The ‘Great Reset’: Rule by Unelected ‘Experts’

Written by Marc Morano on October 13, 2020. Posted in Current News

C.S. Lewis: “I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in.”

Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1961: “We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

Eisenhower: “A government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity” and “the prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever-present and is gravely to be regarded.”

The World Economic Forum has called for “a Great Reset of capitalism” due to COVID and to help fight climate change. Klaus Schwab said the virus has given us an “opportunity” to pursue “equality & sustainability.”  – “The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions,” Schwab explained.

Thomas Sowell: “Experts are often called in, not to provide factual information or dispassionate analysis for the purpose of decision-making by responsible officials, but to give political cover for decisions already made and based on other considerations entirely.”

“A flu d’état.” “A takeover of our supposedly democratic political process by unelected & unaccountable administrative state medical bureaucrats.”

Peter Hitchens: “All the crudest weapons of despotism, the curfew, the presumption of guilt and the power of arbitrary arrest, are taking shape in the midst of what used to be a free country.”

By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot – October 13, 2020 11:18 AM

Climate Depot Special Report

The COVID-19 lockdowns and suspension of liberties have only emboldened climate campaigners to achieve their progressive vision of having “the masses” lives planned, monitored, and  controlled for their “safety” — all in the name of “science.” The very real threat of oppressive rule by unelected experts in government is now threatening to engulf the world due to the ongoing COVID lockdowns and “phased reopenings.”

‘Complaint’ public is a grave danger to liberty

“If one lesson from the pandemic is that taking serious action in a timely manner is key – then shouldn’t this also be true in terms of climate change?” asked the Speaker of the House of Commons Sir Lindsay Hoyle at G7 Speakers’ Meeting in 2020.

Speaker Hoyle was amazed at how “compliant” the public was in accepting COVID lockdowns “No-one could ever imagine that we would be wearing masks so readily and that we would all be so compliant,” he said. “People were prepared to accept limitations on personal choice and lifestyle – for the good of their own family and friends.”

Hoyle claimed that the climate “tragedy is that unlike the pandemic, the climate crisis is not simply an external threat, but one in which we have had a clear hand”. He said: “In other words, it seems that we have brought this on ourselves. While this is again sobering, surely, it is in our hands to rescue it, if we have got the will to do it?”

The “will to do it” means the public has to prepare for climate lockdowns since they were so “compliant” in accepting the COVID lockdowns. A compliant public and ambition politicians and bureaucrats are a grave threat to liberty. The COVID lockdowns are being hailed by climate activists across the spectrum as a model for the coming climate lockdowns.

[See Full April 2020 Climate Depot Special Report:

‘Fantastic’ for the climate: Activists See Coronavirus Lockdowns As A Dress Rehearsal for ‘Climate Emergency’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: “If you like living under the coronavirus fears and government-mandated lockdowns, then you’ll love living your life under a ‘climate emergency’.”]

Former Secretary of State John Kerry noted that “the parallels [between COVID-19 and climate change] are screaming at us, both positive and negative.”

“You could just as easily replace the words climate change with COVID-19; it is truly the tale of two pandemics deferred, denied, and distorted, one with catastrophic consequences, the other with even greater risk if we don’t reverse course,” Kerry said.

French President Emmanuel Macron while warning citizens to stay confined to their homes during COVID-19 lockdown, urged: “We must all limit the number of people with who we’re in contact with every single day. Scientists say so.”

And the reason? Because “scientists say so.”

COVID-19(84)

The COVID lockdowns and the attempt to impose a Green New Deal upon the USA herald another step into what is being called “scientism” that is leading us to a technocracy. “Technocracy” can be defined as the public’s acquiesce to a governing body composed of an elite cadre of unelected technical experts who are positioned to call the shots and manage society.

“The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste of what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioral control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state,” German Economic Professor Antony P. Mueller explained in August 2020.

“This coming technocracy involves close cooperation between the heads of the digital industry and of governments. With programs such as guaranteed minimum income and healthcare for all, the new kind of governance combines strict societal control with the promise of comprehensive social justice,” Mueller wrote.

“Earlier totalitarian regimes needed mass executions and concentration camps to maintain their power. Now, with the help of new technologies, it is believed, dissenters can easily be identified and marginalized. The nonconformists will be silenced by disqualifying divergent opinions as morally despicable,” Mueller detailed.

Mueller added, “Under the order envisioned by the Great Reset, the advancement of technology is not meant to serve the improvement of the conditions of the people but to submit the individual to the tyranny of a technocratic state. ‘The experts know better’ is the justification.”

As C.S. Lewis warned decades ago: “I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in.”

Lewis explained: “I dread specialists in power because they are specialists speaking outside their special subjects. Let scientists tell us about sciences. But government involves questions about the good for man, and justice, and what things are worth having at what price; and on these a scientific training gives a man’s opinion no added value.”

Teen school skipper Greta Thunberg has urged the world to “start listening to the science” and “unite behind the science.” 

But just which scientists and what “science” should we be listening to? In the age of COVID lockdowns and a pending Green New Deal, author Thomas Sowell’s insights are more valuable than ever. “Experts are often called in, not to provide factual information or dispassionate analysis for the purpose of decision-making by responsible officials, but to give political cover for decisions already made and based on other considerations entirely,” Sowell wrote.

Or another name for it is: Science manipulated to support preconceived policies.

Eisenhower’s Technocracy Warning

We were warned about being ruled over by scientists and experts. In President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Farewell Address in 1961, he bluntly warned that “public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”

Eisenhower explained that “a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity” and “the prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever-present and is gravely to be regarded.”

“We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite,” Eisenhower added.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower

President Eisenhower continued: “Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.”

2020 became the year that Eisenhower’s warning about a “scientific-technological elite” became a very obvious reality in America. COVID and climate morphed into two sides of the same coin as COVID lockdowns achieved many of the same goals the climate movement has strived for: central planning, loss of individual freedom, economic pain, obedience to authority, and weakened national sovereignty – all happening in a virtual blink of the eye.

‘A flu d’état”

Health care journalist Peter Barry Chowka was blunt, calling the COVID/Climate “solution” linkage “a flu d’état.” “A takeover of our supposedly democratic political process by unelected & unaccountable administrative state medical bureaucrats,” Chowka warned, noting that all of the COVID solutions were virtually the same as the Green New Deal “solutions” to the purported climate “crisis.”

“Overnight, our society is doing what radical leftist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and her fellow Green New Deal fanatics have demanded: An almost total end to air travel; personal automobile travel down to a trickle; promises of free health care for all quickly becoming the new status quo; and the ability of people to sit at home without working and receive a paycheck from the government. The Democrats want that to continue indefinitely,” Chowka wrote.

‘Lab coats run the world’

The U.S. is entering into a new phase where the “danger of letting lab coats run the world” is palpable. “It should be clear by now that most of the world’s leaders were stampeded over the lockdown cliff like so many lemmings.  What caused the stampede is even more remarkable: a tiny coterie of obscure, soft-spoken epidemiologists in white lab coats playing with numbers…the aim was to cause panic,” wrote Bill Dunne in American Thinker. 

“We were plunged into the grandest of experiments in authoritarian paternalism, whereby we plebeians — i.e., those without government jobs — are deemed incompetent to judge if it’s safe to take a dip in the ocean or a walk in the woods.  We can, though, crowd into a Walmart or the local supermarket,” Dunne wrote.

Former UK Supreme Court Judge Lord Sumption explained this well in 2020: “Do we really want to be the kind of society where basic freedoms are conditional on the decisions of politicians in thrall to scientists and statisticians? Where human beings are just tools of public policy?” Sumption asked.

“To say that life is priceless and nothing else counts is just empty rhetoric…There is more to life than the avoidance of death,” he added. “To say that there are no limits is the stuff of tyrants. Every despot who ever lived thought that he was coercing his subjects for their own good or that of society at large,” he added.

“A society in which the Government can confine most of the population without controversy is not one in which civilized people would want to live, regardless of their answers to these questions. Is it worth it?” Sumption explained adding, “The lockdown is, without doubt, the greatest interference with personal liberty in our history.”

Epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski also slammed the COVID lockdowns and ripped the “scientific studies” funded to support government policy.

“Shutting down schools, driving the economy against the wall – there was no reason for it,” Wittkowski explained in a YouTube video. For his honesty, Wittkowski was promptly banned from YouTube as were almost all lockdown dissenters on social media platforms.

“Governments did not have an open discussion, including economists, biologists, and epidemiologists, to hear different voices. In Britain, it was the voice of one person – Neil Ferguson – who has a history of coming up with projections that are a bit odd. The government did not convene a meeting with people who have different ideas, different projections, to discuss his projection,” Wittkowski said.

Echoing the words of President Eisenhower in 1961, Wittkowski said:

“They have the scientists on their side that depend on government funding. One scientist in Germany just got $500 million from the government, because he always says what the government wants to hear. Scientists are in a very strange situation. They now depend on government funding, which is a trend that has developed over the past 40 years. Before that, when you were a professor at a university, you had your salary and you had your freedom. Now, the university gives you a desk and access to the library. And then you have to ask for government money and write grant applications. If you are known to criticize the government, what does that do to your chance of getting funded? It creates a huge conflict of interest.”

Or another name for it is: Science manipulated to support preconceived policies.

Eisenhower has been proven correct. The public health bureaucracy and the climate community have become political lobbying organizations and they are using “the science” to support the preferred policies. No researcher looking for government-funded research money would put their name on a study that was against the politically accepted views on COVID or climate.

In 2020, the UN IPCC chief Hoesung Lee admitted — while discussing how “the COVID-19 pandemic tells us that everything is connected” — that the UN climate panel is all about using science to lobby for political goals. “Our [IPCC] assessment findings will strengthen the political will of the policymakers for immediate and concrete actions,” Lee said on June 1, 2020. Or another name for it is: Bending science to support the policy. [Also see:Watch: Gore admits UN IPCC report was ‘torqued up’ to promote political action – ‘How else do they get the attention of policy-makers around the world?’]

Is ‘Science’ becoming a liberal conspiracy?!

A bumper sticker promoted by progressives reads: “Science is not a liberal conspiracy.”

 Marc Morano in 2019 interview: “Oh yes, it is. Yes, it can be and much of science is. Here is where that bumper sticker is wrong. When the regulatory state — the Environmental Protection Agency, the United Nations, the U.S. federal government, the UN, the EU — when they want to regulate, they look for justifications — that’s the natural state of any government. So essentially the regulatory state is using the climate scare now to achieve its ends. The science must support the government policy and the network of government and academic funding, peer-pressure is designed to ensure ‘the science’ ends up supporting the politicians’ favored policy. Any dissenters have to face intimidation and censorship.”

Chinafication of the West

German Economic Professor Antony P. Mueller explained how China’s methods are being employed in Western nations. “This new world order of digital tyranny comes with a comprehensive social credit system. The People’s Republic of China is the pioneer of this method of surveillance and control of individuals, corporations, and sociopolitical entities,” Mueller wrote.

“It is, in short, a type of social engineering which is the opposite of a spontaneous order or of development. Like the mechanical engineer with a machine, the social engineer—or technocrat—treats society as an object. Different from the brutal suppressions by the totalitarianism of earlier times, the modern social engineer will try to make the social machine work on its own according to the design,” Mueller analyzed. [Also see:UN climate chief Christiana Figueres steps down – Lamented U.S. democracy as ‘very detrimental’ – Sought ‘centralized transformation’ – Lauded one-party ruled China for ‘doing it right’ on climate& 

DELUSIONAL NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE GOES FULL POLITICAL & FASCIST – CALLS FOR TRUMP TO BE VOTED OUT & PRAISES CHINA’S LOCKDOWN’S AS ‘EFFECTIVE” ]

UK columnist Peter Hitchens warned about the lockdowns from the onset. Lockdowns are “the biggest state takeover of life and work ever attempted by non-Communists,” Hitchens wrote 

“All the crudest weapons of despotism, the curfew, the presumption of guilt and the power of arbitrary arrest, are taking shape in the midst of what used to be a free country,” Hitchens wrote about the COVID lockdowns.

“Even Vladimir Putin might hesitate before doing anything so blatant frightening series of restrictions on ancient liberties and vast increases in police and state powers,” Hitchens explained. But he lamented that the UK citizens were so willing to “surrender centuries-old liberties in an afternoon” and “seem to despise our ancient hard-bought freedom and actually want to rush into the warm, firm arms of Big Brother.”

“Imagine, police officers, forcing you to be screened for a disease, and locking you up for 48 hours if you object. Is this China or Britain?” Hitchens added. “How long before we need passes to go out in the streets, as in any other banana republic?” he asked.

Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs rejected the entire approach to COVID using lockdowns and mask mandates. “Raise your hand if you’re tired of hearing from ‘experts,’”, Briggs wrote. “Stay Inside Or Die!” Briggs mocked, while noting that “Ver are your paperz! comes to the good ol’ USA.”

Former Prime Minister of the UK Gordon Brown called on world leaders to create “a temporary form of global government” to fight the coronavirus outbreak. “This is not something that can be dealt with in one country,” Brown said. “There has to be a coordinated global response.”

Briggs replied: “Brown wants international organizations like the WHO and the UN to be given executive powers that would supersede national sovereignty as part of a new system overseen by world leaders and health experts.” By ‘temporary’ Brown likely meant ‘in perpetuity.’ But seriously, who could have figured elites would use a crisis like this to increase their power?”

Unelected health bureaucrats preside over the U.S. economy

The Trump administration initially allowed the health bureaucracy and their failed COVID models to dictate the national policy narrative which led to the lockdowns. Trump economic advisor Larry Kudlow said in April 2020 that it is “up to the health people” when the economy would reopen.

“How much longer? I don’t really want to forecast. That is up to the health people.,” Kudlow said on Fox News.

Joe Biden said he would listen to the scientists and go along with a second national lockdown to fight COVID. “Asked specifically whether he’d push to shutter economic activity if scientists said it was necessary, Biden replied: ‘I would shut it down,” ABC News reported. 

The “listen to the science” narrative has been a very effective strategy because it has bullied Republican politicians, conservatives, and many dissenting scientists into silence or submissiveness when it comes to challenging COVID lockdown or climate change claims. If you accept “the science” determines whether or not you are a good person, a smart person, or an evil science denier who deserves to be jailed and silenced according to our mainstream media, government officials, academia, and social media censors.

This “listen to the science” litmus test for climate change will be used to bully politicians into climate and COVID-19 policies.

‘Mass scale bombing of one’s own economy’

As the controversy over the COVID lockdowns grew, questions about the cost/benefit of lockdowns were raised.

Economist Sanjeev Sabhlok, resigned from his job in the Department of Treasury and Finance in Victoria Australia in September 2020 “to protest the outrageous violations of liberty” due to the COVID lockdowns. “Australia’s bureaucracy has performed as badly as the world’s worst bureaucracy during this pandemic. No one offered any independent advice. Comprehensive groupthink and incompetence have prevailed,” he explained. Scientists and politicians are “panting like a mad monster in the excitement of their total power over the people,” he added.

“This is like a mass scale bombing of one’s own economy,” Sabhlok said, referring to lockdowns and phased reopenings. Many UN climate supporters and Green New Deal proponents have endorsed the concept of “planned recessions” and economic “degrowth” for climate change. The COVID lockdowns achieved those goals almost overnight.

“The problem with science today is that it is effectively just another branch of government,” Sabhlok explained.

‘A triumph of the precautionary principle’

“25 million Americans became unemployed in 5 weeks…Many people want this insanity to continue. As far as I know, it has never happened in the history of civilizations that the bulk of a large enough nation, let alone the world, was kept at home for several months,” Former Harvard University Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl wrote. 

“The precautionary principle has only been promoted as a meme since the 1970s when it appeared as the ‘Vorsorgeprinzip’ in German discussions about deforestation and sea pollution. The precautionary principle is an extremely dangerous fallacy whose purpose is to make an absolutely irrational assumption – namely that some risks must be considered infinitely more critical than all other risks – sound more intelligent or maybe even scientific. You are ‘obliged’ to do even things that actually make the public health conditions worse,” Motl added.

Sabhlok believes Western nations need to build in civil liberty protections against future lockdowns. “This pandemic should lead to the rewriting of all textbooks in epidemiology and should lead to a law (like they have in Sweden) that governments must require court orders for each individual, to restrain them at home for quarantine or lockdown,” Sabhlok wrote.

Steve Milloy of JunkScience.com warned that the government response and suspension of liberty during COVID revealed “the incompetent, corrupt and politicized public health bureaucracy…wants to create a precedent for permanent control of society via ‘public health.’”

“As with education, conservatives abandoned public health as a profession decades ago. I don’t know any conservatives with expertise in public health. We are now paying the price,” Milloy wrote. 

“We have ceded the field (of public health) to leftists who have only one tool — government crackdown. All public health bureaucrats are Democrats and worse sorts of leftists,” Milloy wrote. “We can still ‘social distance’ without devolving into a police state or destroying the economy.”

COVID and Climate Policy Following the Same Playbook

“Climate and COVID share the commonality of government control. From electric car and fuel efficiency mandates to the entire economy busting Green New Deal, the ‘benevolent’ government seeks to control all aspects of our lives,” wrote Denver-based physician Dr. Brian C. Joondeph. 

“One can see numerous parallels between COVID and climate policy. Both create fear, to a frenzy level, of the world ending, massive death and destruction, all due to a warming planet or an aggressive flu virus,” he explained. “Question the dogma of either the virus or climate movement and prepare to have your life, if not disrupted, then ruined. There is only one politically correct viewpoint on both issues.”

Read more at www.climatedepot.com

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.