World Economic Forum. In essence, it's an NGO with globalist agenda and as a result the boogyman of the ant-globalist movement. There are some valid criticism and very creative conspiracy theories around it. Capitol invading shamans level stuff, highly recommend it.
"Globalist" became a too obvious anti-Semitic whistle so now the far-right is fear-mongering about one specific international NGO that cares about global issues like climate change and international trade.
The far-right has always claimed that the Jews are the puppeteers of various progressive movements they don't like. A century ago they accused the Jews of being behind and secretly controlling the Bolshevik movement. Now they accuse Jews of being behind globalism, international trade agreements, and mass immigration.
I'm sure the far-right accuses Jews of those, and many other things. But that (obviously) doesn't mean we can't be critical of those things.
And if you say that criticizing those things is being an antisemite, aren't you just implicitly endorsing the far-right theories you just denounced? I mean, we should be able to criticize mass immigration, or international trade agreements, globalism, etc. regardless of who supports those ideas, but especially if jews aren't even involved then what's the harm? (Note that jews being involved still would not change the fact that we should obviously be able to agree or disagree with, and criticize any political idea, policy, theory or ideology).
For me, criticizing globalism is not that different from criticizing imperialism, since (at least IMHO) globalism, and more specifically global governance, is a form of imperialism. One of the best-known critic of globalization is Noam Chomsky, who happens to be Jewish (but, again, that is completely incidental and not really relevant to what he thinks).
The left likes to vilify the practices of the IMF, BlackRock and GoldmanSachs. Is that also a "too obvious anti-Semitic [dog]whistle"? Or does that only apply to those evil people on the right?
There's stuff on the left end that ends up in Antisemitism. Usually when the nuance goes missing, and it becomes "a cabal of organizations (whose make up may differ at times) controls what's going on in the world."
"I dislike the IMF for its simplistic monetary policy that they enforce with their loans and which often leaves countries worse off than they were before" is very different from "The IMF controls all money flows to try to enslave us all."
I don't understand how this thread and comment about WEF turned into name calling between you two, but I'd like to address this:
> Because when you look at NGO that openly works to support young people and is openly proud when young people succeed you see conspiracy.
They don't care about young people and their success. They influence impressionable people and having them owe them favours. Young, politically passionate and famous people fit that bill nicely. All they care about is lining their pockets, at the end of the day. They're a bit like modern Mafia. Mafia used to threaten people physically, and these people hang the looming threat of getting cancelled.
WEF is a lobbying group. And everyone knows (sans those in lobbyists circles) lobbying is just corrupt. A pig with lipstick is still a pig, and all that.
If you look at the videos posted, they either circle jerk about how great they are and set vague and forgettable goals about the "greater good".
Look, I like your version much more, but it's naïve to ignore human nature. They're using people's good faith like yours to spread their bullshit gospel.
A comment here linked a wikipedia link to the WEF; I recommend reading it in full before forming your opinions.
Plenty of jewish people all throughout history have been anti-semites. It's no different than the pastor who screams the evils of pedophiles while diddling altar boys or the republican congressman voting against gay rights while getting a handy in the airport bathroom.
Trudeau and Schwab are catholics, Macron is masonic, at what point am I even talking about Jewish? I hadn't even checked their religions. Their "club" of World Leaders has nothing to do with religion, they share an ideology which again has nothing to do with religion, and they document it themselves, go ahead and read the Great Reset by their guru Schwab.
You can call me a conspiracy nut, it's fine, I could even feel proud about it, but antisemitic is definitely not.
You believe in justice, good for you, reality will teach you otherwise (if their cover up for Epstein and Biden hasn't already) one day or another, the hard way.
"Trudeau and Schwab are catholics"
Their politic and public behavior has nothing to do with catholic doctrine. They could name themselves as Catholics, but their actions are not.
What discussion? I don't see a discussion but interpretation of facts in a way to fit a narrative of a conspiracy and I provide alternative interpretation.
Did justice, medias, zuckerberg, meet with biden who told them to cover for him? No, who would believe in such conspiracy.
Does justice, medias, zuckerberg, biden, share an ideology that drives them to manipulate the masses? Yes, they are under the influence of the ideology of the WEF guru.
You need to realize we're way past conspiracy theories, we're fighting an ideology which has way too much power, such as making an election with mass manipulation, and religion has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I'd like to mention that I used to be on the other side, with the "anti conspirationists" and other "fact checkers" before realizing over time that I was on the wrong side of what's happening.
When ever you start to see the world in "sides", you need to recognize this as a canary and reflect on your world view. It is more complex than that. Your blanket statements here are typical, jump to conclusions that fit your theories, conspiracy statements, so don't be surprised if people don't bother to look behind the crass words.
Heck, I'm seeing evidence to that in my own country. Where a number of unpopular decisions supported by fallacies are taken by some of our government officials, using some of the most expedient and least democratic tools possible.
There's this article from the French constitution where the prime minister can force the parliament to vote for a particular law without further discussion, unless the parliament gathers enough votes to kick the entire government out (at which point the President has to name another Prime minister). It requires more than half of all congress people (translating/simplifying here), not just more than half of the votes, and lately this procedure was used quite a bit more often than we should be comfortable with.
It seems the end game for those people is maturing corporate capitalism all the way to cyberpunk, though without the cool implants I'm afraid.
i.e. rush the world into some globalist, "sustainable" future as soon as possible and never mind the impact on the regular people. As long as Davos man can still swan about to conferences in a private jet it's all good.
