Originally posted on Spectator Australia
The breakdown of the nation-state has been instrumental in global institutions growing their power and influence.
How did this breakdown occur?
There have been a combination of factors: weakened nationalism, Woke ideology, decades of leftist institutionalised indoctrination, corporate social responsibility, the prominence of virtue signalling, and reliance on government. Such things primed society for manipulation and control.
The belief in a healthy level of national pride has dwindled away into nothingness. Its remnants have been replaced with a collectivist ideology so profound and effective it has beaten us into submission. It did so by being quietly institutionalised and ingrained into our subconscious.
In the post-Covid world, if a citizen does not demonstrate that they comply with the current common cause, they are automatically assumed to be against it or sympathise with those who refuse to bend the knee.
With the love of country lost, the era of the global elites has begun.
As the World Economic Forum holds their latest seminar in Davos, elites everywhere have reaffirmed their justification for a crackdown on free speech. They have also toyed with ideas of global surveillance on a level not even conceived by Orwell. Meanwhile, the World Health Organisation has convened to lay the foundation for a global treaty that undermines the sovereignty of nations.
Democratic leaders have felt a rush of self-importance so tantalising that the actual people they are there to represent have gotten foggier with every sip of the expensive champagne. Their blurry vision has left democracies around the world unrecognisable.
The global Covid response, spearheaded by the WHO, demonstrated that citizens of the world were largely compliant. With a bit of fear and coaching, they followed the advice of health bureaucrats who imposed often irrational, draconian, invasive, and destructive policies. People went along with the demands largely due to the threat of fines, avoidance of social stigma, and a genuine fear of the virus resulting from relentless, alarmist legacy media coverage.
Those who remained sceptical turned to information from sources such as The British Medical Journal, investigative journalists like Sharri Markson’s What Really Happened in Wuhan, and academics along the lines of Gigi Foster et al’s The Great Covid Panic.
Independent news outlets began to gain traction as the Real Rushkan brought the realities of Melbourne protests to our screens and Joe Rogan interviewed ‘controversial’ figures such as Dr Robert Malone (contributor inventor of mRNA vaccines).
Despite attempts to censor and discount counter-arguments, big tech and government authorities have not yet been able to eradicate their voices. Framing such counter ideas as ‘misinformation’ and a ‘threat to national security and safety’ is how free speech will be suppressed in the near future.
It is behaviour reminiscent of communist societies.
In the space of less than two years, Australian society has voluntarily commenced the shift from libertarianism to totalitarianism. This was done in the name of a pandemic with a survival rate of 99.5 per cent.
Now we brace for the next phase of the WEF’s global agenda, unashamedly detailed in Klaus Schwab’s book The Great Reset.
As demonstrated in the recent Australian Federal Election, Climate Change is the most important issue for many people and was the deciding factor in the 2022 election. It is the threat of Climate Change that the WEF will use to further their reach into our country.
Modelling and projections of the impact of temperature rise on our planet has so far been inaccurate and exaggerated. Since 1980, scientists have been predicting alarmist outcomes: snow becoming extinct, Antarctica left as the only inhabitable place on Earth, oceans drowning cities, and an array of other apocalyptic predictions that have not come to fruition.
If the climate modelling can’t be trusted and no scientist ever seems prepared to admit to their failings, why do people continue to have faith in the dire predictions? Why did so many people accept the inaccurate modelling of academics such as Imperial College of London’s epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, who stated that Covid was projected to kill at least 40 million people worldwide?
It comes down to fear and how effectively that fear can immerse into the collective psyche.
The exaggerated, disproportionate response to the Covid outbreak has demonstrated how dangerous a blind belief in projected modelling can be. What’s more, the mainstream media betrayed its once sacred duty of holding governments to account. No longer can it be trusted to question, critique, or meaningfully challenge those who are meant to serve the people.
At the WEF forum in Davos, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman has told participants that freedom of speech and other human rights are in need of ‘recalibration’. Inman has denounced the ‘polarisation’ and ‘binary’ feel that is currently playing out online and wants to fix this by curtailing free speech. In other words, it’s far better if we all agree and only receive approved information.
Red flag much?
We all want a healthy, thriving planet but we also want a free, democratic society. Can the two coexist?
Can we achieve better outcomes for the planet and its inhabitants without succumbing to totalitarianism, a growing wealth divide, and destroying the democratic pillars of civilisation?
Can the Enlightenment be born once again?
We need leaders who are willing to defend national sovereignty, resist the influence of global organisations such as the WEF and WHO, and implement policies that honour the lessons from the past and that achieve better outcomes for the planet without sacrificing what liberty we have left.
Australia has not voted for such leaders.
We will therefore be subjected to alarmist policy endorsed by the Teal Independents who represent wealthy constituents. They are busy virtue signalling their climate credentials, comforted in the knowledge that it is not them who will feel the strain of the green policies, but rather the lower income families who lack the privileged position of influence and power.