Thoughts on Covid-19: The Great Reset, by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret

A few weeks after the World Economic Forum launched their ‘Great Reset‘ initiative, it was followed up with the release of a new book titled, ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset‘, authored by the executive chairman of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, and Senior Director of the Global Risk Network at the institution, Thierry Malleret.

Having read the book I wanted to share with you some initial thoughts on the potential significance of the publication.

As touched upon in my last article, there are 5 planks to the Great Reset – economic, societal, geopolitical, environmental and technological – all of which the book covers in detail. But I want to focus largely on the conclusion, as it is here where the author’s motivations and rationale for championing a Great Reset, in the wake of Covid-19, become clearer.

Schwab and Malleret characterise the future direction of the world as ‘The Post Pandemic Era‘, a phrase that is repeated ad nauseam throughout. Rather than define it to a particular outcome, the authors opt instead to ask whether this new era will be marked by more or less cooperation between nations. Will countries turn inward resulting in the growth of nationalism and protectionism, or will they sacrifice their own interests for greater interdependence?

No firm prediction is made either way, but we do manage to gain a degree of insight into the authors’ way of thinking when they discuss what they call ‘the direction of the trend.’ They write that concerns over the environment (primarily through the prism of climate change) and the advancement of technology (integral to the Fourth Industrial Revolution) were pervasive long before Covid-19 entered the picture. With the economic and health implications of the lockdowns now ingrained within society, Schwab and Malleret contend that long established worries amongst citizens ‘have been laid bare for all to see‘ and ‘amplified‘ because of the pandemic. In other words, if minds were not concentrated on the problems and threats the world faced before Covid-19, then they certainly are now.

And whilst the direction of these trends on the environment and technology may not have changed, with the onset of Covid-19 it ‘got a lot faster.’ It is why Schwab and Malleret believe that these two issues in particular ‘will force their way onto the political agenda‘ due to increasing public pressure. A movement such as Extinction Rebellion is one example. Another is the rapid growth of the Fintech community which is leading people to question what constitutes money ‘in the digital age.’

As for where they see things going in the future, the suggestion is that current trends are pointing towards a world that will be ‘less open and less cooperative than before the pandemic.’

Effectively, the WEF have presented the world with two potential outcomes. The first is that the Great Reset can be achieved relatively peacefully with nations acquiescing to the objectives being pushed by global planners. The second outcome, they warn, would be far more disruptive and damaging. It would come about through countries failing to address the ‘deep rooted ills of economies and societies‘, which could see a reset being ‘imposed by violent shocks like conflicts and even revolutions.’

And, apparently, we do not have much time to decide our fate. What we have now, according to the authors, is ‘a rare and narrow window of opportunity to reflect, re-imagine and reset our world‘. If a ‘proper reset‘ is to be realised, it can only occur through an increased level of collaboration and cooperation between nations. As Schwab and Malleret see it, the alternative is a world entrenched in perpetual crisis which would eventually lead to the disintegration of the post World War Two ‘rules based global order‘ and a global power vacuum.

There is, therefore, a very real risk of the world becoming ‘more divided, nationalistic and prone to conflicts than it is today.’

One thing the authors do write on from a position of clarity is that never can the world return to normal. Or more to the point, be allowed to return to normal. Their view is that before Covid-19 took hold, a ‘broken sense of normalcy prevailed‘. The situation now is that the virus ‘marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.’ In a very short space of time it ‘magnified the fault lines that beset our economies and societies‘.

If it was not already obvious, then the authors confirm over the last few pages of the book that the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development programme is intertwined with the Great Reset. This is evident when studying the WEF’s Strategic Intelligence unit. Sustainable Development and the Great Reset go hand in hand.

For Agenda 2030 to be implemented successfully, Schwab and Malleret offer an alternative to the possibility of countries failing to come together. As you might expect, it revolves around collaboration and cooperation. In their eyes no progress can otherwise be made. Covid-19 offers the opportunity to ‘embed greater societal equality and sustainability into the recovery‘. And, crucially, this would ‘accelerate rather than delay progress towards 2030 Sustainable Development Goals‘.

But it does not end simply with the full implementation of Agenda 2030. Schwab and Malleret want to go further. Their aim is that the open exposure of weaknesses within existing global infrastructure ‘may compel us to act faster by replacing failed institutions, processes and rules with new ones that are better suited to current and future needs.’ To convey the importance of this statement, the authors state that this alone is ‘the essence of the Great Reset’What they appear to be seeking is global transformation where systems and the age of the algorithm take precedent over political institutions. We are already beginning to see moves by major global institutions like the Trilateral Commission, the World Trade Organisation and the European Union to ‘reform‘ and ‘rejuvenate‘ both their work and membership. Covid-19 has undoubtedly straightened the hand of global planners and their quest for reformation.

As ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ was published, it was accompanied by an article written by Schwab and Malleret. Called, ‘COVID-19’s legacy: This is how to get the Great Reset right‘, they stated plainly that not only will a lot of things change forever, ‘the worst of the pandemic is yet to come’:

We will be dealing with its fallout for years, and many things will change forever. It has wrought (and will continue to do so) economic disruption of monumental proportions.

Indeed, no industry or business will be able to avoid the impact of the changes ahead. Either they adapt to fit in with the Great Reset agenda (assuming they have the resources to do so), or they will not survive. According to Schwab and Malleret, ‘millions of companies risk disappearing‘, whilst only ‘a few‘ e.g. corporate monoliths, will be strong enough to withstand the disruption. It is your smaller companies and independent run businesses that are faced with ruin, opening the door to a new era of mergers and acquisitions that will further erode consumer choice and competition.

Schwab and Malleret tell us that the worst of the pandemic is yet to come, and from an economic standpoint I would not doubt them. But let’s look at the health aspect for a moment. Global media coverage of Covid-19 has characterised it as a deadly virus that kills with impunity, and without the antidote of a vaccine could devour communities whole.

Perhaps surprisingly, the authors offer up a little fact based logic. They admit that Covid-19 is ‘one of the least deadly pandemics in the last 2000 years‘, and barring something unforeseen ‘the consequences of the virus will be mild compared to previous pandemics.’ At the time the book was published, 0.006% of the global population were reported to have died from Covid-19. But even this low figure is not altogether accurate.

In the UK for instance the way the death rate has been calculated has meant that people who have been diagnosed with the virus and then succumbed to an accident within 28 days of being tested will have their cause of death marked as Covid-19.

To quote Professor Yoon Loke, from the University of East Anglia, and Professor Carl Heneghan, from Oxford University:

Anyone who has tested COVID positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE COVID death figures.

Schwab and Malleret could not be clearer when they write that Covid-19 ‘does not constitute an existential threat or a shock that will leave its imprint on the world’s population for decades‘. As it stands the Spanish Flu and HIV/AIDS have a larger mortality rate.

It was not an uncontrollable spread of Covid-19 that caused governments around the world to shut down their national economies, but the data modelling of unaccountable technocrats like Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London that predicted hundreds of thousands of people were at immediate risk of dying without the imposition of social restrictions, which we now know to be a combination of social distancing and lockdown measures.

When Schwab and Malleret talk about Covid-19 leaving it’s imprint on the world, the truth of the matter is that it is the measures imposed in the name of Covid-19 that have caused widespread economic destruction, not the virus itself. That distinction is one that mainstream outlets in particular refuse to engage with.

In summary, if we are to take the authors at their word, then they see a rise in nationalism and protectionism off the back of Covid-19 as a detriment to the quest for a Great Reset. The much coveted Sustainable Development Goals could even be at risk should nations turn inward. IMF Managing Director has said the world has a choice between the Great Reset or the Great Reversal (the Great Reversal being ‘more poverty, more fragmentation, and less trade‘) I would argue that there is another way of looking at it.

In the book Schwab and Malleret describe how in an interdependent world – which is precisely the kind of world that global planners have been championing since at least the end of World War Two –  ‘risks conflate with each other, amplifying their reciprocal effects and magnifying their consequences‘. When nations are interdependent, ‘the systemic connectivity between risks, issues, challenges determines the future.’ It is the old cliche of dominoes falling. Once one falters it sets off a chain reaction, which was evidenced back in 2008 when Lehman Brothers collapsed.

The scale of change that globalists are calling for through the vehicle of a Great Reset, which by definition is global in nature, will in my view require the implosion of the current world order to lay the foundations for a new world order. The old must make way for the new. And the one method for how that could be achieved is through increased kickback against interdependence. Sustained crises offer many opportunities for global planners. The potential for a contested U.S. election, an upcoming no deal Brexit and warnings of ‘vaccine nationalism‘ are three eventualities that if brought to bear could be exploited and used to advance the cause for a Great Reset. I would say that the further the world appears from collaboration and cooperation, the more people are going to call for those very same things if they become increasingly desperate.

The authors say that there is only a narrow window of opportunity for the Great Reset. Let’s keep in mind though that so far it is only global institutions like the WEF that are promoting the initiative, not national administrations. When it starts to permeate politics is when you know the agenda is advancing. But what exactly will the economic and societal conditions be when the Great Reset becomes part of the global conversation? Has what we have seen up to now been enough to compel people to call for change on a global scale? Has there yet been enough degradation and material change to living standards for citizens to implore global institutions to take action? I would argue not.

Already ‘solutions‘ like Universal Basic Income have been touted. But as yet there is not a widespread clamouring for change. But that time is coming. Whether it be in the name of Agenda 2030 (aka Sustainable Development), The Green New Deal or The Great Reset, it would amount to largely the same outcome – the subjugation once and for all of national sovereignty where the nation state is subordinate to global governance.



  1. Great stuff Steven.

    I noticed that Patrick Wood picked up your article on his “Technocracy News and Trends” youtube channel’s latest. In my humble opinion Patrick is the king of Technocracy (well, the king of exposing these diabolical plans) so that’s a fantastic accolade.

    Keep up the good work !


  2. Nicely thought out and said. Of course the only options to any of the orchestrated crises, fake man made global warming, fake multiple on order pandemics and now a fake BLM revolution in the USA are globalist’s options. They intend to control the pathways to their Technocratic transhumanist world through either a hard road through instituted chaos and pain if the general population avoids being manipulated through fear of created “hobgoblins” or a rapid transition with no push back from an anesthetized populous. I believe that the threat of with holding loans from businesses if they do not comply with Agenda 21 is already the same threat that has been transmitted to national entities with a variation of imposition of the threat. This is apparent with the ‘lockstep’ reaction of most nations to the covid protocols that are the opening moves to the fast tracking of this pyramid cap’s ambitions. Sweden of course is not strong enough to disobey the dictates of this unseen power play and must be regarded as some sort of control group to the overall covid experiment. Where we do see actual balking to the reset agenda is in Belarus which refused to accept WB loans to combat the fake covid pandemic, with the acceptance of the attached conditionalities of economic destruction through lockdown protocols. This as paramount to creating a failed current system as impetus in the adoption of the new system on offer.. A colour revolution as a practiced operation is the result now in progress in Belarus against a leadership which is indeed dictatorial but otherwise entirely acceptable to the pyramid cap as long as that leadership is compliant to the cap’s ambitions.

    There are of course multiple avenues to righting this world that do not see the light of day in the debate of humanity’s future because these propositions would necessarily go to the heart of the current problem of how the current power structure enslaves humanity through debt controlled and all owed to a minuscule subset of the human population. A subset that is “absolutely corrupted” to their very souls by the immense disparity of leveraged power over the rest. This small subset has become so warped as as a group and individually as the expansion of their control structures have advanced over the last 350 years or so that they retain little of what makes people human! The sanctifying of human dignity and the individual freedom of self determination is to be wholly degraded by a this tiny class of ‘Dementors’ so that their wealth and power can never be challenged ever again which is the real goal behind the whole reset facade.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Excellent article Steven, thank you, as always you are on the button. I am reminded of the great global reset of 536AD as described in the book: which, through a volcanic eruption and the black plague, ushered in the new world order we are witnessing collapsing today.

    Whether this pandemic was a Plandemic is a mute point as it has instigated permanent changes to our world that only a New Emergent Economy can be the outcome as described in my book, ‘The Financial Jigsaw’ describing the failures and corruption of our global institutions and systems, its demise and transmogrification. A free PDF is available:


    • Yes, ‘no poverty’ meaning a one world standard of living. Globalism being the standardization of all world systems. To standardize inventory and control all finances, law/regulations, all land, water, information, education, all minerals, plants, animals. energies, means of production, construction, human habitation and all humans on this planet,


  4. Nicely written! I only have one tiny objection. You write: “Let’s keep in mind though that so far it is only global institutions like the WEF that are promoting the initiative, not national administrations.”

    That’s not 100%. The WEF could only reach its dominance, because the Swiss government allowed them tax freedom as international organization (or something like that). I’m not sure if this runs on federal level in CH or on canton level, but somewhere Klaus and his cronies managed to get a tax exemption for their little club. It’s the reason why everyone loves going there including the security detail: Making a ton of money without having to give away half of it. As for the ones in the position to invite: What better way to corrupt an NGO speaker than by paying them a nice sum to attend there.


    • Bang on, the nexus being the ‘all money created as debt owed to its owners among a pyramid cap,’ BIS sitting on its sovereign ground in Basel in the shape of Orwell’s boot. And of course many govts. (especially at the local level). are now very busy instituting Agenda 21- sustainable development- aka a Technocracy under the auspices of the WEF’s ‘Great Reset.’ This iteration of another fake pandemic, fake BLM revolution, as excelerators, but the all too real removal of civil privileges is the State serving globalist elites. “The State exists to enforce the dominance of elites, all the rest being propaganda, misdirection and obfuscation.”


  5. Schwab and Malleret guess that, without agreement to the capitalist reset, there is “a very real risk of the world becoming ‘more divided, nationalistic and prone to conflicts than it is today.’”
    I do not think this is possible! The world has been deeply divided into three sordid worlds for centuries. These are: the ‘first’ world comprised by the imperialist/ nationalistic/ industrialized/ developed countries; the ‘second’ world, comprised by the independent/ nationalistic/ industrialized/ socialist countries; and the ‘third’ world, comprised by the occupied/ subservient/ looted/ impoverished underdeveloped countries.
    These brutes actually mean that the socialist ‘second’ world must submit to the ‘first’ world, since their success is threatening them. That is, the world should remain as it is, as any change will affect the balance that exists between the ‘first’ world and the ‘third’ world.


  6. “…before Covid-19 took hold, a ‘broken sense of normalcy prevailed‘. The situation now is that the virus ‘marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.’”
    This is how these thugs want us to see it… But, the break of the system was NOT caused by the coronavirus. The system failed a long time ago. It broke because it had passed its sell-by-date. Today, there are over 6 billion people excluded of the formal sector of the economy, living from the leftovers – in poverty and unstable (as even despite joblessness and without any kind of social- security, they still disturb the powerful criminals, occasionally, just because they use some space…). A world socio-economic system like this could not possibly survive, today, as HISTORY has shown that, before capitalism-imperialism, several socio-economic systems had been replaced by systems that were more adequate for their time. Technological development is the key. Today, our technological development is high enough to sustain a world free of exploitation and poverty.


  7. How can these criminals affirm that “…‘the worst of the pandemic is yet to come’”? How do they know that the coronavirus pandemic is not over? What about the Russian vaccine, for example?
    Obviously, they are NOT talking about the virus! They are talking about the ECONOMIC COLLAPSE! That is, ‘the worst of the economic collapse is yet to come’… And I do want to see it happen! It must happen, so we can get rid of capitalism once and for all.


  8. These communists can wrap up their plan in all the pretty words they want but what it boils down to is global communism which is what UN Agenda 21/2030 Agenda and the MDGs/SDGs has always been about. It is not about the environment, climate change, poverty, peace etc etc. It has ALWAYS been and still is about global communism and the destruction of billions of lives, private property, freedom and liberty. The only revolution that will come is if they try to move this agenda forward. Of course they could always bump off a few billion with their vaccines and planned famine before they start their take over as to make it easier. But as long as Americans are armed and there are still decent people alive around the world this plan will NEVER survive. Who gives these people the right to decide how the entire world should function. They have no right. They have no authority. They are lying about their agenda and many people know this. This COVID was a planned event and we know it and we know why. If Trump is elected again he needs to defund the UN as his first line of business then he needs to stop tax exempt foundations to get rich off of the blood of the tax payer. We will no longer pay for our own demise. Tax exempt foundations are the cancer that will destroy this country.


  9. In August 2019, months before the first corona cases were reported in Wuhan China, BlackRock authored.
    BlackRock was later hired to implement parts of its own plan in the US, Canada and Sweden.

    Then, in September 2019, the WHO Global Preparedness Monitoring Board published “A world at risk”…

    In another one of those strange coincidences, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink is also a trustee of the WEF – a co-host of the high-level pandemic simulation exercise of a coronavirus outbreak (Event 201) that was done on 18 October 2019.

    That was all before the “Great reset” plan of the WEF:


    • Hello Eric,

      I’m going to write an article on this soon. I wouldn’t profess to have the answers, but raising awareness alone is not enough. There needs to be a strategy in place to prevent the plans of the WEF becoming our future. It begins with knowledge and understanding.


  10. “Has there yet been enough degradation and material change to living standards for citizens to implore global institutions to take action? I would argue not.”
    Well, it seems that the good folks at the WEF agree with you on that point. Indeed, they appear to have anticipated such an outcome and have prepared a “second wave,” or booster shot if you will, of societal and economic upheavals. Next, we are warned, it will be a cyber-attack named “Cyber-Polygon,” and it will so dwarf in scale and intensity the impacts and aftermath of the supposed bio-attack of COVID19 as to really concentrate the hearts and minds of those of us amongst the rabble. Here is a nice breakdown and preview, by Ice Age Farmer via Activist Post, of the pending or imminent calamity already lined up for us to really drive the point home:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.