Freedom and Property Rights are inseparable. You can’t have one without the other. ~ George Washington
Centre For Risk Analysis: The Great Reset is an idea put forward by the World Economic Forum to fundamentally restructure the global economy in the wake of covid-19. But what are some of the dangers inherent in this ideology? Joining me to discuss is Douglas Kruger, a speaker and author focusing on political correctness.
Douglas, could you tell our viewers what is this idea of The Great Reset exactly and what are some of the risks attached to it?
Transcript
Douglas Kruger: When we talk about Collective ownership we are often told that the great thing about it is that everybody will own. The reality of the thing is that nobody but those in power own.
Like many of the politically correct ideas that we, we hear bandied about in the media. This entire project is couched in, in kindness. It is presented as something that is being done or being proposed for our good and for the greater good and that always sets my, my alarms and sensors going because that tends to lead to very problematic ideology.
In a very quick nutshell, the proposal out of DAVOS (World Economic Forum) is essentially this. A group of exceptionally powerful individuals predominently in the banking, finance and business sector in alliance with government leadership are proposing that, as a result of these covid lockdowns that have done a great deal of damage to economies globally, they perceive that they now have an opportunity to rebuild economies, but to do so in what they believe is a, a more enlightened fashion.
And they’re are generally, generally speaking there are problems with the idea of groups of people in power deciding the history of humanity. In a best case scenario we are simply supposed to be free to determine our own futures, our own progress, what we want out of life.
Now in this particular case what they are preposing is a sort of collective idea that takes personal ownership out of the equation. The little phrase, and it sounds so innocent, is you’ll own nothing and you will be happy.
Now, if you go back just several hundred years, the Founding Father and the first President of the United States, which was essentially a project founded on the idea of human liberty and freedom, pretty much for the first time in modern history, George Washington said, there is no such thing as personal human rights without property ownership and he said that for several very interesting and important reasons, but the principle is sound. If you are dependent on a greater power (other than God) for everything, then you are not free. You, you place yourself as an individual in quite a precarious situation. It was, in fact, the formula for living, the sort of political reality, for most of human history. If you look back at the simple set up of the serfs of Europe, this is a group of people who who owned nothing ans simply contributed to the overlord who determined what they could and could not have. And they had zero rights. It is the property that you own that actually insures your rights to a great degree. So while this may sound like a very enlightened idea, sort of a communal, a collectivist Utopia, there are many problems with this once you start thinking about how it might actually be implemented, and that’s what concerns me.
