Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.38 AVERAGE
3.38 AVERAGE
Is Alex Jones crazy? Is he a conspiracy theorist? Is he wrong about this evil plot? I sure hope so because the alternative is very scary.
Alex Jones knows his stuff. That's for sure! Some of the things he brought up, I remember hearing or reading about in past news. This book is well-written, but sometimes hard to digest as I am a Patriot who loves America and wants her to continue on. There really are people in this world who want to see the death of America and it's tragic. We've been blessed for over two hundred years with people who have wanted to see their country grow and prosper. Why destroy this? Because the elites want to and they will stop at nothing to do so.
Read this book carefully. It's sad when you realize how long this has been going on!
Read this book carefully. It's sad when you realize how long this has been going on!
Alex Jones has the uncanny ability to pick up on the deeper truths and implications of things despite being seemingly ridiculous on a surface level. His writing style can be quite frankly annoying and his criticisms can be off center but he's not actually incorrect about anything in this book. His boisterous and dramatic style, excitability, lack of polish, and clownish reputation should not distract readers from the fact that he's one of the only people talking about this stuff and it is very important stuff to talk about indeed. Unfortunately the religious nature of his outlook and the bombastic style of delivery dilutes his message. What makes him popular and interesting to watch is also what makes him easy to pick apart and ignore. If he was really such an unhinged guy babbling nonsense the establishment would not be so interested in him. The proof that he has true and explosive things to say in amongst his silliness is revealed by how seriously the powers that be take him, and you should too. It's just quite unfortunate that his delivery can be so lacking. I did find this book to be enlightening in several regards and certainly a worthwhile read but I would have preferred the same information in a different package.
informative
medium-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
dark
funny
informative
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
My first impression: After hearing Del Bigtree’s praise of this book on The Highwire, I was really looking forward to reading this book. I was expecting to read a more serious book about the great reset and the history of totalitarian governments, but instead what this is is Jones basically giving reviews of the globalists’ books. Jones uses analogies to give his own interpretation of whatever Schwab says. In the first couple chapters, Schwab really says nothing at all, just basically, “The world is changing, and we must adjust” with no specifics. And Jones reads into everything he says and makes it sound sinister. The Great Reset is sinister enough without having to twist and exaggerate Schwab’s vague words. I feel like Schwab could have said, “We’re going to teach kids the sky is blue,” and Jones would twist it into, “Oh my God, our kids are going to be property of the state! They’re going to be indoctrinated!” This insulting and over the top exaggeration of Schwab may appeal to those who already hate the man and want to hear nothing but an echo chamber, but it lacks the substance that more objective people seek. I wouldn’t be able to give this book to someone ignorant to teach them about what the great reset is all about. They would think Jones was just a raving lunatic making a big deal over nothing.
But the book did get better as Jones got more serious and analyzed in a calmer manner. And I did learn some things I didn’t know before.
Schwab’s writing seemed to be pretty neutral/vague. It reminded me of the book I read called Revolutionary Wealth, in which the author talked about how things are rapidly changing and how great the future will be.
Brzezinski’s writing was more specific and clearly negative for the majority of us: “More directly linked to the impact of technology, it involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled and directed society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite whose claim to political power would rest on allegedly superior scientific know-how. Unhindered by the restraints of traditional liberal values, this elite would not hesitate to achieve its political ends by using the latest modern techniques for influencing public behavior and keeping society under close surveillance and control” (63).
I liked that Jones admitted that Yuval Noah Harari was intelligent and complimented his writing as fascinating and thoughtful (98, 99). This shows Jones can be objective. Harari’s vision of the future includes genetic manipulation of food (and eventually humans), robotic enhancements (chips under the skin), and intelligent machines (AI) that rule over us (113-119). “The system will still find value in some unique individuals, but these will constitute a new elite of upgraded superhumans rather than the mass of the population” (122). The small, privileged, upgraded elite humans will remain indispensable and undecipherable (123). Bill gates said he was a big fan of everything Harari has written (125).
“The missing component in Harari’s analysis is he does not seem to consider the possibility that it was the rise of people like himself, those who think they know better than others, that has caused so much strife as groups of people began to live in larger and larger communities” (101). Probably every leader of government and corporation and even family groups think they know best. Whether they actually do or not is debatable. Their status as leaders allows them to carry out their will.
Harari said, “If you want power, at some point you will have to spread fiction. . . . Scholars throughout history have faced this dilemma: do they serve power or truth? Should they aim to unite people by making everyone believe the same story, or should they let people know the truth even at the price of disunity?” (125) I think that’s what happened with religion. It was a lie to unite people, because it was too chaotic and unpredictable to let people believe whatever they wanted, and law wasn’t enough to keep some people in line. Harari likes Brave New World’s style of controlling people through love and pleasure rather than through fear and violence (127).
He said that Disney’s movie “Inside Out” had the message of no free will, and that it surprisingly became a worldwide hit despite its “sinister implications” (126). First of all, the movie likely only became a hit because it was a Disney movie, and all modern Disney movies become hits because all the parents take their kids to see them without knowing anything about them. Secondly, if Harari thinks it’s true that people don’t have free will, why would he call this sinister? Passages that like one and this one make me wonder if he’s trying to warn people against technology rather than advocate for it: “As cave paintings gradually evolved into television broadcasts, it became easier to delude people. In the future, algorithms might bring this process to completion, making it well-nigh impossible for people to observe the reality about themselves. It will be the algorithms that will decide for us who we are and what we should know about ourselves. For a few more years or decades, we still have a choice. If we make the effort, we can still investigate who we really are. But if we want to make use of this opportunity, we had better do it now” (128).
The World Economic Forum started as The Trilateral Commission, founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, and Zbigniew Brzezinski (38, 40). “They immediately passed the baton to the United Nations. In 1974, the United Nations passed a resolution called ‘The Establishment of a New International Economic Order’” (40). “The members of the Trilateral Commission had sufficient contacts among the foreign policy elite that they could reasonably expect to be placed in the top positions in government, regardless of whether there was a Republican or Democrat administration in power” (41). Kissinger was President Nixon (R)’s National Security advisor, and Brzezinski was President Carter (D)’s National Security advisor and got China to join the world stage (40, 41). The Trilateral Commission operated through the presidencies of Reagan, Bill Clinton, Obama, and George Bush Sr. & Jr. (45). “The same thing happened, maybe to a lesser extent in the Trump administration, and now you have the Biden administration” (45). “China is the poster child for Technocracy. They have perfected surveillance, artificial intelligence, the use of social credit scores to keep their citizens in line, and strong-arming the population, forcing them to do whatever they want” (41). The Trilateral Commission was a smaller group of people who were more secretive, but when it became the World Economic Forum, it was open about its plans and broadened its membership to include media, lawyers, politicians, and CEOs (47). “One of the people who was not taken with the globalists of the Trilateral Commission in the 1970s was United States [AZ] Senator Barry Goldwater” a republican who ran against Johnson in 1964 and lost (65). Goldwater said that the globalists of the Trilateral Commission would treat the population “as nothing more than producing and consuming units. No attempt has been made to explain why the people of the Western world enjoy economic abundance. Freedom—spiritual, political, economic—is denied any importance in the Trilateral construction of the next century” (67).
Goals of TC/WEF/UN:
- Infiltrate governments across the world (148).
- End national sovereignty. It has largely been accomplished in the European Union. “The EU has taken over virtually every single function of the countries that it presides over. You can say on one hand, there’s still a national government in Spain, Switzerland, and Germany. Yes, there is. But do they have the same power today that they had, say, 30 years ago? No, of course they don’t” (52). Schwab said, “If no one power can enforce order, our world will suffer from a ‘global order deficit.’ Unless individual nations and international organization succeed in finding solutions to better collaborate at the global level, we risk entering an ‘age of entropy’ in which retrenchment, fragmentation, anger and parochialism will increasingly define our global landscape, making it less intelligible and more disorderly. The pandemic crisis has both exposed and exacerbated this sad state of affairs. The magnitude and consequence of the shock it has inflicted are such that no extreme scenario can now be taken off the table” (79).
- Use Covid-19 to make people stay home more, use the Internet more, and get more comfortable with tracking and limitations (171).
- Digital IDs. “Our goal is to enable all life situations with this digital ID. The pandemic has accelerated our progress. First of all, people are really now demanding digital, online services. People have no choice but to trust technology.” (Mykhailo Fedorov, Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation of Ukraine, p. 139-140).
- Fascism. Replace classic capitalism with crony capitalism (217). Jones points out that the globalists want to do a public-private partnership, which is basically fascism as in Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s Germany. “This is how fascism differs from communism. The communists seized the means of production and tried to run these industries. They didn’t do a good job” (19-20). “Schwab is counting on the big corporations to function as de facto governments, possibly through their terms of service” (28), just as the US government used the biggest social media websites to censor, while it was not technically considered censorship because the government was not directly doing it (or so they claimed). “It’s important to understand that Technocracy can’t accurately be called communism or democracy. It is best understood as a monopoly on power, held jointly by Big Business and Big Government” (39). I guess the globalists couldn’t do communism in the US even if they wanted to, because the wealthy business leaders wouldn’t allow it to happen. Wealthy business owners lobby the government to get them to do their bidding. So the only way government/globalists can get more control over the people is by partnering with big business.
- Weaponize climate change; use it as an excuse to control or prevent people’s movement. “Carbon dioxide emissions must fall by the equivalent of a global lockdown roughly every two years for the next decade for the world to keep within safe limits of global heating” (171). Academics in Australia propose adding climate change to death certificates (169). An international agency calls for everything from restrictions on your thermostat, to restrictions of moving. You can only fly in a climate emergency when it’s quote, ‘morally justifiable’” (169). “In the UK, they proposed CO2 ration cards that the government or employers would monitor your CO2 levels, your energy use, your travel, the type of car you drive. If you exceed a level, you pay penalties. If you’re under, you get credits. . . . A CO2 budget for every man, woman, and child on the planet as been proposed by a German climate advisor” (170). Biden’s infrastructure bill requires that all new vehicles sold in the US have instant kill switches. The police or other government authorities will be able to access it whenever they want, likely without a warrant. Hackers could also access it and shut down your vehicle. The regulation likely won’t be enforced for five years. (162-163). Another thing included in the infrastructure bill is charging people per mile that they drive, which Jones says is to make driving too expensive for most people (163).
- Destabilize the global food supply in order to fully control the population (181). Encourage eating bugs (195). The WEF article titled “Why We Need to Go On the ‘Planetary Health Diet’ to Save the World” said to limit Westerners to 14g a day (30 calories) or a mouthful of a Sirloin steak, Africans to 50g of starchy veggies, and Asians to 28g of fish (189). The globalists claim farming meat contributes to climate change, but Jones thinks that they want us to stop eating meat because meat makes us more intelligent. In a study on 555 Kenyan children, eaters of a meat soup got higher non-verbal test scores, and eaters of that or an oil soup got higher math scores compared to kids who ate soup with milk in it or no soup at all (190-191). I’d like to see this study done with fish too. I predict the fish group would do best of all. I’d also like the study to be done making sure each group got equal calories to eliminate the possibility that simply more calories contributed to their higher test scores.
COVID:
“The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, in partnership with the WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on 10/18/19 in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to the severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences” (70). Funny that the economic and societal consequences of 2020 were caused by the public/private partnerships, not by covid-19.
Scientists said in a 2016 Nature article that they were able to make bat coronaviruses able to infect humans (70).
Schwab said “One of the great lessons of the past five centuries in Europe and America is this: acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state. It’s always been the case and there is no reason why it should be different with Covid-19” (78). “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 inflict long-lasting and wider environmental changes. They will, in effect, make ‘good use’ of the pandemic by not letting the crisis go to waste. [A famous statement attributed to Chicago mayor and Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel.] The exhortation of different leaders ranging from HRH the Prince of Wales to Andrew Cuomo to ‘build back better’ goes in that direction” (83). Jones says Build Back Better is the global elite’s sanctioned political slogan for the Great Reset (171).
Isabella Chase (British think tank member) and Rick McDonnell (UN chief) wrote an article in May 2021 called “The U.S. Pandemic Recovery is a Chance to Improve Digital ID” (150). Whether or not Covid was released intentionally or not, the globalists are using the “Crisis to further a long-standing agenda” (151).
Interesting:
“Nothing reveals more about a person than where they spend their money” (106).
The governor of CA “invoked emergency powers that never seem to end,” while at the same time allowing the Super Bowl in his state where 30,000 people sat elbow to elbow without any masks on (144).
Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK had a massive lack of fertilizer because of gas shortages (158).
It takes about 100 barrels of oil to make the amount of batteries that can store a single barrel of oil-equivalent energy (161).
“Business moves in an elevator lifted by the force of creativity; governments and regulatory agencies take the stairs of incremental learning” (202). That’s one reason why capitalism thrives and communism fails.
Empires “have been toppled only by external invasion or by a split within the ruling elite” (Harari, p. 107).
“When things improve, expectations balloon, and consequently even dramatic improvements in objective conditions can leave us dissatisfied” (Harari, p. 111). “If economic growth and self-reliance do not make people happier, then what’s the benefit of capitalism?” (Harari, 109). I think those things could make people happy, but the advertising and social media show people things they don’t have, so people want more things and become unhappy with what they already have. It’s not the fault of capitalism exactly. It’s more the fault of TV/computers. Even if advertising were only done through the postal mail and through billboards, this would help a lot because it would be less exposure to advertisement than what we currently get through TV and computers.
Where I disagree with Jones:
A study from Nature magazine said that meat provides a more calories-rich meal with much less chewing than root foods, which boosts nutrient levels (190). I disagree with this. My kid takes forever to chew meat.
“If there has been a problem with income inequality, human dignity, or degradation of the environment, it’s the fault of that 1% [of elites/rich people]” (21). Not really. Degradation of the environment was caused by industrialization and overpopulation. And who reproduces the most? The poor. Income inequality is party because of poor people who refuse to get out of poverty, which government enables by providing welfare and food stamps, and partly because the very rich get paid so much more than minimum wage. But it isn’t the fault of the rich that there’s such a wealth gap. Many wealthy get paid so well because their poorer customers are willing to pay those high prices. If not many people paid the high prices, the wealthy would not be so wealthy and would be forced to lower their prices. Blaming the 1% for income inequality is why leftists want socialism/communism, which makes everyone equally poor except the government which becomes the new 1%.
Jones doesn’t think that the success of any political system is based on the use of force, rather than persuasion (107). Even the US’s laws were not decided on by asking everyone to vote on them. They were made by a handful of men who thought they knew best. And if anyone disobeyed the laws, then they would be taken away by force, not persuaded to change their ways.
“If there’s no such thing as free will, how could anybody ever be prosecuted for rape, murder, or any crime?” (121) According to the Bible, we have free will AND get punished by God if we sin. So both free will and punishment can exist at the same time. “This is a version of hell where nothing is forbidden, and all things are permitted” (121). Actually, that would be complete freedom AKA anarchy, which isn’t a good thing any more than the strict control the globalists want for us. The globalists want strict control over us while at the same time saying we have no free will; they don’t want all things permitted. No free will doesn’t mean anything goes; it means we are controlled by something else. The globalists want to be that something else.
Jones implies that Russia invaded Ukraine because Ukraine wants to force digital ID on people (140). I disagree with this because Vladimir Putin was a Young Global Leader of the World Economic Forum (148), and China has been oppressing their citizens with similar technology, and Russia never invaded China. “The CCP has been constructing a moral ranking system for years that will monitor the behavior of its enormous population—and rank them all based on their ‘social credit’ . . . The exact methodology is a secret—but examples of infractions include bad driving, smoking in non-smoking zones, buying too many video games, and posting fake news online, specifically about terrorist attacks or airport security. Other potential punishable offenses include spending too long playing video games, wasting money on frivolous purchases, and posting on social media. Being discredited or blacklisted in China makes it nearly impossible to get a job, travel, buy things from stores, get a mortgage, or have children. You could also find your Internet speed slowed down or be prevented from boarding an airplane. That’s not to mention the public shaming component, as there is even an application that shows you the names and photos of everyone around you who is low on social credits, or in financial debt!” (141-142)