If you’re not familiar with a little organization called the “Council For Inclusive Capitalism,” don’t worry, most people have never heard of it. The group was formed at the height of the covid pandemic; as fear instilled by government officials and the media propagated the news feeds, the majority of the public was rather distracted. The CIC is essentially everything that conspiracy theorists have been warning about for years packaged into a single Orwellian entity, complete with dramatic piano music and a mask of humanitarian philanthropy.
The basic root function of the council is to centralize most or all major corporations (corporations with global influence) and join them with governments into a network that places ideology over profit motive. Some people might argue that corporations need to adopt a shared value system instead of simply roaming around like sharks devouring whatever they can sink their teeth into. But who gets to choose the set of values that corporate behemoths follow?
The CIC is a physical body representing the action arm of the ESG concept. It is meant to create incentives and punishments for the business world based on their compliance with the values of globalism and woke socialism, as well as their submission to the climate agenda. I have written about this issue extensively, but my article ‘What Is The “Council For Inclusive Capitalism?” It’s The New World Order’ is probably the best overview of the group and their intentions.
The idea is simple: Bring the majority of corporations into line with the far-left political order. Once this is done, they will force those companies to use their platforms and public exposure to indoctrinate the masses. We have seen this strategy in action over the past several years, with many companies producing a steady stream of products, media content and marketing rife with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion propaganda, not to mention anti-west and anti-conservative propaganda.
These corporations have been so ingrained into the DEI and ESG format that many of them are willing to alienate the majority of their customers and lose vast profits. The last vestiges of free market economics are thus destroyed, because the profit motive has been replaced with a political motive.
Why would companies choose to join with such an organization if they are going to be constantly micromanaged in their operations? It my not be presented to them as a choice, but rather an inevitable requirement. Those who get in on the ground floor get the best seats at the cabal’s table; those who join late might be crushed under the weight of an oppressive socialist bureaucracy.
Then again, the choice could also be voluntary with the promise that corporate leaders will be given extensive governance roles after the “Great Reset” of capitalism which the World Economic Forum discusses so often.
Keep in mind that the only way such companies would be able to survive after being shunned by the majority of the public is if they join with governments, are handed a state sponsored monopoly and are supported by perpetual subsidies. They might even be operating under the assumption that as long as they continue to serve the woke religion they will eventually be rewarded with “too woke to fail” status.
Mussolini once defined the meeting of corporate power with government power as the original design for fascism. The Council for Inclusive Capitalism is the living breathing expression of that authoritarian seed.
The group is headed by Lady Lynn de Rothschild of the notorious Rothschild dynasty, and has expanded to include an army of corporate partners, government partners, UN partners and even the Vatican. A key component to the globalist agenda that is mentioned frequently is Artificial Intelligence (AI), along with its supposed ability to upend everything in our society and economy forever. While the abilities of AI are highly overrated, the elites seem to think it’s some kind of godlike apparatus that will remake the world. Lady Rothschild engaged with the media recently to promote an interesting and revealing argument:
Surprisingly, Rothschild meets some resistance from her interviewers which forces her to make an indirect admission: AI will require a “root and branch reform of the economy,” meaning, free markets have to go and government/corporate partners will have to step in to control everything, for the sake of the populace and the “greater good”, of course. Except it’s all a sham.
AI, much like climate change, is quickly becoming yet another fabricated excuse for global centralization. The CIC along with institutions like the WEF and the UN have been asserting for the past few years that “someone” needs to step in to moderate AI so that no single government abuses its apparently unlimited power. In other words: Problem, Reaction, Solution.
The globalists create a problem out of thin air (AI), then suggest it is a much greater boon (or threat) to humanity than it actually is, then they offer their services as fair and benevolent arbiters of the technology and its effects. Rothschild suggests it herself in the interview when she claims that “capitalists” will have to adjust their priorities over to social causes in the wake of AI. As I stated before, it’s just ESG in another form.
I would point out the tone of disdain in Rothschild’s reaction when free markets are brought into the debate. These people HATE any notion of free markets. Adam Smith’s system was drafted in direct response to the trespasses of mercantilist control. The two constructs are mutually exclusive. You cannot have free markets (or freedom) within a centralized mercantilist empire. You cannot have free markets and socialism within the same economy. And to be clear, the system we have in the US today is NOT a free market system, it is former free market system slowly undermined over time.
Free markets are already fair. Corporate elites interfere with that fairness when they join with governments to rig the system in their favor and gain undue advantages. The inequities Rothschild describes as an excuse for centralization were in fact created by elites like her. The CIC and the Great Reset agenda are nothing more than tools to entrench corporate and elitist power forever.
They get to decide which companies thrive or die. They get to decide the social values of the next century. They get to dictate how the worlds resources are utilized and who is allowed access to them. And, governments will ensure that they are protected from the rage of the people should the public become wise to their hostile takeover.
The most insulting part? Anyone who criticizes or attacks this ideological invasion of our economic life will be accused of being a monster. After all, the CIC just wants to save humanity from itself, right? If you want to stop them, you must be some kind of selfish villain that values individual freedom over the common good.
The bigger question that the globalists don’t want us to ask, though, is what makes them qualified to determine the common good? Why is is assumed that they should be the arbiters of everything? Even the stagflation crisis we are facing today is a direct result of governments and central banks stepping in with trillions in fiat money to save the “too big to fail” corporations from their own disastrous practices. Why should we trust them with our social welfare, or anything else for that matter?
The globalists will respond to this argument with AI. They will say that AI is the ultimate “objective” mediator because it has no emotional or political loyalties. They will assert that AI must become the de facto decision making apparatus for human civilization. And now you see why Rothschild is so anxious to spearhead the creation of a global regulatory framework for AI – Whoever controls the functions of AI, whoever programs the software, eventually controls the world, all while using AI as a proxy. If anything goes wrong, they can simply say that it was AI that made the decision, not them.
It is the perfect shadow government; a technocratic Wizard of OZ using the smoke and mirrors of an AI puppet to rule the planet, removing all accountability and displacing all rebellion. For how can the populace argue with or revolt against a faceless algorithm floating in the digital ether?