Rothschild Admits ESG Failure As Globalists Shift To "Inclusive Capitalism" Agenda
(Brandon Smith) In July of last year as the hype surrounding the covid pandemic was finally dying out I published an article about a barely publicized project called the “Council For Inclusive Capitalism.”
The group, headed by Lynn Forester de Rothschild who now seems to be the public face of the notorious Rothschild dynasty, is the culmination of decades of various globalist agendas combined to represent the ultimate proof of “New World Order” conspiracy.
Remember when people used to say that global governance by elitists was a paranoid fantasy? Well, now the plan is an openly admitted reality.
The CIC is intimately tied to institutions like the World Economic Forum, the UN and the IMF, but it is primarily an attempt to link all these organizations more closely to the corporate world in an open display of collusion. The group pushes the spread of what they call “Stakeholder Capitalism” – The idea that international corporations have a responsibility to participate in social engineering, and that they are required (in the name of the greater good) to manipulate civilization through economic punishments and rewards.
We witnessed this agenda in action during the covid lockdowns and the rush to enforce vaccine passports. These efforts would not have been possible without the participation of major corporate chains working hand-in-hand with national governments and the World Health Organization. Luckily, the strategy failed as local governments and the public fought back.
We have also seen the ugliness of stakeholder capitalism in the push for ESG rating systems among major companies. Most readers are probably familiar with ESG at this point; just keep in mind that the public was oblivious to the terminology until the past 2 years. Globalists have been developing ESG rules since 2005. What is ESG? As Klaus Schwab of the WEF notes:
“The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.
…What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.”
ESG was intended to be the tool that globalists and governments would use to force companies into the stakeholder capitalism model. It is much like the Chinese communist social credit system, but for businesses rather than individuals. The higher a company’s ESG score, the more access lending and government funding they would have (easy money). It started out in 2005 focused on climate controls (influencing corporations to accept carbon credits and taxation). But, by 2016 it became something else; ESG widely adopted woke politics including Critical Race Theory, feminism, trans ideology, various elements of Marxism, etc.
This was the modern ESG that all of us are aware of today. The goal was to incentivize corporations into bombarding the public with woke messaging 24/7. Every movie, every TV show, every book, every comic, every children’s cartoon, every commercial, every product, every major social media site, every employee handbook, every social interaction would be tainted with the poison of woke propaganda. There would be nowhere to hide, nowhere to escape the messaging. And it worked, for a little while…
The exposure of ESG is perhaps one of the greatest triumphs of the alternative media. It was proof that the “wokification” of our economy and society was not the result of some grassroots activist movement or the natural evolution of civilization. No, everything woke was a rigged agenda, an astroturf movement forced into existence by corporations and globalists using ESG as the vehicle.
It is with some disappointment I’m sure that Lynn Forester de Rothschild recently admitted the defeat of ESG at the B20 Summit in India. Though, Rothschild also suggests that the goal will be to replace the term “ESG” with something else that the public is not as privy to. In other words, the globalists have been forced to abandon ESG but will continue to look for other methods to trap companies into the far-left hive.
It is typical for globalists to re-brand their projects whenever they get exposed as a way to throw the public off the scent. However, I don’t think this tactic is going to work anymore. Researchers are locked onto the ESG dynamic and changing the name will not help the establishment avoid scrutiny.
Interestingly, I have noticed a dramatic shift by globalists towards a defensive posture, rather than the offensive posture they held a couple years ago. I can only conclude that something went very wrong for them during covid. They were brazen with their rhetoric in 2020, basically admitting their intentions to enforce a global authoritarian system. Now they are sheepish and much more careful in the things they say.
To this end, most of the honest discussion on globalism is no longer found in the statements of the WEF or the halls of the Davos forums. People like Klaus Schwab are fading into the background. The true agenda is now discussed at more obscure climate change events such as B20 in India or the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris which I covered in July. These are the events where globalists feel more free to talk about what they REALLY want.
One interesting comment from Rothschild at B20 was her claim that Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is one of the best models for incentivized climate controls. This confirms what we already suspected: The Inflation Reduction Act had nothing to do with inflation. Rather, it was a way to divert taxpayer funds into government subsidies for carbon taxation and green tech. That is to say, Rothschild and the CIC want to dictate global business and force companies to adopt ESG-like policies using trillions of dollars in climate funds ($7.5 trillion per year, to be exact).
Look at it this way: Any company that “volunteers” to use less efficient green tech and to promote climate ideology gets access to government subsidies – they get rewarded. Any company that refuses to go along with the plan will ultimately face heavy taxation while trying to compete with their subsidized peers – They are forced out of business. This is, essentially, the early stages of a global communist/collectivist economic regime.
And this is where we get to the crux of the issue.
There is no “inclusive capitalism.” There is no “stakeholder capitalism.” There is no “ESG.”
Climate change as an existential threat is a farce, just as covid was never a legitimate threat to the vast majority of people. All of these issues represent smoke and mirrors, a way to distract the populace from the root intent – To create total financial centralization in the hands of a select few elites.
It’s not about the environment. It’s not about public health. It’s ALL about the economy.
The end game for them is to convince the public to embrace economic micromanagement.
Once the economy is locked into an ideological prison where businesses are forced to virtue signal, once access to private trade can be denied by a handful of bureaucrats working with corporations, the establishment then has the means to dictate every other facet of society.
Our behaviors, our beliefs, our principles, our morals; everything is up for grabs.
For if the oligarchy has the power to determine if you and your family eat or starve, they then have the power to make you do anything they want you to do.
