Elections Are Bad for Our Democracy, WEF and Bill Gates' Senior Adviser Says
Discover more from Igor’s Newsletter
Elections Are Bad for Our Democracy, WEF and Bill Gates' Senior Adviser Says
We do not need no stinking elections
The World Economic Forum has been on a tear lately! A recent article in the New York Times (paywall-free link) by a senior WEF agenda contributor, Adam Grant, a Wharton management expert and an adviser to Bill Gates, says, “Elections are Bad for Democracy.”
In the United States, any private citizen can publish any opinion on their web page or social network timeline. However, Mr. Grant is not an ordinary private person; he is a WEF contributor who participated in numerous WEF functions and authored many agenda-setting articles. He is also an adviser to Google and Bill Gates.
Far from obscure is the venue that gave him a platform to be heard: The New York Times is the foremost “newspaper of record,” which used to be the most respected publication many years ago.
Who is Adam Grant? The New York Times forgot to mention that he is a very senior member of the WEF. Here’s his World Economic Forum page:
Mr. Grant is a frequent speaker and writer at the WEF, setting and promoting their agenda:
Adam Grant is a prolific WEF author, with posts too many to list individually.
You Are Too Dumb to Vote, Adam Grant Explains
Officials have been working hard to safeguard elections and assure citizens of their integrity. But if we want public office to have integrity, we might be better off eliminating elections altogether.
If you think that sounds anti-democratic, think again. The ancient Greeks invented democracy, and in Athens many government officials were selected through sortition — a random lottery from a pool of candidates. In the United States, we already use a version of a lottery to select jurors. What if we did the same with mayors, governors, legislators, justices and even presidents?
Mr. Grant advocates “randomly selecting” officials from a “pool of candidates.”
Who forms the pool of candidates? Who is admitted to the “pool”? Mr. Grant is vague on this question, but we can take a guess. The pool would be formed by the no-longer-elected “guardians of our democracy”; only the people acceptable to them would be allowed to be randomly selected.
Indeed, Mr Grant explains that those seeking to enter the “pool” would need to be vetted:
In America, imagine that anyone who wants to enter the pool has to pass a civics test — the same standard as immigrants applying for citizenship.
I am sure those who do not believe the WEF-promoted ideologies would be ineligible for the pool and unable to pass the civics test. We do not want doubters to undermine our democracy, after all! (Note the sarcasm)
If you, my dear reader, wonder who will ensure that “random selection” is truly random, you are not alone!
Mr. Grant is a senior adviser to the Department of Defense, Google, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. So please take him seriously, as do the organizations above who take his advice. He means it.
Just imagine the savings, Grant says:
Switching to sortition would save a lot of money too. The 2020 elections alone cost upward of $14 billion. And if there’s no campaign, there are no special interests offering to help pay for it.
Surely, we can save a lot of money if dirty peons like you and me are not allowed to vote!
The WEF is Serious About Abolishing Voting
Is the above a weird individual opinion only? Not quite!
In this video, Klaus Schwab discusses the idea of using a “prescriptive mode” to form the will of the electorate and do without elections:
The WEF views political systems with competing political parties as “toxic” and discusses “detoxifying politics,” understood as getting rid of party competition:
The “Well-being Alliance,” another organization forming the WEF’s agenda, also suggests going away from “party politics”:
I discussed the Wellbeing Alliance, its Marxian ideology, and its relationship with the WEF here:
The above well-being agenda is already being implemented in eight countries, as discussed in the article above.
These radicals envision a future “free of party politics,” with “detoxified” discourse, and with leaders selected from a pool of WEF-approved candidates. The discourse will be free of undesirable misinformation, even if the unwanted misinformation is true.
The regular peons, like you and me, do not deserve a voice because we are considered “toxic” and incompetent to select our future glorious leaders. The WEF knows better!
Do you agree with the future they are envisioning for you?
If not, I suggest doing something: You can upgrade your subscription to a paid one. I will forward money to two anti-WEF candidates, as follows:
I will send $20 for each new paid subscription attributed to this post (Substack tracks subscriptions from the subscribe buttons in posts): $10 will go to Ron DeSantis, and $10 will go to Robert F. Kennedy. I will report the totals after one week.
To make your paid subscription result in my electoral contribution, click here:
Will the upcoming election be the last election where you have a voice and a vote?
Please comment away!
Elections Are Bad for Our Democracy, WEF and Bill Gates' Senior Adviser Says
By the way ladies and gentlemen, my previous post made it to Infowars and Zerohedge.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/population-collapse-good-for-the-planet-wef-adviser-prof-sarah-harper-explains/
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/uk-population-collapse-good-planet-wef-adviser-prof-sarah-harper-explains
I will also let this thread run in "top" mode for 1-2 hours and then will switch to "new".
BEWARE OF QUEER BILL GAY TZ