I saw this article by Mr. 187 IQ himself, Scott Greer, Klaus Schwab: The Safe Villain.
It was re-tweeted approvingly by Cernovich. Same for Richard Hanania who similarly expressed skepticism of the prevailing right-wing narrative about the WEF.
“Schwab is a convenient and safe scapegoat to blame for our situation because he’s an identifiable figure, he isn’t elected by anyone, he looks evil, and you won’t be called a bigot for attacking him.”
Analysis of the brain virus of anti-Schwabism. https://t.co/wng34GFS93
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) January 17, 2023
This is evidence of the emergence of a sort of clique or schism in the online-right between those who are more conspiratorially-minded, in contrast those who are more pragmatic or realistic, or who want to signal more high-status views/values. I have observed with with vaccines, too.
But I agree that the threat of the WEF is probably overstated. It’s just mostly well-connected people pretending to enthusiastically listen to lectures about ‘climate change’ or ‘sustainability’, not some covert plot to overtake the world. Apparently, the WEF includes way more than just billionaires, dignitaries, and statesmen, but also journalists, academics, and other lower-ranked people. Over 3,000 individuals attended in 2018, which is way more than I would have expected, and hardly limited to just elites. It’s not like you have to be that powerful to be invited. If the WEF is supposed to be some covert plot, why would journalists be invited? Although the media is restricted from some events. From Wiki:
At the 2018 annual meeting, more than 3,000 participants from nearly 110 countries participated in over 400 sessions. Participation included more than 340 public figures, including more than 70 heads of state and government and 45 heads of international organizations; 230 media representatives and almost 40 cultural leaders were represented.
As many as 500 journalists from online, print, radio, and television take part, with access to all sessions in the official program, some of which are also webcast. Not all the journalists are given access to all areas, however. This is reserved for white badge holders. “Davos runs an almost caste-like system of badges”, according to BBC journalist Anthony Reuben. “A white badge means you’re one of the delegates – you might be the chief executive of a company or the leader of a country (although that would also get you a little holographic sticker to add to your badge), or a senior journalist. An orange badge means you’re just a run-of-the-mill working journalist.” All plenary debates from the annual meeting also are available on YouTube while photographs are available on Flickr.
400 sessions? That sounds really boring. From what I gather, it’s like a giant convention for certain well-connected and high-status people to discuss high-minded ideas and to signal ingroup belonging, not a cabal or a conclave, which would imply much more secrecy or exclusivity, like the College of Cardinals.
Some of the most disastrous policy over the past 2 decades, like the Iraq War and the Covid restrictions/lockdowns, had nothing to do with the WEF. The WEF has no power, per say. Neither its participants nor its ‘deacon’, Mr. Schwab, can compel anyone to do anything. Even Bill Gates, who epitomizes the ‘globalist elite’ found that his policy recommendations largely fell on deaf ears or were ridiculed, while always being in the shadow of Fauci, whose powers were also quite limited . The Covid restriction were mostly inspired by policy papers out of Europe early on during the pandemic, and then enacted worldwide by leaders otherwise acting independently, not as part of a global conspiracy. Unlike 911, there was no ‘national response’ to Covid; states had discretion on how many or few restrictions to enact. State/local governments imposed restrictions of varying severity, which were enforced by local police, not globalist elites.