The WEF is Overrated
Where does global power lie?
I have recently seen a lot of people posting the image showing Javier Milei is a member of the WEF as proof he is "controlled". I'm no fan of Milei, but him being a part of the WEF doesn't show he's a shill, so much as it shows how useless WEF-centric conspiracy theories are.
The popular conspiracy is the WEF is trying to implement global communism, but Milei is an anarcho-capitalist and the WEF hosts a number of other libertarian economists who you will hear speak against everything from carbon taxes to UBI.
The problem for people who focus on the WEF as the seat of globalist power is there isn't really a common ideological thread of every "member", because membership doesn't mean anything but attending a talking shop.
When the Ukraine war kicked off, the attempt to make the WEF reductionism make sense got to insane levels with people pointing out that both Zelensky and Putin were members, hence the war must be fake. To take another example, Xi Jinping and Soros have both been "members" but they are totally at odds in their worldview, with Soros delivering a speech to Davos where he identified China as the number one threat to his goal of The Open Society.
At this year's conference, the attempt to pin all the blame on Davos became even more tenuous as a number of world leaders, and George Soros, snubbed the conference for other commitments.
The WEF does not set policies or give orders - the worst examples of its dystopian plans usually come from speakers at the conference expressing some Malthusian plot to reduce the world population or monitor us through technology, but there is always another speaker whose statements could be cherry-picked to suggest the WEF supports the opposite.
For example, some have found speeches given at Davos in support of UBI to suggest the "plan" is for the globalists to put us all on a digitally tracked basic income. The only problem is Bill Gates, Yuval Noah-Harari, and Klaus Schwab himself have all come out against UBI. There is obviously great ideological conformity among the Davos attendees, but this is just a reflection of the hegemony of liberalism over the global system - blaming this on Davos is like saying the Oscars are setting the Hollywood agenda.
Insofar as there is a "WEF agenda", it is not some kind of highly centralised, global communism, but a continuation of the status quo of neoliberalism. Organisations like the WEF are created by the globalist elite to try and maintain legitimacy for the establishment by suggesting the global financial elite can fulfil all the responsibilities government used to even as state sovereignty is eroded by globalisation.
So who does hold power? Well, it is the global super-elite of politicians, billionaires, media moguls and lobbyists, the kind of people who attend Davos. Their power is not centralised and they are not handed orders from the top down, most of their members are apolitical or true-believing liberals, but the lack of co-ordination allows for a much larger share of influence to the Zionist segment of this elite, who are heavily political, networked and strategic.
The dissident right became somewhat incoherent and ineffective during COVID, when its analysis of world events devolved into focusing on figures like Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab as Bond villains pulling the strings behind world leaders, and made outlandish predictions about mass depopulation events and vaccine die-offs which never materialised. Since the end of this period, the dissident right has become enormously effective, helping mainstream awareness of the anti-White agenda on X, discrediting the ADL, and now exposing Zionist power in the West to millions.
The elite would rather we focus on synthetic meats and support another batch of neoliberal politicians promising to fight the "communist agenda" than get to the root of the anti-White agenda in the West and collectivise for our interests in a way that can actually take our sovereignty back from the globalist elite who hobnob at Davos.
With the momentum we are gaining this looks more doable than ever.
“There is obviously great ideological conformity among the Davos attendees, but this is just a reflection of the hegemony of liberalism over the global system - blaming this on Davos is like saying the Oscars are setting the Hollywood agenda.”
This is true but I think this argues in favor of the schizo position on Davos/WEF/Globalism etc.
Criticizing the Oscars, the people who attend & the things they say is a useful strategy to counter the propaganda machine that is Hollywood. Has it worked? In 1998, 57 million people tuned into The Oscars. Now they are pretty well scorned, have terrible ratings and Hollywood is in truly bad shape.
Likewise criticizing the WEF & the Davos crowd necessarily signals “globalism bad, nationalism good”. Has this message not resonated? I’d say yes and it’s why Klaus Schwab is unironically looked at as Klaus Blofeld.
In both cases, I’d argue you want people to think something like “Just who in the fuck do these people think they are, anyways?” The actual legal or state power of these institutions is beside the point.
I understand a couple of the chief concerns of “schizo” thinking (aside from some of the obvious absurdities you mentioned) is that it distracts from the true nature of the regime and also has an in-built danger of veering off into QAnon territory.
The latter is certainly true to an extent, it’s a short rabbit hole from Klaus Schwab to 5G sterilization nanobots. But I think that could be said for almost anything nowadays. It’s simply the nature of the modern online experience. In the end, I’d prefer people to be naturally skeptical of the regime, even if it carries a bit of kookiness along with it.
As for the former, I think addressing issues singularly, without reference to “the true power” is reasonable. It’s not hiding the ball to criticize “this” without always naming “them”. To demand so every time would be frankly a little schizo in my opinion.
Credibility is important, especially for political dissidents. If we want to move the ball we can’t be viewed as irrational spergs chasing our tails around or as the Pepe Silvia meme.
But credibility is also the reason why criticizing and deriding these meetings of elite jerkoffs is important. Ask yourself, why do nationalist have to perform a cloak and dagger operation every time they wish to meet up for a conference? It’s because their enemies know that a successful conference without incident increases the credibility of the movement and the attractiveness of the ideas.
These meetings might not exercise any hard power, but they don’t need to because of liberal hegemony as you say. That’s why criticizing them is a good thing.
WEF morphed heavily out of Qanon and picked up a lot of people who weren’t exactly into the “arrests are coming, military tribunals!” stuff the Qanon folks were about.
However, everyone on the right was affected by a shade of Q before, during, and immediately following Covid.
Patriots in command
Truth
God
Did you remember to turn the oven off?
White hats
Patriots
Q