Imagine a young girl, maybe 20 years of age, who has been courted by an older man for a long time. He spoiled her with flattery and gifts and she felt on top of the world. Her parents were no where to be found, and the young girl came to depend wholly on the older man for her sustenance and for her sense of selfhood. She never hesitated to do his bidding, and she enjoyed the feeling of power and agency that it gave her. But her older lover was often absent and didn’t tell her where he was going or what he was doing. As she grew a little older and her beauty began to wane, and her lover’s affections cooled, she began to question the man’s actions and his intentions, and she began to wonder about herself – whether she had any life or identity independent of her keeper. She looked back on the years she had been by his side and started to perceive – as through a glass, darkly – that she had been deceived and abused and, to her deep embarassment, that she had welcomed it, not knowing any better. Now she is dazed and struggling to find her way before the walls close in.
This is one of many images that comes to mind when I consider the tragic situation of my country, the United States of America. Most of us have no understanding of the role we’ve played in the world.
125. The Ukrainian Future – Smart Cities – The 4th Industrial Revolution With Julianne Romanello
Apr 8 2022
As the Ukraine is taken apart and big promises arise at giant rebuilding programs, crypto and block chain – do the Ukrainians know what they’re in for? No, and they most likely don’t care. Just like the Syrians, Iraqi’s, Lebanese, and Libyans don’t care.
Perhaps soon Americans and the so called “west” will be in the stewing pot and the slow cook turned up a little – that remains to be seen – but the aim is the same. Take people to the brink until they are “willing” to walk on in to their UN Habitat Smart City playground.
Julianne Romanello is a PHD university lecturer, formerly University of Tulsa, and she has been studding the details of the 4th Industrial Revolution to a high level. We talk with her and introduce a more focused political message aimed at businesses, policing, military and the intelligence community – and politicians as well.
How appealing are the following innovations, each of which is described in the above interview as a possibility in the not-so-distant future?
●Licking your phone to experience gourmet aromas and flavors?
●Having your company require virtual water cooler encounters to nudge more diverse interactions?
●Determining whether you and your spouse should accompany each other into the Meta where you date other virtual creatures?
●Education based on an AI profile of you that has run every possible scenario for your pathway?
●Having a digital twin of your child to coach you on what parenting decisions you ought to make?
Each of these scenarios assumes a fundamental shift in the order of human life and society, and the moral assumptions that hold them together. Do any of these things sound like a future we want for ourselves or our children?
The Fourth Industrial Revolution is a New Religious System
One of the most important concepts to grasp at the cusp of this catalysmic shift in human history is the fundamental model of managing wants and needs through predictive profiling. The Precision Economy is based on the power of an AI to know you better than you know yourself and to determine how to optimize you for the benefit of yourself and others, ostensibly leading to habits that generate less waste and more happiness. At its core, this type of human-management system is, I think, the result of an effort to erect a substitute for God – a project guided by man’s desire to believing that he is his own maker. Yuval Harari’s 2016 article in The New Statesman is a clear example of this type of existential grasping.
The assumption that metaphysical and ontological structures are changeable and changing is evident in an article I recently came across: an Age of Aquarius interview with Danish futurist, Liselotte Lyngsø. Her company, Future Navigator, markets “Future-as-a-Service” and other similarly nebulous offerings to its clients. Until recently, the fantastical projections of professional Futurists have seemed too far-fetched for the general population to take them seriously as a guide for personal or business planning. But the events of the past 2 years have brought the Fourth Industrial Revolution and all its technologies into the mainstream, and – as its architects are the ones who are currently driving the rapid transformation of human society – we would do well to pay more attention to the Futurists’ incredible predictions. They are absolutely serious in their efforts to foresee and to control new worlds on the basis of advances in high technology.
Skeptics may find it helpful to consider how technology has already been put into place at employers including WalMart and in schools in the United States. Moreover, according to the World Bank, the growth of educational gaming protocols – sometimes called “edutainment” – as a behavior-modification technique are being used in both corporate and education sectors. In 2017, an article by Jump Associates, an innovation strategy consultant to major corporations, describes how VR “experiences” can alter perceptions and lead to behavior change:
VR’s ability to transport people into situations that are physically and emotionally inaccessible shows much promise. Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab is experimenting with using it to influence choices people make in their everyday lives. They’ve found that after VR interactions like playing the role of cow eating and drinking before being sent to slaughter, or virtually eating lumps of coal representing energy used to heat water while taking a shower, people see a connection between choices they make and the potential environmental costs of their actions.
Notice how, in the example above, human beings are presented with non-human – i.e. animal – experiences in order to encourage them to develop an emotional (vs. intellectual) commitment to carbon-reduction goals that are key to UN Sustainable Development Goals.
This type of attitude-management strategy is crucial to the Build Back Better, or impact economy, because it will not only increase a corporation’s ESG rating, it will also increase employee productivity by linking competitive gaming frameworks to job performance incentive strategy, as for example, in Salescreen’s product line.
How the ostensible conflict between competitiveness and empathy or global citizenship will be mediated in a future-world that takes all morality and metaphysical and ontological structures as fluid is anyone’s guess. My guess is that it will be decided by those who care more for management than they do for people.
In conclusion, I highly recommend listening to the 55 – minute podcast embedded in the Age of Aquarius article. Liselotte Lyngsø is optimistic, open-minded about the positive potential of these futuristic technologies, forthright in her assumptions, and blissfully unperturbed by the dystopian visions of humankind 2.0. In other words, she has bought into the 4IR ideology and will give you an honest tour of the best possible version of it. Of course, her naivete is demonstrated by her belief that we – regular people – will be able to determine how these technologies are put to use. I doubt that that is the case, but think rather that we will have no say whatsoever in transhumanocracy and its subjugation of all things genuinely human. The reality is that this agenda will be forced on us in the same manner as the coronapocalypse, as a set of VR goggles, and so many other titanic programs of domination.
Over the past decade, and especially since 2020, billionnaires, mega-corporations, and the government have, with growing intensity and volume and in the same words and images, called on civil society, business, and the public to end systemic racism. There is something curious about the fact that these groups – which have long histories of exploiting minorities and (directly or indirectly) encouraging bigotry and strife for purposes of profit – have suddenly become vocal promoters of racial equity, dismantling systemic racism, and diversity, equity, and inclusion norms, etc.
We can begin to unravel this paradox of public good will by considering the organizational commitments to racial equity published by JUST Capital. A non-profit organization founded by “a group of concerned people from the world of business, finance, and civil society – including Paul Tudor Jones II, Deepak Chopra, Rinaldo Brutoco, Arianna Huffington, Paul Scialla, Alan Fleischmann, and others,” JUST Capital is an organization that claims to promote a “just economy” and “true prosperity for all” by measuring and ranking corporate performance on a set of common metrics related to those goals. Investors who are concerned with racial equity, for example, may use JUST Capital’s rankings to determine which companies are most committed to this moral norm and most deserving of investment capital.
By examining JUST Capital’s statements about what goes into tracking racial equity, we start to see that one social justice issue is used to justify the imposition of a much larger program of human capital scoring.
“We have listed below our internal commitments to racial equity and how they deepen our mission’s impact.
To track and report on the distribution of employees across standard pay bands – by race, ethnicity, gender, and job category – on an annual basis, and share results publicly, including whether any adjustments have been made.
Develop fair, equitable, and inclusive hiring and promotion processes by conducting a diversity audit of existing practices; setting goals for hiring, promoting, and retaining Black and Brown employees; and establishing a transparent framework for determining salaries, internal pay bands, pay increases, and promotions.
Build a more diverse board of directors by setting clear board diversity targets and actively recruiting new directors who represent the Black and Latinx communities.
Continue to discuss and address issues of bias within our organization through antiracist training and education for our leadership team, staff, and board of directors.
Create and clearly define a more comprehensive grievance mechanism that allows employees to report instances of marginalization and discrimination, and provide training to those responsible for handling grievances.
Continue to cover structural racism and racial equity in our research and content, even after these issues have become less prominent in national consciousness.
Ensure that a greater diversity of voices is integrated into our content and events by elevating the voices of our Black and Brown colleagues and external leaders.
Build our network of partnerships and collaborations with organizations advancing the cause of racial equity.”
From these commitments, we can see that a published concern for racial equity makes a very effective justification (i.e. a cover) for implementing universal standards for and expectations of HUMAN CAPITAL monitoring and reporting.
No matter what JUST Capital’s Public Priorities Pollsclaim to demonstrate (I suspect they are heavily influenced by the Solutions Journalism/Impact Media approach, which is not unlike that which a now-infamous data modeller from London’s Imperial College used back in 2020. See, e.g. this ESG-related poll.), I think most people – black, white, and all others – are categorically opposed to the kind of SURVEILLANCE PROFILING entailed in the policy recommendations proposed by this organization. Or at least that would be the case if the peddlers of this brutal scheme were honest about how it is designed to work and to what end.
There are other reasons why racial equity is in every foundation’s, every corporation’s, every NGO’s mission statement – these include things like disrupting social demographics, redistributing wealth, demoralizing people who are white, and shifting economic power and prestige to the Non-Profit Industrial Complex (which is a main offender in terms of human capital tracking).
Note: I think that there are real wounds and scars and ongoing injuries that are the result of bigotry and prejudice. The statements above are not intended to dismiss those real injustices. Rather, I hope my observations will encourage further scrutiny of the language of systemic racism and especially its invocation by billionnaires, corporations, and the government. There is something unsettling about the fact that the same interests that are quick to eulogize George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter movement are also funding the pilot program installation of FLOCK SAFETY license plate readers in (to use a local example) a low-income, predominantly Black TULSA NEIGHBORHOOD. These groups care little about genuine progress in the area of race relations. Why would they? Trauma, division, strife, and poverty are the conditions upon which the new impact economy thrive. And, after all, Paul Tudor Jones, the mastermind of this organization made his fortune in …. what?
Please watch this 3-minute-long promo video for Grapheal’s TestNPass application.
This is the “solution” (digital identity health pass) that has motivated the “problem” (the declared illness) and the “reaction” (the economic and social collapse that will justify the Build Back Better, or Great Reset).
More than Simply a Health Pass
This digital credential-verifying technology eventually will be used to register every possible data point generated about each one of us. This data will form our unique human capital profiles, which will, in turn, determine what “privileges” we are “allowed” to access. Some privileges will require that we comply with “personalized” recommendations for “wellness” or “social responsibility.”
Notice that IBM offers a health credential passport, a learning credential passport, and more using the foundation of blockchain distributed ledger technology.
Behind the theatrics of the Covid 19 pandemic, a seismic shift in corporate and economic structures is underway, and the digital passport introduced in response to a “public health crisis” is the prologue to a full-scale digital identity credential passport that will serve the new model. On short, corporations are transitioning their business strategies from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism.
Stakeholder capitalism is as brutal as the name sounds, which is why this Emperor is clothed in a tapestry of pleasant buzzwords such as Resilience, Sustainability, Inclusiveness, Equity, Innovative, Accountability, Collaborative, Transparent, and Diversity. These terms give us the impression that ESG investing – the new model of “socially-responsibile investing” that purports to benefit all ‘stakeholders’ – represents genuine progress from profit-oriented shareholder capitalism to something more beneficial to “the community.” Not so, however.
ESG Investing incorporates Human Capital metrics into a corporation’s overall, ESG profile – a profile that determines whether the firm will receive capital investments from banks and other lenders. The Digital Credential Passport will be the tool for tracking not only employees’ health statuses, but also their larger social responsibility (ESG) profile, as captured through Smart City infrastructure and the expanding Internet of Things. If an employee is not ‘committed’ to the attitudinal and behavioral goals deemed appropriate to a good 21st-century global citizen – viz. the UN SDGs or Global Goals, which are commercialized in the Stakeholder Capitalism Metrics – his or her employer will intervene to correct that, assigning professional development training that measures attitudes before and after the assigned intervention (tracking impact / investments in the workforce). Moreover, as a result of AI processing of employment applications, anyone who does or is likely to fall short of good global citizen status will probably find that he or she has very limited, if any, ‘access’ to employment at all.
Tracking Employees’ Loyalty to the Firm
We also see that, in the Built-Back-Better economy, employees will be expected to have, in addition to a commitment to the Global Goals, a level of engagement to the firm that leads to his or her personal promotion of the firm even and especially during off-the-clock life. In this industry piece from Marketing Insider Group, CEO and author of the book Mean People Suck Michael Brenner writes:
Statistics show that employee engagement does indeed drive marketing ROI by a significant percentage. The more business your engaged employees bring in, the more it drives up profits. …
A Loyalty 360 study supports that conclusion. Reporting customer retention rates 18 percent higher for companies whose employees are “highly engaged,” the study demonstrates the impact engaged employees can have on this sought-after marketing metric.
That kind of engagement can only happen when every department acts as the right arm of the marketing team.
That kind of collaboration depends on the marketing team’s initiative to get everyone from the CEO to the janitor and everyone in between involved in marketing efforts.
In the 4IR future of work, corporations will expect employees to be their “walking billboards” and brand ambassadors. The Framework for Inclusive Capitalism recommends instituting pay equity on the basis of an accurate assessment of the value that an employee creates for the company. Here again, this is where a digital access pass, based on blockchain distributed ledger technology, proves its worth beyond health-related applications – the access pass can hold massive amounts of data about all sorts of employee choices, attitudes, and interactions – occurring both on- and off- the-clock and recorded by multiple sources – that might have some bearing on the company brand.
This brand ambassador ledger becomes an important tool in standardizing human capital scores for pay equity initiatives, especially insofar as employee behavior during non-working hours has the potential to generate steep ROI for companies that have ‘activated’ their employees.
When you activate your employees, though, it’s marketing magic. Activation includes a wealth of tools to empower your employees to become walking billboards for your company, including:
Training that not only makes them more informed about your products, but also allows them to climb up the corporate ladder – imagine – you gotta love a company that trains you to qualify for a better job
Permission to post content on social media and elsewhere about your company’s culture, products, and services Involvement in creating blog posts, videos, white papers, and other “official” marketing content, creating a platform on which they can showcase their expertise
Once your employees start sharing the love your company has shared with them, it will pay off. Not only will it pay off in good vibes, but it will also likely make a huge impact on your bottom line.
Source: Michael Brenner, “21 Marketing Trends You Need to Know For 2022,” Marketing Insider Group, 2021
Since positive comments and posts about an employer on an employee’s personal social media account create significant value/profits for the firm, corporate strategy will include investments in activation programming, new and existing personnel who are amenable to being activated, and technologies such as a digital access pass which enable firms to measure and manage the value of their investments in employee activation.
The willingness to stake one’s own reputation on the company brand – and one’s effectiveness at so doing (which may be determined by consulting the ledger of interactions written to a digital access pass) – will be a major factor in determining a person’s ESG Score, or human capital score. That score is the employee’s key to unlocking privileges across many sectors – personal, professional, mobility and recreation, etc., and is also an opportunity for market speculators to make big bets on how one will fare in the human capital futures index.
Will anyone actually go along with this program for total surveillance and corporate behavioral engineering of employees? Unfortunately, yes. Most people will accept the access pass and the program that comes with it because the corporate resetters are demolishing the economy and engineering human labor surpluses in order to create massive unemployment. Jobs will be few and hungry families will be many. This is their strategy to force people to accept the “activation.” The digital identification system is about behavioral conditioning and control.
Here’s a short talk about Ocean Protocol – a new ‘solution’ for the problem that we don’t own our own data. In other words, the problem that the data that we generate (through all sorts of signals intelligence, e.g. Fb) belongs to and is monetized by the giant data-capture companies, leaving us as merely ‘the product’ of the services we use. The speaker here is an enthusiastic supporter of Ocean Protocol, and he celebrates the potential of privacy-protecting open-data platforms to enable ‘some whiz-kid’ (Greta’s bff, perhaps?) to discover a solution to all the world’s problems. He also explains that Ocean provides compensation to data-providers, eliminating the ‘you are the product’ problem.
But listen to this talk closely. The speaker knows his stuff (certainly better than I!), but I think he overlooks three very important things.
First, when he talks about being compensated for data-production/intellectual activity, he explains that our data output becomes an asset that may be leveraged to gain privileges. This sounds a lot like a human capital ranking or social credit score.
Second, the corporate partners involved in Ocean Protocol – Daimler, IBM, Roche Diagnostics, BMW, to name a few – have deep roots in the eugenics revolution of the 20th century. That they would pivot to caring about human beings is a long-shot indeed.
Third, Ocean is partnering with the World Economic Forum and the United Nations. No need to explain that one, as everyone knows that Klaus and his band of thugs want to Reset the world. There’s also the MIT connection, the hexagon logo, the creepy octopus symbolism, but I won’t go into that.
Bottom line: lots of serious investors and social engineers are setting up the new data economy, and they are using the coronapocalypse to do it. But this open-data ‘solution’ is a trap. Its real aim is to usher in techno-facist regime of digital totalitarianism, smart contracts, social credit scoring, and VR GOGGLE-prisons.
Besides facebook reactions, I don’t have any way of knowing who has read or considered the information that I share in my posts.
I hope the information I share – which deals with the CLEAR AND PRESENT danger to AMERICANS’ BUSINESSES, BANK ACCOUNTS, and BILL OF RIGHTS might somehow reach individuals who have the COURAGE and the CLOUT to stand up against the CONTROLLED DEMOLITION of AMERICAN SOCIETY and INSTITUTIONS.
INCLUSIVE CAPITALISM is a program that delivers into the hands of FOREIGN-OWNED PRIVATE CORPORATIONS all the coercive tools of government, effectively obliterating any public check on the use of this power.
Someone is going to interject, saying that government was set up to oppress the people and that popular sovereignty is a myth, etc. etc. I am not interested in that argument right now.
If the CORPORATE TAKEOVER of the United States of America and the implementation of the UN Habitat Smart Cities program CONTINUE, everyone will be required to profess allegiance to the planetary technate, and the prospects for meaningful discussions of alternative lawful and political paradigms will be nil.
This is what I think is important right now: If enough people BELIEVE and are WILLING TO ENFORCE the principle that government is a creation of the people, set up to protect RIGHTS, the source of which is SUPERIOR to ANY constitutional or political system, then the institutions will become – in practice – answerable to the People. The Bill of Rights has power because the People believe and are prepared to enforce that its prohibitions and protections are FOUNDATIONAL to the organization of society and have an INVIOLABLE STATUS as principles of constitutional order.
“But, but the laws that have been passed… and the Supreme Court rulings …”
We would do well to remember one pithy response to institutional overreach, “Mr Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”
With these statements, I am not glorifying the state or a particular form of government or the American regime. I am trying to call attention to the FACT that we are facing a HIGHLY ORCHESTRATED, COORDINATED EFFORT to abolish individual rights and the rule of law and the freedom of thought and conscience. This is taking shape through the transfer of public administration to foreign-owned and -interested corporations. If this transfer continues unabated, there will be NO GOING BACK and the American people will truly be the most miserable in the world. The Fourth Industrial Revolutionary Regime will be a TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT POLICE STATE.
There is a term for entities that conspire to destroy the foundations of law and institutions, that sell their country to a hostile cartel. And there are criminal penalties for engaging in the activities comprehended by that term. The American People need to think deeply about the significance of this and of the existential crisis that we are facing right now.
This article’s catechesis in “technopreneurship” is a perfect example of the brassy, venture-hipster-chic-speak that the peddlers of false perception have to use to if they are to trick people into buying their meta oil. They aren’t making or doing anything original or genuinely valuable. They are in the “experience” business, which lacks substance, but is glutted on buzz and stock imagery and the fantastical conceit of market-driven social progress.
Just look at how they plan to finance this emerging class of start-up technoprenuers – through investments secured by the promise of future cost offsets in the public sphere.
Capitals and investments: Investments are one of the most essential parts of any business. Right? Naturally, an Entrepreneur/ technopreneur needs capital to start up their business ventures. So what do you think they do? They take economic support from various investors. Simple! They use the public savings which in turn leads to economic flow and development. To be very precise, technopreneurs use the money for overall societal development. Tell me you love the idea already!
They predict that their “innovations” will save society some future expense that it would incur (or so they predict) should it continue according to the status quo, and that these savings ought to justify the expenditure/investment in their experience service. But IT’S ALL HYPOTHETICAL, which is why they must rely on narrative manipulation, or propaganda. The fleecing of the public, on whose backs the whole burden of this sham will fall, is, however, very real indeed.
The language used in articles like this one gives us an indication that the “societal progress” envisioned by the Technopreneurs is one that is disembodied, artificial, and augmented. The “brainchild” of the technopreneurs’ “validated brainstorming session” is tweaked and teched for the purpose of revolution, ad infinitum.
In this technology-driven era, technopreneurs start their businesses with a validated brainstorming session. Once they reach an innovative idea, they start plugging technology into this very brainchild. It is all about using creativity and innovation to revolutionize business productivity and traditional practices. You already see the flow, don’t you?
I see the flow, and it looks very much like the closed system of sustainable finance – a circular economy that operates as a reflexive feedback loop, designed to benefit only the very few by impressing the rest into an elaborate system of measured, managed, meta experiences.
This has been the goal for a long time – corporate global governance, enforced by advanced monitoritoring technology and social credit scores. We are seeing the final stages of the maturation of the techno-fascist surveillance state, which began in earnest 19 years before the Covid 19 epidemic: on 9/11/2001. Then, in 2010, Richard Florida, an influential social engineer from the University of Toronto’s Martin Prosperity Institute, coined the term ‘Great Reset’ in order to describe a seismic transformation of the global economy based on concentrating most of the world’s inhabitants into urban megacities.
Here is an excerpt from a review of his book:
“In The Great Reset, Florida examines the roots of our current economic crisis. Unlike most observers, Florida argues the crisis is not merely a temporary emergency in government policy. It is a fundamental shift in our economic system—a “great reset.” Florida claims that times of major economic crisis necessitate the resets. Every reset involves a spatial fix, a change in where we live and work. The first reset involved a movement from farms to cities. The second involved suburbanization. Our current reset is a move towards mega regions, dominated by major urban centers.” See: https://c2cjournal.ca/2010/06/the-great-recession-or-the-great-american-opportunity/
2010 was also the year that Sir Ronald Cohen, an investor from the UK, developed the first Social Impact Bond (SIB), a financial instrument that incentivizes corporate investments in social impacts/outcomes in roughly the same way as a bonus for early completion of a contract would incentivize a private company to agree to accept a public project. SIBs are also called Development Impact Bonds (DIBs) or Pay for Success Contracts (PFS) and all fall under the category of Social Impact Finance (SIF). The language of “what works,” “data-driven,” “performance-based,” “results-oriented,” etc. signals a shift toward private social impact financing rather than, or in conjunction with, public tax revenues.
MaRS, a Toronto-based “engine to lead Canada in the Innovation Economy,” explains Cohen’s social impact revolution in a 2010 article, excerpted here:
“Sir Ronald’s goal is to connect the capital markets to the social sector. “It is not enough to increase the standard of living at the high end. It is right at the same time to worry about those who are left behind,” he says.
It would be a shame to waste the economic crisis that we have just endured and not learn lessons from it. Sir Ronald offers the following reflection and I would suggest hope that “societies everywhere will come to the conclusion that an important part of the capitalist system is having a powerful social sector to address social issues, because government doesn’t have the resources.”
Sir Ronald and his colleagues have formed an organization appropriately called “social finance” and have come up with the concept of a Social Impact Bond – “a contract between a public sector body and Social Impact Bond investors,” in which the former commits to pay for an improved social outcome. Investor funds are used to pay for a range of interventions to improve the social outcome.
“By enabling non-government investment to be utilized, Social Impact Bonds will lead to greater spending on preventative services. These interventions can have a direct impact on costly health and social problems.”
“Social Impact Bonds are a unique funding mechanism, in that they align the interests of key stakeholders around social outcomes”. See: https://www.marsdd.com/news/sir-ronald-cohen-on-social-finance-the-next-big-thing/
In 2016, Cohen explained that SIF would be a crucial mechanism to compensate for pervasive budget deficits that had rendered many governments across the world incapable of providing basic services for the people they serve. Austerity is a precondition for shifting from public finance to private SIF:
“Governments across the world are throwing up their hands when they see the “yawning gap” between the need for social services and their ability to pay for them, Cohen said. “We’re beginning to see governments across the world saying, ‘We can’t cope. We need money from the capital markets.’” Venture capital, he said, was a response to the needs of tech entrepreneurs: “Why can’t we find a similar response to the needs of social entrepreneurs who are motivated by empathy to help others?”” See: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-connect-social-entrepreneurs-capital
Then, in April of 2020, when many people were still trying “flatten the curve” of the forecasted surge in cases of the novel coronavirus, and before the public announcement of the Abraham Accords, an article in Arabian News discussed the promise of SIF for addressing the social and economic weaknesses exposed by the Covid 19 epidemic:
“The World Health Organization (WHO) declared Covid-19 a pandemic on March 11th, 2020 causing significant economic and social implications, which continues to evolve rapidly across the world.
The persistent effort for finding long-term solutions to overcome its effect is both ongoing and at the forefront of governments, corporates, philanthropic foundations and the global community itself. There is a need more so than ever to look for innovative ways to combat the situation and relieve its effects. One such solution gaining traction in the market is the use of social impact bonds (SIB). As Sir Ronald Cohen stated “A SIB is an excellent tool for preventing different harmful matters and global issues”.”
The social impact bond blends public-private partnerships (PPPs), results-based financing and impact investing. Within a social impact bond, private investors provide up-front capital for social needs and are repaid by a measurable outcome funder dependent on the achievement of agreed-upon results which is similar model to a “green bond”. The COVID-19 crisis has presented significant challenges for the global economy, and society which has paved the way for the adoption and exploration of social impact bonds.” See: https://www.arabianbusiness.com/comment/445960-lasting-bond-are-social-impact-bonds-the-solution-to-respond-to-covid-19
Cohen’s interview in 2016 explains how measurement toward actionable goals is key to making SIF work for investors and the public. The aspirations of the UN Sustainable Development Goals conveniently provide the substance of global set of targets for environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investments that ought to benefit all “stakeholders.” Responsibility to those stakeholders requires “evidence-” or “science-based” policies that can demonstrate “transparency” and rule out “bias” in policy-making and ensure that no one is “left-behind.” The criterion of “science” is using raw data, measurement -as much of it as possible and in real-time- in the construction of any given policy. Continuous measurement tracks a program’s progress toward SIF outcomes, or success metrics, the achievement of which triggers a success payment – hence the phrase Pay for Success.
Like the fallout of 9/11, the response to Covid 19 has – under the auspices of “safety” – amped up the surveillance infrastructure that is needed for the transition to the Impact or Innovation Economy. Wearable technology, contactless digital currency, remote work (which brings corporate surveillance into private homes), and economic devastation that will force many businesses and homeowners to default on mortgages, leaving those properties ripe for social impact investors like BlackStone and BlackRock to restructure patterns of real estate and land use: toward the Great Reset described by Florida in 2010.
Make no mistake, C19 is not about a public health crisis at all. It is a controlled demolition of the global economy that paves the way for corporate investors and venture capitalists to “Build Back Better” by launching the social impact (engineering) economy.”
Framing the Fourth Industrial Revolution and Inclusive Capitalism Video Series
Overview of the Framework of Inclusive Capitalism – Recorded Live
In this video series, I offer a general introduction to the Framework for Inclusive Capitalism, which is the plan for a new global, “sustainable,” economic system that is to be managed by a collaboration between businessess and government. I discuss how ESG investment metrics, human capital scoring, and track and trace technologies contribute to a culture of corporate control, the likes of which the world has not before seen. The Framework is an elaboration of the “Great Reset” plan, introduced in June 2020 by the World Economic Forum during the height of fear and speculation about the worldwide epidemic.
The version of the Framework that I use was written for the USA – its subtitle is “A New Compact Among Businesses, Government, and American Workers” – and it can be downloaded by clicking on the final url listed here. You can find your country’s plan by searching the web for “Inclusive Capitalism” AND the name of your country, or visit the Coalition for Inclusive Capitalism’s homepage for further info.
Special thanks to my friend Bryan Mayberry, who has generously gifted his time and talent to polish up this recording and prepare it for distribution here.
Part I: Introduction and Overview of Pillar One – Principles
This was supposed to be a 15-min overview of Inclusive Capitalism buzzwords, but it became an hour-long overview of the 4 points of the First Pillar of The Framework for Inclusive Capitalism.
This was my first live set-up for something like this, and I had a hard time seeing what viewers could see and figuring out the dashboard. Also, unlike a Zoom call, you can’t see the faces of viewers during a fb live recording. I found this to be very disorienting – we cue off each other’s faces for so many features of communication, after all – so please forgive me for the rough spots. I have a couple of ideas to fix that for future talks. Of course, the social engineers know how awkward these formats are, and that’s why media design companies are creating software packages that claim to humanize digital communications through augmented reality features and “immersive experiences.” Remember that “sustainable economic growth” happens in the cloud – when our lives are moved to digital worlds, lived through computer-brain interfaces. Hard to believe? Look up SuperWorld, which is selling virtual real-estate. VIRTUAL REAL estate = word salad.
Also, check out GoldmanSachs whitepaper on the Great Reset (=Inclusive Capitalism) and “sticky learning.” These guys KNEW that most human beings would recoil at the prospect of a permanent shift of work, education, healthcare, commerce, worship, etc to digital formats. We stubborn humans wouldn’t voluntarily learn to use these tecchnologies – we’d go on “gathering” in person, claiming (rightly) that in-person activities are more fruitful and better for the bottom line, too. Hence the need for a pandemic – to “accelerate” our acceptance of these dehumanizing “innovations” AND to force the obsolescence of anyone not able to “adapt” (via sticky learning) to the new abnormal. “Adaptable” = “Resilient.” Remember, they WANT to cause economic collapse so that labor and skills supply chains can be re-engineered. So they are happy to hurt the bottom line and to undermine productivity. This creates an impact “Opportunity” for measuring outcome improvements, and that is the basis of the new impact economy.
So I’m going to grit my teeth and try my hand at a little Resilience (haha!) and figure out how to make these talks smoother and to condense them for easy viewing.
Part II: Continuing Pillar One – Recommendations
This video is Part II in a series in which I offer a general introduction to the Framework for Inclusive Capitalism, the plan for a new global, “sustainable,” economic system that is to be managed by a collaboration between businessess and government. Part II continues the examination of Pillar One: “Create More Opportunities for Workers [to enter and remain in the workforce],” turning to the specific Recommendations for Businesses and Government that are designed to keep Workers working.
The Recommendations outlined in the Framework are suggestions (in name only – these policies are already being implemented) for Businesses and Government to adopt in order to “Create More Opportunity for Workers” to enter into and remain productive in the Workforce. In the video I try to explain what the buzzwords like Resilience, Sustainability, Employee Wellness, etc. mean for the “American Worker” who will be unhireable if he or she does not embody them 24/7. Labor surpluses (which are forming as a result of growing automation and robotification many jobs) will create a “race-to-the-top” situation in which employment is contingent upon a “worker’s” demonstrated “commitment” to the values and policy program set out in the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
The reason why the SDGs are so important is that they are directly tied to a corporations access to investment capital. The SDGs are the starting point for ESG Investing Metrics – a new set of social / corporate responsibility indicators that are supposed to give mission-oriented, purpose-driven impact investors the information they need to select which companies in which to invest. Impact investors will be looking to invest in corporations that have the highest “S” metrics, which are the measure of how the corporation ranks on Social indices. Here, a company’s Human Capital Assets (the worth of its workforce) are greater if the company’s employees are good 21st century global citizens, They turn into liabilities if a company’s employees aren’t sufficiently socially responsible, as defined by the SDGs and demonstrated by digital record created by the Internet of Things,
Knowing thiat their investors demand the highest degree of social responsibility, the corporations will be careful to hire ONLY those individuals who are top-rated in terms of their do-gooding. But what if you didn’t start volunteering when you were a toddler? Or if you don’t agree with the transgender agenda, or if you forget to recyble that plastic fork one day? Two words:: You’re screwed.
Stakeholder Capitalism and the Soft Coup d’Etat: a “Golden Opportunity,” Part I
The World Economic Forum
declares that it is time for a
The declaration of the Covid-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020 brought the world’s economic systems to a near-standstill, decimating small and independent businesses and creating catastrophic hardships on working people everywhere. In June of 2020, the World Economic Forum (WEF)—an elite think tank representing global corporations, government officials, academia, the media, and social policy influencers—in partnership with the United Nations, announced a plan to address the systemic economic and social injustices that the pandemic revealed or magnified—things like “gaps” in access to goods and services, the fragility of supply chains, and the environmental impact of daily activities such as driving to work, for example.
Covid 19 presents “a golden
opportunity” for inaugurating
the transition to stakeholder capitalism.
“The Great Reset,” as the plan is called, aspires to “seize something good” from the crisis by using it as the “golden opportunity” to implement “stakeholder capitalism” on a global scale. Executive chairman and CEO of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, has long argued for a new global socio-economic order that is equitable, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable — “a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being.” In order to accomplish this,Schwab argues,businesses and corporations across the globe must adopt the governance principle (i.e. a framework establishing a corporation’s strategic operations toward a mission or purpose) known as Stakeholder Capitalism.
Schwab claims that the realities of life in the twenty-first century—especially the constellation of technological, societal, and economic factors associated with The Fourth Industrial Revolution, or 4IR, such as automation, robotics, digital technologies, globalization, nanotechnology, bioengineering, etc.)—reveal the fundamental interconnectedness of people and planet and, as a corollary, the need to move beyond the outdated paradigm of prioritizing the self over the community. Harmony among people and with the planet that we share is possible if we can set aside our attachment to individualism / individual rights. These must be tempered by reference to the common good, which looks toward the needs and preferences of the global public. Schwab’s reflection on the mentality guiding Germany’s post-WWII recovery captures the heart of Stakeholder Capitalism, viz. that “one person or entity could only do well if the whole community and economy functioned.”
Klaus Schwab describes the contours of 21st
century Stakeholder Capitalism
Schwab’s vision is a Communitarian one. Noted researcher, author, and founder of the Anti-Communitarian League, Niki Rapaana, unpacks Communitarian theory in her extensive blog and books, which are available here.
Stakeholder Capitalism is distinguished from two familiar economic models, both of which have a narrow vision of whose interest corporations are to serve:
1) Shareholder Capitalism, the standard model for most Western businesses, which sets profit maximization for corporate shareholders (i.e. equity investors) as its primary criterion of economic success, as well as
2) State Capitalism, a system in which the state dictates the structure and direction of the economy as a whole and requires individual corporations to conform to it. The primary example of this model is China.
Where shareholder capitalism prioritizes the economic success of individual corporations and their investors – oftentimes at the expense of the economic success of the community as a whole, state capitalism seeks to maximize the economic benefits to the community as a whole – even if that leads to diminished returns for the corporate entities that drive the economy.
By contrast, Stakeholder Capitalism seeks to harmonize the interests of the individual and the interests of the community. This “third way” is accomplished by evaluating competing interests through a forward-looking or long-term moral perspective that envisions people and planetary balance as the ultimate economic goal. Or, in other words,sustainable development.
That is the core of stakeholder capitalism: it is a form of capitalism in which companies do not only optimize short-term profits for shareholders, but seek long term value creation, by taking into account the needs of all their stakeholders, and society at large.
– Klaus Schwab, “What Is Stakeholder Capitalism?”
In an article in TIME Magazine Schwab explains that as “stakeholders of our global future,” government, business, and civil society all “have a shared responsibility to shape the world in collaborative ways.” For Schwab, who has written about the intersection of economics, management, and mechanical engineering, shared responsibility and collaborative approaches are not ends in themselves. Rather, they must still promote the optimization of the pursuit of the well-being of all. And this is where we begin to see the threat that Stakeholder Capitalism poses to traditional political institutions and, indeed, to the stability of constitutional order itself. For representative government as established by the U.S. Constitution is designed not to optimize the pursuit of some new proposal claiming to promote the health and safety of the people. The system of checks and balances at the heart of the Constitution is a mechanism for de-optimizing the process of innovation in order to deter the passage of unjust laws by encumbering the legislative process with multiple opportunities for deliberation and many requirements for consensus-building.
Report: “Measuring Stakeholder
Capitalism Towards Common Metrics
and Consistent Reporting of
Sustainable Value Creation,” WEF, 2020.
The “golden opportunity” presented by the declared Covid-19 pandemic consists in the revelation of the sub-optimal ability of representative governments to respond effectively to a traumatic and disruptive global crisis. Governments were slow and ineffective in their efforts to contain the spread of the disease and to make timely public health recommendations. By contrast, the private sector – especially technology and pharmaceutical companies – proved its ability to innovate, adapt, and collaborate to deliver a quick and effective solution to an immediate need.* Just a few months prior to the pandemic declaration, Schwab wrote , that “Stakeholder capitalism … positions private corporations as trustees of society, and is clearly the best response to today’s social and environmental challenges.” In this model, private corporations, which are able to optimize operations in response to pressing global problems, assume the place and powers heretofore assigned to representative government.
The Great Reset plan attempts to reconfigure almost every feature of society. Its launch of Stakeholder Capitalism, which positions private corporations to assume responsibility for the programs and powers of governments that (in principle, at least) were designed to be accountable to the electorate, is one of the most radical and consequential of its innovations. The governmental functions to be privatized under Stakeholder Capitalism include the administration and oversight of public services such as health and education services, housing, safety, transportation, and cultural events; and they also include executive, legislative, judicial, and regulatory powers. In the stakeholder model, these functions are delegated to private or quasi-governmental corporations, often through a public-private partnership, or “P3.”
Absent the unprecedented economic devastation caused by close to a year of lockdowns, the likelihood that the people of Western nations would readily adopt the WEF’s “new social contract” is questionable. But with rising unemployment and decreased consumer spending come lower tax revenues and, subsequently, severe budget deficits that will prevent public agencies from fulfilling their public service obligations – and at a time when more and more people find themselves in need of this assistance. Covid 19 is just the sort of crisis that’s needed if one wishes to launch a “new social contract” quickly and without the hassle of consulting the public. It is indeed a “golden opportunity.”
As we saw earlier, Stakeholder Capitalism sets up private corporations as “trustees of the social good.” How well a corporation lives up to that responsibility will become the basis of its reputation capital score – that is, its value as brand – and that will be the key to securing a competitive edge in the radically-altered 4IR post-Covid economy. What better way to earn a reputation for social responsibility than to partner with cash-strapped public agencies in order to support public relief efforts with a variety of grants, expert research and development services, and operational support? Through these partnerships, private companies – in contrast to the people or their representative government – will acquire the means to drive social progress and to act as guardians of entire “ecosystems” of people, places, things, and ideas. Government administration is, in effect, outsourced to some private corporation that made a deal that couldn’t be refused.
The Shift host Doug McKenty discusses the rollout of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and its effects on higher education with Julianne Romanello, Ph.D. Drawing on her experience of the corporate takeover of the University of Tulsa and on the concepts elaborated by 20th-century political philosopher Eric Voegelin, Dr. Romanello discusses topics including the constriction of traditional university curriculum in favor of STEM training, the formation of public-private partnerships for the purpose of advancing the Great Reset, and the wholescale transition to a pedagogical model aimed at social change-making.
Activists, Permaculture Farmers, and Solutionaries unite for The Greater Reset Activation, an alternative to the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. Julianne Romanello, PhD, appears at 12:26:00 in the broadcast. Activists, researchers, influencers, permaculturists and entrepreneurs are coming together to participate in The Greater Reset, an initiative of The Freedom Cell Network. Join us from January 25 – 29, and 31st, 2021, as we counter the World Economic Forum’s The Great Reset initiative. www.thegreaterreset.org
Kilgore from IDoNotComply.org discussing The Great Reset with Julianne Romanello, December 22, 2020
In this installment of the Free Thought discussion series, Kilgore sits down with Julianne Romanello, Ph.D. to discuss The Great Reset, The 4th Industrial Revolution, human capital, and social impact finance.