is leaving his executive role and transitioning to a “non-executive chairman role” in 2025.

The truth is that Børge Brende, president of the World Economic Forum, already leads the day-to-day operations. Mr. Brende is a smart, sophisticated Norwegian negotiator with a proven track record, and he is primed to take on an even bigger role in the organization. His involvement in the Bilderberg meetings, including service on their steering committee and various roles within the United Nations, including Chairman of the U.N. Commission of Sustainable Development (2003-04), attest to his ability to build power and influence. He is the natural successor to Klaus’s vaulted title of executive chairman.

Schwab is an excellent cut-out villain cartoon character with his Germanic, authoritarian, and overbearing demeanor. He comes across as a two-dimensional figure, driven by corporatism and power, which makes him an easy target to hate. But the truth is that he has been co-opting and coercing national leaders for decades.

The Malone Institute put together a list of all the WEF Young Leaders Graduates and a list of U.S. politicians who are graduates of the five-year long young leaders program, which can be found here.

Without Schwab at the helm, it will be harder to hold the WEF accountable for its corporatist agenda, that is, a corporate governance of world affairs driven by its globalist mindset.

I predict that under Brende, the WEF will try to garner more power and influence among the “middle powers” (smaller nation-states), as the ability for more regulatory capture within the superpowers is already maxed out. As the middle powers crave a bigger and more important role on the world stage, they are an easy target for the WEF transnational corporations.

Already, the WEF website is courting these players as the next wave of world leaders. The WEF website states: “middle powers and regional groupings are emerging as alternative axes in today’s multipolar world.” By aligning these middle powers with the WEF, the corporatists will increase their wealth and power.

Some of the recent WEF articles on “middle powers” include:

Furthermore, I believe that in the future, the WEF will work to downplay the Davos-man opulent parties, opting instead for more exclusive and private venues – where the press isn’t invited, as is the case with the Bilderberg meetings. The WEF leadership knows that they have a PR problem with the populist (center-right, libertarian, and conservative parties) throughout the world, and Brende will act quickly to try to fix this. It will require a public relations overhaul of Klaus Schwab’s flagship policy agenda, which the WEF calls stakeholder capitalism. This, of course, is just another word for corporatism, whereby there is a fusion of the unelected global leadership and transnational corporations in order for the largest corporations in the world access to enough power to rule the world. For our own good, of course!

The World Economic Forum is a tool for corporate globalists to rule the world through inverse totalitarianism. In effect, our nation, as well as many other nation-states, have been turned upside down while being captured by corporate interests that endorse authoritarian policies – hence “inverted totalitarianism.”

Here we are today. In many ways, the hidden head of this unelected corporatist government structure is now the leadership of the World Economic Forum. This is where the heads of corporations, politicians, and other wealthy elites meet to decide the governing decisions of the world. A trade union of the thousand largest corporations in the world.

Resistance has begun, which is what makes the WEF so scared and defensive. That is why the WEF will have a facelift as soon as Schwab’s rule has ended. The WEF will try to become a behind-the-scenes power player once again. The hand inside the glove. It is our job to not let that happen.

This is why government, corporate interests, and “mainstream” media find alternate social media platforms that they can’t control to be so threatening. They know social media, and the populist parties associated with it, are a threat to the corporatist globalist structure they have built over decades. They are worried that it is in danger of crumbling.

Resistance is not futile.

Reprinted with permission from Robert Malone.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

Trudeau’s ‘Online Harms’ bill so flawed it will never be enforced, Conservative MP says

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner called the Trudeau government’s ‘Online Harms’ bill ‘irredeemable,’ and doubted it will ever be enforced.

A Conservative MP has contested that a Liberal government bill seeking to further clamp down on online speech is so flawed that it will never be able to be enforced nor come to light before the next election.  

“The government is close to the end of its mandate and does not have a lot of public support across the country,” said Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner in the House of Commons last Friday regarding Bill C-63, also known as the “Online Harms Act.” 

Rempel Garner observed that this bill “would not likely become law,” and that she is certain “the regulatory process is not going to happen prior to the next election even if the bill is rammed through.” 

The Online Harms Act, or Bill C-63,was introduced by Justice Minister Arif Virani in the House of Commons in February and was immediately blasted by constitutional experts as troublesome. Put forth under the guise of protecting children from exploitation online, the bill also seeks to expand the scope of “hate speech” prosecutions, and even desires to target such speech retroactively.

The law also calls for the creation of a Digital Safety Commission, a digital safety ombudsperson, and the Digital Safety Office, all tasked with policing internet content.

The bill’s “hate speech” section is accompanied by broad definitions, severe penalties, and dubious tactics, including levying preemptive judgments against people if they are feared to be likely to commit an act of “hate” in the future. 

Details of the new legislation also show the bill could lead to more people jailed for life for “hate crimes” or fined $50,000 and jailed for posts that the government defines as “hate speech” based on gender, race, or other categories. 

Rempel Garner noted that members of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet do not have public support when it comes to Bill C-63. 

“We are presently living under a government that unlawfully invoked the Emergencies Act and that routinely gaslights Canadians who legitimately question efficacy or the morality of its policies as spreading misinformation,” she said, noting that harmful online internet content could be countered by “laws that are already on the books but have not been recently enforced due to a lack of extreme political will.” 

Bill C-63 an ‘Orwellian’ disaster 

In addition to being slammed by a number of Canadian legal experts, a number of high profile personalities domestically and abroad have taken the time to skewer the proposed law.   

Jordan Peterson, one of Canada’s most prominent psychologists, recently accused the bill of attempting to create a pathway to allow for “Orwellian Thought Crime” to become the norm in the nation.  

During Rumble’s first-ever free-speech-centered live event, speakers including Donald Trump Jr. critiqued Trudeau’s Online Harms Act. 

Even billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk remarked that it is “insane” the Trudeau government’s proposed “Online Harms” bill would target internet speech retroactively if it becomes law. 

Continue Reading


School boards need leaders who focus on education not politics

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Michael Zwaagstra

Canada’s largest school board is looking for a new leader. Colleen Russell-Rawlins, director of education of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), will retire this fall.

To say her tenure has been controversial would be an understatement. During her three years in the top job, TDSB doubled down on its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, with tragic consequences. Former TDSB principal Richard Bilkszto took his own life last year after facing relentless harassment from other administrators for challenging DEI orthodoxy during a professional development session.

The harms caused by DEI extend even further. Two years ago, TDSB voted to abolish its merit-based admissions policy at specialized arts and sports schools in the name of “equity.” Parents of students in these schools were not happy about this erosion of standards. After spending years building up these specialized schools, TDSB is now tearing them down.

Add to this the ongoing harassment of Jewish students in TDSB schools and the failure of administrators to crack down on employees who disseminate blatantly anti-Israel propaganda. Expect things to get even worse if trustees replace Russell-Rawlins with someone with a similar mindset and approach.

Unfortunately, this is exactly what will happen if TDSB follows the guidelines provided by the Ontario Public Supervisory Officers’ Association (OPSOA), the organization representing superintendents and directors of education in Ontario.

To be eligible for the position, prospective directors of education must complete the OPSOA’s Supervisory Officer’s Qualification Program. However, this program looks like a woke propogandist’s dream. According to the OPSOA’s website, the qualification program focuses on “anti-oppression, anti-racism, [and] anti—colonialism.” No wonder education directors appear obsessed with these topics.

Education Minister Stephen Lecce has stated that he wants school boards to focus more on academics. He’s even gone so far as to publicly rebuke school boards that get mired in debates over secondary issues such as masks or transgender policy. Lecce is right to be concerned. From 2003 to 2022, Ontario’s PISA math test scores declined from 530 to 495. That’s the equivalent of nearly two years of learning loss. Clearly, something needs to change.

However, things will only change for the better when school boards start hiring education directors who reject DEI ideology and who put academics first. This means choosing men and women who haven’t climbed the career ladder by pushing DEI initiatives.

At a minimum, the province must drop the requirement for education directors to hold supervisory officer’s qualifications. Making the completion of a program replete with DEI buzzwords such as “anti-oppression” and “anti-colonial” mandatory is a surefire way to ensure that education directors will focus on non-academic issues.

Fortunately, the Ford government has started making at least some changes. Back in 2020, Ontario removed the requirement for directors of education to be former teachers. Considering the uselessness of most Bachelor of Education courses, it’s legitimate to ask why anyone would need an education degree to run a school board.

Obviously, none of this means that qualifications don’t matter. The Ford government’s recent announcement that all future teachers must pass a math proficiency test shows that basic competency matters. People working for school boards, particularly those in the top job, must also be familiar with the education system and know how to lead effectively.

It’s important to remember why we have schools in the first place. The purpose of education is to help students master the academic basics, acquire important life skills, and become responsible Canadian citizens—not to indoctrinate students into woke ideology.

Schools can only function if they have the trust of the communities they serve. If parents feel that teachers are ignoring their concerns or are disrespecting their beliefs, they will pull their kids out of the government school system and pursue other educational options. While parents should always have this right, it’s unfortunate when they are forced into it by administrators who are hostile to their values.

TDSB trustees have a real opportunity to make a change for the better by hiring an education director with a track record of putting academics first. Otherwise, TDSB will continue its downward spiral.

Real change starts at the top. Hopefully, TDSB trustees realize the importance of the decision they are about to make and hire the right person for the job.

Continue Reading