Discover more from A Lily Bit
The Connection Between Covid-19 and Climate Change
Behind nearly every WEF climate and pandemic proposal is a technocratic solution facilitating the unelected globalists’ Great Reset Agenda.
When the COVID-19 pandemic emerged, the World Economic Forum (WEF) adopted many of the objectives it had sought to attain in the context of climate change, such as reducing the use of automobiles and air travel, controlling the narrative, and implementing digital surveillance for tracking and tracing. As a result, the distinctions between the desired outcomes for these two issues became nearly imperceptible.
“While for a pandemic, a majority of citizens will tend to agree with the necessity to impose coercive measures, they will resist constraining policies in the case of environmental risks where the evidence can be disputed” — COVID-19: The Great Reset, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2020.
To address both climate change and the pandemic, the architects of the Great Reset are advocating for a set of measures, including universal digital identification, programmable digital currencies, extensive data collection and surveillance, monitoring of personal carbon footprints, evaluation of corporate Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, reduced meat consumption, restricted travel and mobility, censorship, and the convergence of business and government interests.
Climate change was reemerging as a prominent issue, particularly with the weakening of the COVID-19 control narrative, evident in the inclusion of 31 sessions exclusively dedicated to “climate and environment” during this year's WEF annual conference.
Just as with COVID-19, the implementation, tracking, and enforcement of climate change solutions require the integration of new technologies from the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
“Some leaders and decision-makers who were already at the forefront of the fight against climate change may want to take advantage of the shock inflicted by the pandemic to implement long-lasting and wider environmental changes. They will, in effect, make ‘good use’ of the pandemic by not letting the crisis go to waste […] If, in the post-pandemic era, we decide to resume our lives just as before (by driving the same cars, by flying to the same destinations, by eating the same things, by heating our house the same way, and so on), the COVID-19 crisis will have gone to waste as far as climate policies are concerned” — COVID-19: The Great Reset, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2020.
The unelected globalists advocate that combating climate change involves discontinuing the use of fossil fuels and achieving net-zero carbon emissions. They also emphasize the importance of establishing the necessary technological infrastructure for monitoring, measuring, and enforcing compliance. The question remains whether these recommendations will have a significant impact on extreme weather events or succeed in halting global warming by the 2030s and 2050s.
What has been observed is the World Economic Forum seizing the opportunity to leverage the COVID-19 crisis as a platform for advancing their Great Reset agenda, a plan that has been in development for many years.
Klaus Schwab, the WEF's founder, whose viewpoints are referenced throughout this article, detailed the significant emphasis on climate action within the Great Reset agenda in his book “Covid-19: The Great Reset” (which I have analyzed here).
This is an illustration of how unelected globalists at the WEF are employing the issue of climate change to promote the same technocratic concepts they introduced during the pandemic in support of their Great Reset initiative.
Vaccine Passports Paved the Way for Digital Identities
The World Economic Forum claims that “millions of individuals are experiencing displacement due to climate change.” The WEF suggests that the Fourth Industrial Revolution will provide a means to identify and assist these “climate refugees” through digital identities.
According to Maram Ahmed, a researcher at the University of London, “Climate-induced displacement and migration are poised to become the most significant challenge of our time,” as stated in a WEF Agenda blog post from June 2019.
Tetsuji Ida, a journalist with Kyodo News, contends in another article from June 2021 that “climate migrants are the overlooked victims of the world.”
“The current refugee crisis and the unique needs of these displaced individuals highlight the limitations of – and potential for – digital identity” — WEF White paper, 2018.
Drawing a parallel, a WEF white paper, dated January 2018, addressing digital identification, observes that “sixty-five million people, a larger number than ever before in history, are currently displaced due to conflict, drought, famine, and various other factors. The ongoing refugee crisis and the distinct requirements of these displaced populations underscore both the constraints and possibilities associated with digital identity.”
The shift from climate change to COVID-19, along with the introduction of vaccination passports, accelerated the momentum behind the adoption of digital identity.
“One silver lining of the pandemic is that it has shown how quickly we can make radical changes to our lifestyles” — Klaus Schwab, Now is the Time for a Great Reset, 2020.
“The World Economic Forum is supporting the development and launch of CommonPass, an initiative which aims to develop a global, interoperable framework to safely restore cross-border travel to pre-pandemic levels” — World Economic Forum, October 2020.
Unelected global leaders have already envisaged a future where digital identification becomes the standard, encompassing various aspects of society, whether it's related to COVID-19 or environmental concerns, such as proving refugee status or confirming health conditions.
To address the challenges stemming from climate change-induced mass internal migration, which has prompted many Bangladeshis to engage in seasonal migration, Dakota Gruener, a contributor to the WEF blog and former member of the Gates-backed GAVI vaccine alliance (launched at WEF 2000), co-authored a piece in 2019 that articulated this vision.
The Good Health Pass Collective, a project dedicated to implementing digital identity through “vaccine passports,” is managed by ID2020, a nonprofit organization of which GAVI is a founding member.
“Our risk for infectious diseases is increasing because of climate change” — Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Climate change is predicted to hasten and widen the spread of illnesses. According to Arthur Wyns, a climate researcher for the WHO, in a blog post titled, “How our Responses to Climate Change and the Coronavirus Are Linked”, one of the health shocks that "have a strong climate change signature" is the "growing range and spread of vector-borne illnesses." In a similar vein, the CDC asserts that "climate change is raising our risk for infectious illnesses."
The widespread response to the COVID-19 pandemic, endorsed by unelected global leaders and public-private partnerships, predominantly centered on mass vaccination as a universal solution. Nevertheless, residents are required to furnish evidence of their health status to either encourage or enforce compliance as a prerequisite for accessing various products and services.
These [vaccine] passports innately serve as a form of digital identity” — WEF Insight Report, February 2022.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) disclosed the CommonPass project's efforts to create a vaccination passport back in October 2020. Although the notice has since been taken down from the WEF website, an archived copy can still be accessed here.
The global implications of vaccination passports have already been witnessed. Given that the vaccines' effectiveness in halting transmission has not been conclusively proven, and people are still falling ill even after multiple doses, these passports have not effectively curbed the spread of COVID-19.
Vaccine passports, along with the overbearing mandates and regulations enforced by governments, are not primarily concerned with public health; rather, they are aimed at exerting social control. Vaccine passports were employed as a pretext to introduce digital identification through a less conspicuous route.
The underlying technological infrastructure was laid to enable another method of comprehensive economic and social control, namely programmable digital currencies, which are also being advanced within the context of the climate agenda.
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) for Ensuring Adherence
Unaccountable global leaders are introducing digital carbon currency as an additional Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) measure to address climate change, leveraging the existing framework for digital identities.
EcoSphere+ CEO Lisa Walker emphasized in a WEF blog post from September 2017 that “Carbon credits are an ideal contender for digital currency due to their data-driven nature, reliance on multiple approval processes, and detachment from the physical effects they represent.”
A proposed digital currency known as “carbon credits” would provide incentives to users for “environmentally friendly” actions, such as the installation of solar panels or tree planting.
As Chainlink Labs CMO Adelyn Zhou highlights in a WEF blog post from June 2021, “In the event that an individual successfully triggers a reforestation smart contract, they could receive compensation in the form of tokenized carbon credits, which could subsequently be sold to charitable organizations, crowdfunding initiatives, or even companies aiming to demonstrate their eco-friendly efforts.”
However, Zhou also points out that within the same digital carbon currency program, individuals who do not engage in environmentally beneficial actions may also face consequences: “Through the utilization of smart contracts linked to real-world data, individuals can automatically receive rewards or penalties based on the environmental impact of their consumption habits, fostering behavioral changes that education alone might not achieve.”
Once more, the goal of technocratic methods is to influence human behavior by force or financial incentives.
“Consumers can automatically receive payments or penalties based on the impact of their consumption habits” — WEF Agenda blog, 2017.
The push for digital currencies evolved from climate credits to Central Bank Digital Currencies, given that the technological groundwork for digital identity was already laid through vaccination passports implemented during the pandemic. Utilizing digital currency necessitates the possession of a digital identity.
Both carbon credits and CBDCs are programmable, enabling the regulation of who has the privilege to make specific purchases and who does not. Once more, this appears reminiscent of the Chinese Communist Party's social credit system, which involves incentivizing or penalizing individuals based on continuous monitoring of their consumption patterns to influence their conduct. Indeed, propaganda promoting the superiority of the Chinese system has already been initiated with Nancy Pelosi famously dubbing China as the “freest society in the world.”
From COVID-19 Contact Tracing to Carbon Footprint Tracking
The unelected global leaders within the WEF expressed particular enthusiasm for the shifts in behavior resulting from government-mandated lockdowns during the pandemic. These measures, while having a limited impact on carbon emissions, significantly restricted fundamental human rights.
Once again, the discourse of unelected global leaders regarding COVID-19 closely parallels their language on the subject of climate change.
“Commuting less, working remotely a bit more, bicycling and walking instead of driving to keep the air of our cities as clean as it was during the lockdowns, vacationing nearer to home: all these, if aggregated at scale, could lead to a sustained reduction in carbon emissions” — COVID-19: The Great Reset, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2020.
In the near future, you might face compelled reductions in consumption, the inability to take vacations, or the necessity to rely on walking for transportation due to the unaffordability of many things. This is particularly evident considering how lockdowns led to business closures, depleted savings, and triggered one of the most significant wealth shifts from the middle class to the upper echelons in human history.
The well-known catchphrase, “You'll own nothing and be happy,” is beginning to acquire a clearer meaning, at least in its initial part.
Lockdowns and vaccine passports restricted people's ability to travel freely and participate in various aspects of society, actions that contravened the principles outlined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. However, the stringent measures enacted by governments were commended as a positive move.
Global leaders are still urging individuals to persist in behaviors akin to those during lockdowns, such as reducing spending, choosing local vacations, and favoring walking over driving, although this approach is far from constituting a “viable decarbonization strategy.”
“Even unprecedented and Draconian lockdowns with a third of the world population confined to their homes for more than a month came nowhere near to being a viable decarbonization strategy because, even so, the world economy kept emitting large amounts of carbon dioxide” — COVID-19: The Great Reset, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2020.
In their book Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret argue that “small individual actions,” such as reducing consumption and limiting travel, pale in comparison to the emissions generated by major contributors like electricity, agriculture, and industry, the so-called “big-ticket emitters,” which continued to operate even during lockdowns.
Unelected technocrats aspire to track and evaluate everyone's health and carbon footprint everywhere they go. They have Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria for corporations and initiatives that affect farmers.
Soon, individual carbon footprint monitoring for purchases and movement may become essential to oversee and enforce compliance with globalist climate change agendas aimed at reducing carbon emissions.
For corporations, the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) score can either be an advantage or a liability depending on their industry and the nature of their operations. Defense contractors may receive positive scores on the social dimension as long as they align with specific objectives, while “big-ticket emitters” could face penalties for their environmental practices but earn recognition for their social justice initiatives.
“The crisis will have created, or reinforced, an acute sense of responsibility and urgency on most issues pertaining to ESG strategies – the most important being climate change” — COVID-19: The Great Reset, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2020.
In the effort to decrease carbon emissions, digital tools such as ESG, personal carbon footprint trackers, and vaccine passports are designed to motivate or compel individuals to alter their behavior by limiting their mobility and consumption of environmentally harmful energy sources and food items, such as fossil fuels and meat.
Similarly, akin to the approach taken with COVID-19, there is a substantial drive to suppress “misinformation” related to climate change, as advocated by the established institutions.
Weaponizing Public Health
Melvin Sanicas, a physician and program officer at the Gates Foundation, authored a blog post for the World Economic Forum (WEF) three years before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, where he cautioned against the spread of false information concerning both climate change and vaccine-related narratives.
Sanicas underscored that vaccine safety and climate change have been prime targets for misinformation in the twenty-first century. He further noted that “climate-change deniers have often disregarded substantial scientific evidence provided by experts.”
Moreover, he pointed out that “For decades, skeptical anti-vaccine groups have been striving to erode public confidence in vaccines through mistrust and misinformation that often prioritizes emotional appeals over concrete evidence.”
“Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation” — Event 201 Coronavirus Pandemic Simulation, October 2019
In an exercise called Event 201, conducted in October 2019, the World Economic Forum (WEF), the Gates Foundation, and John Hopkins University simulated a coronavirus outbreak. During the simulation, they urged governments and social media companies to take measures against what they considered to be “misinformation.”
One of the recommendations arising from Event 201 stressed that “governments should work in conjunction with traditional and social media companies to assess and formulate rapid responses to combat misinformation.”
In March 2020, the World Health Organization officially declared COVID-19 as a pandemic, occurring a few months after Event 201. Coincidentally, major digital platforms like Twitter and YouTube promptly began to restrict any content that deviated from WHO recommendations. Furthermore, they actively suppressed and countered any inquiries regarding the virus's potential origin in a Wuhan, China facility.
“We don’t monetize any kind of climate change material, so there’s no incentive for you to keep publishing that material that is propagating something that is generally understood as not accurate information. […] If you are dealing with a sensitive subject like news, health, science, we are going to make sure that what we’re recommending is coming from a trusted, well-known publisher that can be reliable” — WEF 2022, Davos – Susan Diane Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube about misinformation.
At the heart of the Great Reset agenda lies the pursuit of narrative control, whether in the context of COVID-19 or climate change.
As stated in a 2015 blog post from the World Bank author on the World Economic Forum (WEF) website, “In the struggle to capture the beliefs and sentiments of people, narrative will consistently surpass data in its capacity to shape human perception and spur human behavior.”
“In the battle for hearts and minds of human beings, narrative will consistently outperform data in its ability to influence human thinking and motivate human action” — WEF Agenda, 2015
The Great Narrative: Controlling Conversations on Critical Issues
With the introduction of the “Great Narrative Initiative” by the WEF in November 2021, the aspiration to exert control over COVID-19 and climate change discussions escalated significantly.
The Great Narrative represents an endeavor to employ storytelling as a means to legitimize the technocratic transformation of society and the global economy. It is also set to fill the void created by the CIA’s efforts to end the grand narratives of the past, which effectively created ‘wokeism’.
This narrative of the Great Reset also delves into how the goals of unaccountable global leaders could be advanced by influencing our behaviors, perceptions, and the world as we know it.
“The grand narrative has lost its credibility, regardless of what mode of unification it uses, regardless of whether it is a speculative narrative or a narrative of emancipation” — Jean-Francois Lyotard, “The Post Modern Condition: A Report on Knowledge” (1979)
A “big story” or “metanarrative,” a term coined by the French philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard, serves to validate power, authority, and established social norms—precisely what the Great Reset aims to achieve.
Authoritarian figures employ grand narratives to underpin their claims to authority, asserting that their knowledge and comprehension align with a universal truth.
Simultaneously, these authoritarians employ these overarching narratives in their “effort to reinterpret alternative perspectives in their own terms and quell any dissent against their own proclamations.”
“The abundance of fake news and its ability to magnify and manipulate polarization hinders our ability to deal successfully with the momentous collective action problems that humanity faces. […] The difference between ‘good governments’ and ‘bad governments’ will be measured by how fast they implement the transition to net-zero while providing concomitantly a welfare policy that makes societies fairer and more prosperous” — The Great Narrative, Klaus Schwab & Thierry Malleret, 2022
Many individuals share the view that safeguarding the environment is a positive endeavor for humanity, and I concur.
However, the COVID-19 and climate policy propositions of the World Economic Forum and other globalist organizations are leading to an increase in centralized control over various aspects of society, the economy, individuals' mobility, purchasing power, and energy consumption.
Proponents of the Great Reset anticipate that if everyone embraces these policies, the world will become a more resilient, sustainable, and equitable place to live by the 2030s and 2050s.
Yet, until their assertions are validated or disproven, the weight of these extensive measures, inspired by the Great Reset and Build Back Better initiatives, which have been impacting the quality of life for many private citizens, is being borne by individuals like you and me.
Under the guise of promoting public health and environmental well-being, fundamental human rights are being infringed upon, while fuel prices surge, food costs increase, and housing expenses rise. However, it was all to be expected since the formal introduction of the Great Reset three years ago.
During the Great Narrative gathering organized by the World Economic Forum, a participant conveyed a message that resonates with the concept of prioritizing global interests over individual or national concerns: “I would urge world leaders to momentarily set aside personal interests, or even the interests of their own countries, and partake in a collective narrative that aspires to shape a superior future for the entire world.”
In essence, the appeal here seems to advocate for adherence to a narrative designed to advance the agenda of technocratic control over society and the global economy. This, however, raises questions about whether these directives align with the objectives for which these leaders were elected by their constituents. It emphasizes the need to consider the balance between global initiatives and the responsibilities leaders hold to serve the interests and expectations of their citizens.
In conclusion, this sentiment highlights the challenge faced by global leaders as they navigate the fine line between broader global interests and the specific mandates for which they were elected. It underscores the imperative for transparency and accountability in policy decisions that have the potential to impact societies on a worldwide scale.
The true power to shape this world has always lain in your hands. Choose well!
If you found the information provided insightful, and believe that independent journalism should be supported, please consider becoming a paid subscriber for more in-depth insights on various topics.
If you don’t want to commit to a paid subscription but still wish to support me, you can donate an amount you choose here. Most of my content is free to read, so it is greatly appreciated. Thank you!
If you do not wish to make a contribution of any kind, please leave at least a like. It costs you nothing and helps others see this post. Thank You :)