The term ‘Davos Man’ was originally coined by the Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington in an essay entitled ‘Dead Souls’. It was intended to describe a member of “an emerging global superclass”, or “gold collar workers”, who owed more allegiance to the elite cosmopolitan class than they did to their countries. Why ‘Davos Man’? Because the members of this class – or, at least, the gold-tier members – meet every January in Davos at an annual conference organised by the World Economic Forum, dating back to 1988.
In UnHerd, Thomas Fazi, co-author with Toby Green of the forthcoming book Covid Consensus, has written a good piece about the WEF, which, as readers of this site will know, features in many conspiracy theories that have circulated in the last 21 months. Fazi doesn’t think the WEF is guilty of secretly trying to use its global political influence to pursue a particular policy agenda – rather, it’s doing that quite openly and has been for years.
The issue, to my mind, isn’t whether Klaus Schwab and his cronies are trying to implement various policies in different countries without worrying about democratic accountability – if that’s a conspiracy, it’s a conspiracy in plain sight. Rather, the question is about how it goes about doing this. My view is that the WEF, via annual jamborees like the one that’s about to kick off in Davos, has been so successful at selling its policy solutions to ‘crises’ such as the pandemic, ‘global heating’ and the ‘infodemic’ – to PR-ing them, you might say – it doesn’t have to worry about the mechanics of implementing them. That’s where the conspiracy theorists go wrong. They make all sorts of implausible claims about the degree of control exercised by Schwab and his coterie of billionaire buddies over senior political leaders because, in their minds, that’s the only way to make sense of the fact that so many governments are dancing to the WEF’s tune.
As I’ve argued before, it’s just not credible to claim that Joe Biden, Rishi Sunak, Justin Trudeau, Mark Rutte, Jacinda Arden et al are receiving instructions from Schwab or one of his intermediaries via a back channel because: (a) someone in their governments would have leaked that by now; (b) there are numerous forces at play when it comes to political decision-making, not least “events, dear boy, events”, and the wishes of one person or cabal of people are never more than one consideration among dozens, if not hundreds; (c) the day-to-day decisions political leaders make are often so last-minute, chaotic and contradictory, seeming to follow one agenda one day, only to do a U-turn the next, the idea of there being some controlling intelligence or mastermind behind these decision simply doesn’t make sense.
Read More: Just How Sinister is Klaus Schwab?