Opinion
The Great Reset doesn’t care if you believe it exists and Canada is on the front line
If you’re among the many people (can is possibly be the majority?) who still believe The Great Reset is an unfounded conspiracy theory, this article is for you.
The Great Reset ‘conspiracy theory’ has been around for years. If you don’t know what it is, here’s a brief explanation. It basically submits that some of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful people are using some of the world’s largest companies (which they own) as well as many of the world’s richest nations (which they run) to execute a plan to completely change the way our society works (which they don’t like very much). The theory is, these people who refer to themselves as “the elite” are planning to cripple the power of nation states and concentrate that power in a world governing body (like the World Economic Forum). This new powerful “elite” would exercise control over everyone, everywhere. They will completely change our supply chains, our economic systems and our energy systems in an effort to unite the world to protect the environment. There’s more to it, but that gets in most of the main points.
So this is the “theory”. But is there a “conspiracy” around this?
According the the Merriam-Webster Dictionary ‘conspiracy’ means simply “The act of conspiring together”. The Oxford dictionary spices that up a little. According to Oxford, ‘conspiracy’ means “A secret plan by a group of people to do something harmful or illegal”. Seems like it’s going to be easier to prove the Merriam-Webster version, but by the end of this article you’ll see how the Oxford definition might just work as well.
When it comes to all of the people who are not actively conspiring to change the world, there are roughly four categories of understanding The Great Reset. Either you:
- Have no idea there is a Great Reset
- Accept there is a Great Reset, but doubt the ability and the organization of the people conspiring.
- Accept there is a Great Reset, accept the ability of the conspirators, but either agree with their intentions, or at least not oppose their intentions due to your concern for a more fair economic system and an impending world devastating environmental disaster.
- Accept there is a Great Reset, and oppose the intentions of the conspirators because you personally value individual freedoms above everything else.
Group 1 is huge. Recent US polling shows half of Americans aren’t even aware of the Great Reset. It’s not like the people behind the reset aren’t writing and talking about it. It’s just that at least half of Americans haven’t seen them do it. That means we need to establish how it is possible in this age of information, that information of this magnitude is not being distributed to everyone. This part of my explanation is critical to understanding how very intelligent people can be completely unaware of information other people take for-granted.
It all comes down to this. We’ve all experienced the vast chasm of division and hatred in society of late. In this atmosphere of doubt and suspicion, there is really only one one thing in the entire world that absolutely everyone can believe in. President Donald Trump is a capital A a-hole. Even the “Don” would likely agree with that, right? But here’s the thing. When the rude TV star began his stunning run through the primaries, the world quickly divided between those who backed Trump and those who absolutely despised the orange tsunami.
How did this happen? Well a very large number of people, many of them living in ‘middle’ America had had it with the quality of the people running, to run America. When a second Clinton announced a Presidential bid they collectively shouted NOOOO. Then they set out in search of the exact opposite of the establishment. They found it in an orange sun rise of vitriol, emerging over the high rises of Manhattan. When Donald Trump threw his hair, ehem.. his hat into the ring, they had their guy. It wasn’t because of his experience, or that they believed he was ultimately qualified for the job. Trump’s crowning quality was the exact thing most people hate about him. You see it was that massive, bulbous, all encompassing ego that was the key. Only someone with an ego this out of control would be capable of resisting and even going on the attack against the oncoming onslaught of opposition from the embedded establishment and the mainstream media who despise him with a passion.
Trump will likely claim differently, but he didn’t invent divisiveness. The world was already moving in this direction. But like every huge event in history, it all starts with one bullet, one border crossing, and sometimes one very unusual Orange head of hair. Camps divided around Trump’s blinding ego. Guess which side the establishment was on? Guess which side the media was on? Guess what this would mean to the distribution of information?
Personally, when the orange glow emerged from Manhattan I tuned out. Not understanding what was happening, I dismissed the orange storm as a weather system that would fizzle out when people got sick of it. I tuned out of mainstream media because I only had so much time for the gong show that was (and remains) the media coverage of the orange blowhard. This is what saved me. I had to go looking elsewhere for information. I would soon find there was more information here, and different takes on the information everyone ‘knows’.
If you still depend on mainstream media you may not know or have time for an entire new world of information that has developed on the internet over the last few years. Comedians who used to turn to late night TV to analyze the daily news through humour (I understand they are still there), have turned to long form and as it turns out, extremely informing conversations in a series of compelling podcasts. They are joined by former media types and some pretty sharp up and coming minds. While their late night and daytime TV competition unite in their humorous hatred of all things Donald, these longer form conversations have tended to go deeper, due simply to the length of the presentation. Conversations often run past two and three hours, and “sound bites” are more like 5 to 15 or even 30 minute explanations of single issues. Yes it is wise to avoid a number of them, just like you would avoid a number of TV programs, but you dismiss many others at your own expense.
You don’t need to agree with them to find them compelling. They are talking about events, people, and issues (including The Great Reset) you will not even find on regular mainstream media. It is not uncommon for these podcaster / interviewers to be covering topics that my friends who rely on mainstream media won’t hear about for months, or even years. A great example of this is the Hunter Biden laptop. If you’ve been paying attention to this new online media, you’d have known about this since the fall of 2020. For those who rely on regular media, they only discovered the exact same information when it was finally confirmed by the New York Times in March of 2022. The fact they call this breaking news is hilarious (and disturbing) for those who read the original articles from the New York Post, about 20 months ago! Here’s a link to a retrospective look at Biden laptop news from The NY Post from December 2020!
Now on to The Great Reset. If you haven’t already clicked on the link in the fist sentence of this article here’s another opportunity.
OK now at least you know The Great Reset is a real thing. So we move on to people who find themselves in group 2 which doubts that the Reset will ever amount to any actual resetting. This group would say these ‘elites’ live really far away, and they’re probably harmless to us because it’s not like they have any control over us. Not in our country. Well. That all depends on how far away you live from people like Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland. Canada’s Deputy PM is also on the Board of Trustees of the WEF. If that’s not a conflict of interest, they probably need to redefine conflict of interest. Don’t take it from me. Take it from the founder of the World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab. (You mean the Klaus Schwab who researched, wrote, and published the book COVID-19: The Great Reset, less than 6 months after Covid-19 was a thing?.. Yes. that’s the guy.) In this short video from way back in 2017 Schwab brags about the success of a WEF program called Young Global Leaders. In Schwab’s own words, the WEF has “penetrated” Canada’s federal cabinet. Sounds kind of conspiratorial.. and a little bit less like a theory when he says it.
If we want to know if this should be disturbing to us we need to know what Earth’s elites are planning for us. Well the WEF was kind enough to tell us exactly what The Great Reset will mean to.. well.. the rest of us. This (in)famous video reveals just how different life will be for the average person by 2030. It doesn’t say how “the elite” will live, though we can expect they’ll have slightly different rules. Alas, I’m getting ahead of myself. Here’s a list of the 8 things the WEF has been kind enough to let us know we need to prepare for by 2030. I understand this video originally came out in 2016. I first saw it in 2020. In five years it’s been circulated widely. Though it’s no longer featured on the WEF website, there are copies all over the internet.
Recap:
1) We’ll own nothing. Ouch. (Obviously the elite will own everything and since they’re smarter than us we’ll be very happy to know they’re taking care of us so well). It’s being said by opponents of this idea that people who own a bit of land are perhaps the greatest risk to this environmental movement. It’s bad for the environment for us to own property or even your own home. Especially because we decide what happens there. Do we keep animals? Do we cut down trees or burn around on recreation vehicles or inefficient farm machinery? All bad for the environment. All that will change.
2) The US will no longer be the world’s superpower. (Hmmm… Don’t these things often change after brutal wars?) Regardless instead of one superpower, there will be a few important nations. Wonder if that will make the world more secure, or less secure?
3) They plan to use 3D printers to make human organs (lucky for us).
4) We will not be allowed to eat meat very much anymore (cows and pigs and sheep are bad for the environment). Hey, speaking of conspiracies, I mean series of seemingly related facts that are probably just random.. Did you know Bill Gates is the largest private owner of ‘farmland’ in the United States? Not sure when the software magnate and WEF “Agenda Contributor” took up farming. I’m sure none of this is related to what Mr. Gates is going to allow us to eat in the future (nervous smile). Although Gates also happens to be a big investor in synthetic meat. Did I mention he’s an ‘agenda contributor’ with the WEF?
5) One billion people in the world will have to move due to climate change (Not sure if that applies to the beach homes of the elite). (Also not sure why scientists and engineers will stop doing what they’ve always done and help us cope and adapt if conditions are changing quickly and significantly.)
6) Polluters will have to pay to emit carbon dioxide. We already know how this feels in Canada.
7) We will be prepared to travel in space (I’m ready to go now). The logic here is that the earth will be so ruined by us, that we better be prepared to go destroy an entirely different planet. What could go wrong?
Finally and maybe most disturbing of all..
8) Western Values will have been tested to the breaking point. Some probably like the sound of that. But in the history books I’ve read, when a society’s values are tested “to the breaking point” that tends to look incredibly violent and warlike. (In my opinion number 8 is going to be really challenging to accomplish at the same time as the everybody will be happy part in number 1. Maybe that’s why they put them so far apart in their list.). By the way, you have to wonder what they mean by “western values”? Is this finally being enlightened enough to turf Christianity and those silly laws that western societies adopted from those traditional religious beliefs. Can’t wait to find out what the new traditions will be! This outta go over well (Imagine Jerry Seinfeld saying that.)
OK. If you don’t find this a tad disturbing that might mean you are personally in favour of The Great Reset. It’s still a free country so that’s just fine with the rest of us. However the introduction video above is very much prior to the official launch of The Great Reset. That took place in the opening months of the Covid-19 pandemic. It would be better to judge how this is actually going to work by looking at how this New World Order (that’s what they’re calling it now) is unfolding. Now that the resetters have been resetting for about two years, how’s it going so far? Here’s a report from Glenn Beck. Glenn is a conservative pundit and broadcaster. If you follow the mainstream media you will know him as a radical far right conservative (and maybe a lunatic). If you don’t see Beck through that filter you will acknowledge that he sometimes says very interesting things. Things like this. By the way, pay attention to the background behind the speakers at this “world government” conference. Then ask yourself if this group might be planning a new world order.
It’s puzzling that the Canadian media doesn’t give this any coverage. I guess there are simply more important things to talk about than whether our own federal cabinet is working in our interest or in the interests of really rich people who plan to OWN EVERYTHING in just a few short years. Oh this is probably nothing but you may have heard about the federal NDP party making a deal to secure the federal government right up to 2025. That party is lead by the guy who now is Co-Prime Minister Jagmeet Singh. Guess what?
Speaking of Canada. You may find this conversation between the British podcast sensation Russel Brand and Nick Corbishley interesting. Nick is the author of Scanned: Why Vaccine Passports and Digital IDs Will Mean the End of Privacy and Personal Freedom. As Canadians it is interesting to hear how people in other countries are seeing The Great Reset, and how Canadians are “world leaders”. Yippee?
If you’ve managed to find your way through the longest article ever, you will certainly now be able to acknowledge The Great Reset or New World Order exists. The question now is, do you believe this is a good thing or do you think we should resist it as things were working pretty well before they launched this? We can get into that later. At the very least the massive number of people who dismissed the “conspiracy theorists” as slightly insane will see there is a reason many people are concerned. In the end, as all philosophers know we need to establish the facts, before we can decide whether we agree with them or not.
Finally my wise friend Garett reminded about the joke that’s been circulating for many months now on social media. Every time it turns out another conspiracy theory was actually a conspiratorial fact, someone passes it around again. If you haven’t seen it yet it might help with your outlook in the future. Goes like this. “What is the difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth? — About 6 months!”
Business
UNDRIP now guides all B.C. laws. BC Courts set off an avalanche of investment risk
From Resource Works
Gitxaala has changed all the ground rules in British Columbia reshaping the risks around mills, mines and the North Coast transmission push.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal’s decision in Gitxaala v. British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner) is poised to reshape how the province approves and defends major resource projects, from mills and mines to new transmission lines.
In a split ruling on 5 December, the court held that British Columbia’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act makes consistency with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples a question courts can answer. The majority went further, saying UNDRIP now operates as a general interpretive aid across provincial law and declaring the Mineral Tenure Act’s automatic online staking regime inconsistent with article 32(2).
University of Saskatchewan law professor Dwight Newman, who has closely followed the case, says the majority has stretched what legislators thought they were doing when they passed the statute. He argues that section 2 of British Columbia’s UNDRIP law, drafted as a purpose clause, has been turned from guidance for reading that Act into a tool for reading all provincial laws, shifting decisions that were meant for cabinet and the legislature toward the courts.
The decision lands in a province already coping with legal volatility on land rights. In August, the Cowichan Tribes title ruling raised questions about the security of fee simple ownership in parts of Richmond, with critics warning that what used to be “indefeasible” private title may now be subject to senior Aboriginal claims. Newman has called the resulting mix of political pressure, investor hesitation and homeowner anxiety a “bubbling crisis” that governments have been slow to confront.
Gitxaala’s implications reach well beyond mining. Forestry communities are absorbing another wave of closures, including the looming shutdown of West Fraser’s 100 Mile House mill amid tight fibre and softwood duties. Industry leaders have urged Ottawa to treat lumber with the same urgency as steel and energy, warning that high duties are squeezing companies and towns, while new Forests Minister Ravi Parmar promises to restore prosperity in mill communities and honour British Columbia’s commitments on UNDRIP and biodiversity, as environmental groups press the government over pellet exports and protection of old growth.
At the same time, Premier David Eby is staking his “Look West” agenda on unlocking about two hundred billion dollars in new investment by 2035, including a shift of trade toward Asia. A centrepiece is the North Coast Transmission Line, a grid expansion from Prince George to Bob Quinn Lake that the government wants to fast track to power new mines, ports, liquefied natural gas facilities and data centres. Even as Eby dismisses a proposed Alberta to tidewater oil pipeline advanced under a new Alberta memorandum as a distraction, Gitxaala means major energy corridors will also be judged against UNDRIP in court.
Supporters of the ruling say that clarity is overdue. Indigenous nations and human rights advocates who backed the appeal have long argued that governments sold UNDRIP legislation as more than symbolism, and that giving it judicial teeth will front load consultation, encourage genuine consent based agreements and reduce the risk of late stage legal battles that can derail projects after years of planning.
Critics are more cautious. They worry that open ended declarations about inconsistency with UNDRIP will invite strategic litigation, create uncertainty around existing approvals and tempt courts into policy making by another name, potentially prompting legislatures to revisit UNDRIP statutes altogether. For now, the judgment leaves British Columbia with fewer excuses: the province has built its growth plans around big, nation building projects and reconciliation framed as partnership with Indigenous nations, and Gitxaala confirms that those partnerships now have a hard legal edge that will shape the next decade of policy and investment.
Resource Works News
Energy
Tanker ban politics leading to a reckoning for B.C.
From Resource Works
That a new oil pipeline from Alberta to BC is being aired by Ottawa and pushed by Alberta has, in turn, critics eagerly pushing carefully crafted scare stories.
Take the Green Party’s Elizabeth May, for one: She insists that oil tankers leaving Prince Rupert would be sailing through “Canada’s most dangerous waters and the fourth most dangerous waters in the world.”
First, this “dangerous waters” claim is unsubstantiated, unproven, and hyperbolic. It is apparently based on a line in a 1992 federal guide to marine-weather hazards on the west coast, but it is not credited or supported there.
Second, who says a new oil pipeline would go to Prince Rupert? No destination is specified in the memorandum of understanding published by Ottawa and Alberta.
It speaks of a commitment to “enable the export of bitumen from a strategic deep-water port to Asian markets.”
Energy Minister Tim Hodgson: “There is no route today. Under the MoU, what (Alberta) would need to do is work with the affected jurisdiction, British Columbia, and work with affected First Nations for that project to move forward. That’s what the work plan in the MoU calls for.”
First Nations concerned
Now, the MoU does say that this could include “if necessary” a change to the federal ban on oil tankers in northwest BC waters.
Some First Nations are strongly fighting the idea of oil tankers in northern BC waters citing fears of a catastrophic spill. The Assembly of First Nations (AFN), for example, is calling for the Canada-Alberta pipeline MoU to be scrapped.
“A pipeline to B.C.’s coast is nothing but a pipe dream,” said Chief Donald Edgars of Old Massett Village Council in Haida Gwaii.
And AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak said: “Canada can create all the MOUs, project offices, advisory groups that they want: the chiefs are united. . . When it comes to approving large national projects on First Nations lands, there will not be getting around rights holders.”
Alberta group interested
But the Metis Settlements of Alberta say they’re interested in purchasing a stake in the proposed pipeline and want to “work with First Nations in British Columbia who oppose the project.”
The Alberta government’s Indigenous loan agency says a new oil pipeline to the BC coast could deliver “significant” returns for Indigenous Peoples.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has suggested the pipeline could bring in $2 billion a year in revenue, and that it could be as much as 50 per cent owned by Indigenous groups — who would thus earn $1 billion a year,
“Can you imagine the impact that would have on those communities in British Columbia and in Alberta? It’s extraordinary.”
And we note that in 2019 the First Nations-proposed Eagle Spirit Energy Corridor, which aimed to connect Alberta’s oilpatch to Kitimat, garnered serious interest among Indigenous groups. It had buy-in from 35 First Nations groups along the proposed corridor, with equity-sharing agreements floated with 400 others. (The project died with passage of the tanker ban.)
Vancouver more likely
More recent chatter, including remarks by BC Premier David Eby, would suggest oil from a new pipeline would more likely be through Vancouver, rather than via Prince Rupert or Kitimat BC. And tankers have been carrying oil from the Trans Mountain Pipeline System’s Burnaby terminal since 1956 — with no spills.
Oft cited by northern-port opponents is the major spill of 258,000 barrels of crude oil (more than 40 million litres) from the tanker Exxon Valdez, which ran aground in Alaska’s Prince William Sound in 1989.
The resulting spill killed native and marine wildlife over 2,100 km of coastline. The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board found that the spill occurred due to human error. It cited a tired third mate on watch, and noted the captain had an alcohol problem.
But the Exxon Valdez was a single-hull tanker. Its spill led to the phasing out of single-hull tankers, replaced in the ensuing 36 years by new generations of double-hull vessels (with an inner and outer hull separated to contain spills if the outer hull ruptures), new tanker safety rules — and new ways of dealing with the far-fewer spills.
Among those new ways is the Western Canada Marine Response Corporation: “Our mandate is to ensure there is a state of preparedness in place when a marine spill occurs and to mitigate the impacts on B.C.’s coast. This includes the protection of wildlife, economic and environmental sensitivities, and the safety of both responders and the public.”
What about LNG carriers?
At the same time, fear-mongers are actively flogging scare stories on social media.
One opposition group sees future LNG carrier traffic along the southern BC coast as potentially numbering “in the realm of 800+ transits a year.”
Eight hundred a year? BC Ferries runs more than 185,000 a year. And the ferries don’t have tethered tugs helping them to get safely from LNG terminals. And they don’t have BC Coast Pilots on the bridge to keep progress safe. Oil tankers leaving the Port of Vancouver have both.
As marine captain Duncan MacFarlane of LNG Canada in Kitimat says: “LNG carriers are some of the most sophisticated ships in the world…Once loading operations are complete (at LNG Canada), three BC Pilots will join the ship and start navigating up the Douglas Channel, which is approximately 159 nautical miles out to the Prince Rupert pilot station.”
“LNG Canada has partnered with HaiSea Marine, which is a company formed between the Haisla Nation and Vancouver-based SeaSpan, to provide two escort tugs and three harbour-assist tugs to safely move the vessel out of the Douglas Channel…once the vessel drops the pilots at Prince Rupert, it starts a seven- to ten-day voyage to its discharge port. To assist with this, they’ll use satellite navigation, weather routing, and a variety of other technologies to get to their port the safest and most efficient way.”
The same would apply to oil tankers from any northern port in BC.
BC’s tanker-safety record
As the small-c conservative Fraser Institute points out: “Pipelines are 2.5 times safer than rail for oil transportation, and oil tankers have [the] safest record of all.”
And it adds: “The history of oil transport off of Canada’s coasts is one of incredible safety, whether of Canadian or foreign origin, long predating federal Bill C-48’s tanker ban. . . .new pipelines and additional transport of oil from (and along) B.C. coastal waters is likely very low environmental risk. In the meantime, a regular stream of oil tankers and large fuel-capacity ships have been cruising up and down the B.C. coast between Alaska and U.S. west coast ports for decades with great safety records.”
This last refers to the 200-230 tankers a year that now carry crude oil from Alaska through Canadian waters south of Haida Gwaii and then down BC’s Inside Passage or outer coastal waters to Juan de Fuca Strait and Washington refineries.
While these tankers do not transit Hecate Strait (the north end of which is the area of concern about spills from tankers from Prince Rupert or Kitimat) all these US tankers are double-hulled, must report positions, speeds and routes in real-time, must carry certified pilots, must use traffic-separation routes (like traffic lanes), and must slow to 11 knots in sensitive areas.
And as Pipeline Action says: “Canada is not inferior — If Norway can move tankers safely through fjords, if Japan can operate in some of the busiest waterways on Earth, if Alaska balances ecological protection with responsible shipping and if Eastern Canadian ports manage tankers every day, then Canada’s West Coast, with its governance standards, technical capacity and Indigenous partnership potential, can certainly do so.”
Resource Works News
-
Automotive2 days agoThe $50 Billion Question: EVs Never Delivered What Ottawa Promised
-
C2C Journal2 days agoWisdom of Our Elders: The Contempt for Memory in Canadian Indigenous Policy
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta introducing three “all-season resort areas” to provide more summer activities in Alberta’s mountain parks
-
Agriculture2 days agoGrowing Alberta’s fresh food future
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoConservative MP calls on religious leaders to oppose Liberal plan to criminalize quoting Scripture
-
International2 days agoTrump admin wants to help Canadian woman rethink euthanasia, Glenn Beck says
-
National14 hours agoCanada’s free speech record is cracking under pressure
-
Alberta2 days agoThe case for expanding Canada’s energy exports


