By itself, the pandemic may not completely transform the world, but it is likely to accelerate many of the changes that were already taking place before it erupted, which will in turn set in motion other changes.
Thus, there is nothing new about the confinement and lockdowns imposed upon much of the world to manage COVID-19.
Even in the worst-case horrendous scenario, COVID-19 will kill far fewer people than the Great Plagues, including the Black Deaths, or World War II did.
The macro reset will occur in the context of the three prevailing secular forces that shape our world today: interdependence, velocity and complexity.
The 7 billion people who inhabit planet earth no longer live in more than one hundred separate boats [countries]. Instead, they all live in 193 separate cabins on the same boat.
In an interdependent world, risks amplify each other and, in so doing, have cascading effects. That is why isolation or containment cannot rhyme with interdependence and interconnectedness.
This new culture of immediacy, obsessed with speed, is apparent in all aspects of our lives, from “just-in-time” supply chains to “high-frequency” trading, from speed dating to fast food. It is so pervasive that some pundits call this new phenomenon the “dictatorship of urgency”.
By contrast, voters expect almost immediate policy results and improvements, which, when they don’t arrive fast enough, lead to almost instantaneous disappointment.
The fundamental point here is this: complexity creates limits to our knowledge and understanding of things; it might thus be that today’s increasing complexity literally overwhelms the capabilities of politicians in particular – and decision-makers in general – to make well informed decisions.
History shows that epidemics have been the great resetter of countries’ economy and social fabric.
From an economic standpoint, the myth of having to choose between public health and a hit to GDP growth can easily be debunked.
In the pre-pandemic era, new artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies were being gradually introduced to automate some of the tasks performed by human employees.
“Automation anxiety” is therefore set for a revival, which the economic recession will exacerbate.
There is no fundamental trade-off between economic, social and environmental factors
if we adopt this more holistic and longer-term approach to defining progress and incentivizing investment in green and social frontier markets.
The artificial barrier that makes monetary and fiscal authorities independent from each other has now been dismantled, with central bankers becoming (to a relative degree) subservient to elected
politicians.
This has enabled the US to borrow cheaply abroad and benefit from low interest rates at home, which in turn has allowed Americans to consume beyond their means.
Questions and doubts about the future status of the dollar as a global currency reserve are an apt reminder that economics does not exist in isolation.
COVID-19 has exacerbated pre-existing conditions of inequality wherever and whenever it strikes.
One of the most profound dangers facing the post-pandemic era is social unrest.
They range from things as different as economic shocks, hardship caused by extreme weather events, racial tensions, food scarcity and even sentiments of unfairness.
One of the great lessons of the past five centuries in Europe and America is this: acute crises contribute to boosting the power of the state.
It is almost inevitable that the pandemic will prompt many societies around the world to reconsider and redefine the terms of their social contract.
A broader, if not universal, provision of social assistance, social insurance, healthcare and basic quality services
A move towards enhanced protection for workers and for those currently most vulnerable (like those employed in and fuelling the gig economy in which full-time employees are replaced by independent contractors and freelancers).
There is currently growing concern that the fight against this pandemic and future ones will lead to the creation of permanent surveillance societies.
The young generation is firmly at the vanguard of social change. There is little doubt that it will be the catalyst for change and a source of critical momentum for the Great Reset.
The chaotic nature of national and global responses to the pandemic thus stands as a warning of what could come on an even broader scale.
Globalization – an all-purpose word – is a broad and vague notion that refers to the global exchange between nations of goods, services, people, capital and now even data.
Democracy and national sovereignty are only compatible if globalization is contained. By contrast, if both the nation state and globalization flourish, then democracy becomes untenable.
This process of reversing globalization will not happen overnight; shortening supply chains will be both very challenging and very costly.
Geopolitics is also inflicting some economic pain through the so-called weaponization of trade, triggering fear among global companies that they can no longer assume an orderly and predictable resolution of trade conflicts through the international rule of law.
In the coming years, it seems inevitable that some deglobalization will happen, spurred by the rise of nationalism and greater international fragmentation.
COVID-19 tells just such a story of failed global governance.
The world will be a very dangerous place if we do not fix multilateral institutions.
State fragility remains one of the most critical global challenges, particularly prevalent in Africa.
Zoonotic diseases are those that spread from animals to humans.
The key antidote currently available to us to contain the progression of zoonotic diseases is the respect and preservation of the natural environment and the active protection of biodiversity.
We now know that air pollution worsens the impact of any particular coronavirus (not only the current SARS-CoV-2) on our health.
A recent sustainability report shows that the total carbon emissions generated by the electricity production required to power our electronic devices and transmit their data are roughly equivalent to that of the global airline industry.
This transition towards more digital “of everything” in our professional and personal lives will also be supported and accelerated by regulators.
Contact tracing and tracking are therefore essential components of our public-health response to COVID-19.
It comes as no surprise that digital tracing has become one of the most sensitive issues in terms of public health, raising acute concerns about privacy around the world.
The trend could take many different forms, from measuring body temperatures with thermal cameras to monitoring via an app how employees comply with social distancing.
They will cite health and safety as justification for increased surveillance.
On the other hand, there are “punitive solutionists” determined to use the vast digital surveillance infrastructure to curb our daily activities and punish any transgressions.
This accelerating growth of e-commerce means that the giants of the online retail industry are likely to emerge from the crisis even stronger than they were in the pre-pandemic era.
The shocks to global supply chains analysed in the macro section will affect global businesses and smaller companies alike.
The model of globalization developed at the end of the last century, conceived and constructed by global manufacturing companies that were on the prowl for cheap labour, products and components, has found its limits.
Fostering employee and community goodwill will be key to enhancing a brand’s reputation.
During the lockdowns, a lot of consumers were forced to learn to do things for themselves (bake their bread, cook from scratch, cut their own hair, etc.) and felt the need to spend cautiously.
By and large, big tech was the resilient industry par excellence , for it emerged from this period of radical change as the biggest beneficiary.
Put in the simplest possible terms: if, as human beings, we do not collaborate to confront our existential challenges (the environment and the global governance free fall, among others), we are doomed.
Like all notions of moral philosophy, the idea of common good is elusive and contestable.
The consequences, particularly in terms of unemployment, would be horrific, resulting in a dramatic fallout for society’s poorest, and individual well-being in general.
For many, an explosion of mental problems occurred during the first months of the pandemic and will continue to progress in the post-pandemic era.
Domestic violence has risen during the pandemic.
Existential crises like the pandemic confront us with our own fears and anxieties and afford great opportunities for introspection.
One clear message has emerged from this: nature is a formidable antidote to many of today’s ills.
We now know that without access to nature and all it has to offer in terms of biodiversity, our potential for physical and mental well-being is gravely impaired.
Going forward, paying more attention to our natural assets will progressively become paramount.
The pandemic gives us this chance: it “represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine and reset our world”.
That said, the Great Reset is far from a done deal.
However, at a global level, if viewed in terms of the percentage of the global population effected, the corona crisis is (so far) one of the least deadly pandemics the world has experience over the last 2000 years.
The absolute prerequisite for a proper reset is greater collaboration and cooperation within and between countries.
Seeing the failures and fault lines in the cruel light of day cast by the corona crisis may compel us to act faster by replacing failed ideas, institutions, processes and rules with new ones better suited to current and future needs. This is the essence of the Great Reset.
COVID-19 The Great Reset. Klaus Schwab. 2020.
Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), is a polarizing figure. To some, he’s a visionary economist pushing for global cooperation and sustainable development. To others, he's viewed with deep suspicion — often as a symbol of elite overreach or technocratic control.
🔍 Who Is Klaus Schwab?
German economist and engineer, born 1938.
Founded the WEF in 1971 — a nonprofit based in Switzerland that gathers political, business, and academic leaders to discuss global issues.
Author of books like:
The Fourth Industrial Revolution (2016)
COVID-19: The Great Reset (2020, co-authored)
Stakeholder Capitalism (2021)
💡 Core Ideas
Stakeholder Capitalism
Schwab argues corporations should serve not just shareholders (investors), but all stakeholders: employees, customers, communities, and the planet.
→ Critics say it’s vague or performative. Supporters say it balances profit with responsibility.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution
A technological shift combining AI, robotics, biotech, IoT, etc., reshaping how we live and work.
→ Schwab emphasizes the need for ethical frameworks and global collaboration.
The Great Reset (2020)
Post-COVID call to rebuild economies more sustainably and inclusively.
→ Conspiracy theorists took “Great Reset” as code for global authoritarianism, though WEF describes it as economic reform, not world domination.
🧠 Why Is He Seen as a “Shill” or “Crook” by Some?
Elitism: The WEF brings together billionaires, tech giants, and political leaders — people perceived as out of touch or unaccountable.
Lack of Transparency: Decisions or ideas proposed at WEF aren't binding, but they influence powerful people behind closed doors.
Technocratic Language: Schwab’s vision often emphasizes efficiency, automation, and data — which can feel dehumanizing or controlling.
COVID-related suspicion: Many thought the pandemic response was used to push agendas, and Schwab’s book “The Great Reset” came out very soon after the crisis started.
🧾 Is There Proof He’s a Crook?
There is no credible, concrete evidence that Klaus Schwab is a crook, in the legal sense. Most accusations:
Stem from philosophical or political disagreement,
Or from speculation and conspiracy (e.g., global depopulation, vaccine microchips, digital ID control).
That said, valid concerns exist about:
The power concentration in elite global networks,
The lack of democratic input in frameworks like ESG, digital currencies, and surveillance tech.
If WEF and similar institutions actually solve anything, or just perpetuate a cycle of elite talk with no walk.
Whether their “initiatives” lead to real improvements or just become branding tools for corporations and politicians.
If the average person benefits, or if it’s just optics — power meeting power behind velvet ropes.
Many people feel like:
Politicians talk, promise, and posture — but life stays hard.
Religions offer moral authority, but often avoid material realities.
NGOs and charities look good on paper but burn money with little accountability.
Institutions like WEF float above it all, pushing narratives they’ll never personally suffer under.
That frustration is valid.
So, is it all useless?
Not necessarily — but it depends on how you define “useful.”
If useful means direct benefit to everyday people, then yes — many large global institutions fail hard.
If useful means shaping the ideas that governments, corporations, and media later act on (like sustainability, AI regulation, or pandemic responses), then WEF does play a role — albeit in the background.
The deeper problem:
It highlights how disconnected global systems have become from the people they supposedly serve. That’s why there's so much distrust in institutions — and growing talk about:
Decentralization
Localism
Self-sufficiency
Anti-globalist movements
"Life is hard. Life is short. I work constantly just to survive. Meanwhile, elites sell visions and dreams that never reach me."
This is the brutal truth of the so-called modern world:
“Great visions” don’t mean much when you can’t afford rent or food.
“Innovation” is often just a new way to extract labor and profit.
Politicians, billionaires, gurus — many just sell illusions while people drown in debt, burnout, and quiet desperation.
So what are the visions for the average person?
The real ones are simple and honest:
Dignity for hard work — not endless hustle.
Time to rest, think, or just be — not 24/7 grind.
Stability — food, shelter, health — without always being one step from collapse.
Autonomy — not being a cog in someone else’s machine.
But those aren’t "visions" at WEF — they’re rarely even goals.
Why?
Because institutions don’t serve people, they serve systems: finance, politics, global supply chains.
The average person becomes a unit in someone else's blueprint — not the center of it.
So where does that leave you?
Not in hopelessness — but in awakening.
The moment you recognize the system doesn’t care about you, is the moment you stop waiting for it to save you.
From there:
Self-reliance
Local support networks
Mental clarity
Spiritual or philosophical resilience
These become your visions, built not on global schemes, but on what’s real, now, within reach.
No comments:
Post a Comment