reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The discussion revolves around who will lead the 4th industrial revolution and its technology, particularly artificial intelligence. The question is posed about which country is best positioned to lead, considering China's advancements with Huawei and 5G technology. The speaker differentiates between state capitalism and shareholder capitalism, stating that state capitalism can provide short-term advantages due to its ability to mobilize resources efficiently. However, the speaker believes that the future lies in stakeholder capitalism, which combines social responsibility with economic objectives.

China's strength lies in its medium- to long-term perspective. The G20 and Chinese leadership are ambitious.

In the era of talent, innovation becomes the key competitive factor, surpassing the importance of low cost and capital availability. We are transitioning from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism, where businesses have a social role to serve society and the environment. It is crucial for business leaders to embrace this concept and incorporate it into all their activities.

The conversation follows Howard Beale, who declares a final revelation and that “the light is impending. I bear witness to the light.” He appears disoriented, and Speaker 1 escorts him to a conference room, noting Beale’s agitation and his own impression that Beale is mad. Speaker 2 interrupts Beale’s crisis with a stark warning: “You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, mister Beale, and I won’t have it. Is that clear? Do you think you merely stopped a business deal? That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back.” He frames the disruption as an ecological and economic rebalancing, insisting that “There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems.” He lists currencies—“Petro dollars, electro dollars, multi dollars, Reichmarks, RINs, rubles, pounds, and shekels”—as the structural reality of the world’s order. Speaker 1 expands on the idea, stating that “It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today.” He further declares that “the world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business.” He argues that the world’s dynamics are driven not by nations or ideologies but by corporate power, likening the global arena to a business enterprise. The dialogue then moves to Beale’s role and the proposition of his audience: “And you will atone.” Speaker 1 asks if he’s getting through to Beale, noting Beale’s television platform: “You get up on your little 21 inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBN and ITT and AT and T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon.” He contends that the Russians also operate with analytical tools, using “linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions,” to calculate prices and investments, asserting that “We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, mister Beale. The world is a college of corporations.” Speaker 1 concludes with a chilling vision: “The world is a business, mister Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, mister Beale, to see that perfect world in which there’s no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company for whom all men

Our upcoming UK elections reveal a shift towards stakeholder capitalism, led by Klaus Schwab and elite stakeholders. Both major parties are involved in transitioning to this new political system, with mandatory climate disclosures and Marxist policies. This movement is promoted by powerful figures like Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer. The stakeholders aim to control companies and lives globally, pushing for inclusivity and sustainability. Any dissent is labeled as dangerous conspiracy theories, leading to censorship and cancel culture. To learn more, watch the documentary series "Stakeholder Communism" for free.

Our upcoming UK elections are influenced by a shift towards stakeholder capitalism, led by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. Both major parties are involved in this transition, promoting Marxist policies and control over companies and individuals. This move towards a global authoritarian system is supported by powerful stakeholders, including leaders from various countries. The narrative of inclusivity and sustainability is used to push this agenda, while dissenting voices are censored. To learn more about stakeholder capitalism and its implications, watch the documentary series "Stakeholder Communism" for free.

The discussion revolves around who will lead the 4th industrial revolution and artificial intelligence. The question is posed about China's potential to lead due to their technological advancements. The speaker differentiates between state capitalism and shareholder capitalism, stating that state capitalism has short-term advantages in mobilizing resources. However, the speaker believes that the future lies in stakeholder capitalism, which combines social responsibility.

The speaker discusses the Great Reset, stating that it is based on communist, socialist, and fascist ideas that would destroy freedom and prosperity. They explain that there are two ways people interact: voluntary action or coercion and violence. They argue that liberalism and capitalism promote voluntary cooperation, while Marxism and socialism rely on coercion and violence. The speaker highlights the different elements of the Great Reset, such as stakeholder capitalism, environmental and social governance, and transhumanism. They also discuss the potential dangers of central bank digital currency and the need to resist and reverse the Great Reset through sound economics and a new enlightenment.

Our upcoming UK elections are overshadowed by a transition to stakeholder capitalism led by Klaus Schwab and elite stakeholders. This shift to a global authoritarian system grants them control over companies and lives. Leaders like Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer are pushing for this transition, while dissenting voices are silenced. To learn more, watch the documentary series "Stakeholder Communism" for free.

Richard Jeffs investigates stakeholder capitalism, a universal political system allegedly being implemented by world leaders in collusion with the World Economic Forum (WEF). Spearheaded by WEF's Klaus Schwab, stakeholder capitalism aims to replace shareholder and state capitalism, granting authority to "stakeholders": governments, civil society, companies, and the international community. Schwab claims this system will be more inclusive and sustainable, addressing issues like oppression and climate change. However, the speaker argues that these "inclusive" policies are Marxist propaganda, similar to tactics used during China's Cultural Revolution, and that "sustainable" policies like net zero impose Orwellian restrictions. The speaker highlights the WEF's close ties to China and its communist system, as well as the implementation of ESG scores, which act as a corporate credit system that forces companies to comply with stakeholder capitalism's policies. He warns that this system could lead to oppression and human rights violations, referencing China's social credit system and historical atrocities under communist regimes. The speaker urges viewers to reject stakeholder capitalism and raise awareness.

First speaker notes that China is a reascending power, not a rising one, pointing out that from 1500 to now China had the world’s largest GDP 70% of those years. He suggests that Confucian thinking underpins China’s view of reasserting long-standing dominance, and explains the blending of public-private partnerships and the role of organizations that backstop private companies in China. He describes China’s capital allocation as both rigid and flexible. The process starts with Xi Jinping and his close circle drafting priorities, including involvement in the five-year plan. The plan moves from a small central group to the Politburo, then to the provinces and finally to the prefectures. He explains it as a cascading set of venture capitalists operating against national priorities, with provinces and local actors rewarded for aligning capital and labor with those priorities. The result is an ecosystem where hundreds of venture capitalists coordinate human capital across regions to advance targeted goals, producing major companies such as BYD and Xiaomi. Second speaker adds that China maintains a five-year plans for every industry, detailing forecasts not just for catching up but for what is possible. This framework drives innovation across sectors, including nuclear power, and supports the notion that China is charting new avenues of development. He reiterates that the country is returning to a position it has long held rather than pursuing a status as the world’s largest economy, emphasizing a national-pride motivation amid different governance structures. Third speaker emphasizes the historical perspective, noting how remarkable it is that China held the world’s largest GDP 70% of the years since 1500. He reflects on how technological innovations, such as ship technology, have driven great empires, with China repeatedly on the heels of such shifts. He suggests that this may be China’s moment of resurgence across the board. The discussion also cites Lee Kuan Yew’s foresight, as highlighted by a work by Graham Allison and related quotes: China is not just another big player, but the biggest player in the history of the world, and China’s displacement of the world balance requires the world to find a new equilibrium. The dialogue ties this historic perspective to the idea that China’s current reemergence is both a continuation of a long pattern and a contemporary strategic effort guided by centralized planning and broad industry-wide five-year frameworks.

Our upcoming UK elections are being influenced by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum, pushing for a transition to stakeholder capitalism. This system gives stakeholders control over companies and lives, with leaders like Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer promoting it. The shift towards stakeholder capitalism is being enforced through mandatory policies and propaganda, while dissenting voices are being silenced. To learn more about this transition and how to address it, watch the documentary series "Stakeholder Communism" at Yellow Dot Forum.

Governments are transitioning to stakeholder capitalism, replacing shareholder capitalism. Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, advocates for this shift, claiming it will create a more inclusive and sustainable society. Stakeholder capitalism empowers a select group of stakeholders, including government leaders and corporations, to govern society. This system promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies, which prioritize opportunities for marginalized groups. Critics argue that this approach mirrors historical tactics used by authoritarian regimes to manipulate public sentiment. The push for sustainability, driven by fears of climate change, is also seen as a means to impose restrictions on individual freedoms. The transition is occurring without public consent, raising concerns about democratic processes and individual rights. The series aims to raise awareness and encourage resistance against this shift to stakeholder capitalism.

The speaker outlines the range of stakeholders that are important to their work, emphasizing a broad and diverse audience. They identify business as a very important audience, alongside politics, highlighting the role of ongoing engagement across multiple governmental contexts through continuous partnerships with many governments around the world. The speaker also notes NGOs and trade unions as key groups to consider, along with media, which is acknowledged as an important stakeholder category. Further, the speaker highlights that experts, scientists, and academia are crucial for informing a forward-looking perspective, particularly when considering future directions and solutions. The statement underscores the belief that the future will be shaped largely by technological developments, implying a need to incorporate cutting-edge innovations and technical expertise in strategic discussions and decision-making. In addition to these conventional sectors, the speaker mentions religious leaders as part of the stakeholder landscape, signaling recognition of faith-based perspectives and moral or ethical considerations in broader dialogues. Social entrepreneurs are singled out as well, described as very important, suggesting that venture-driven approaches to social impact are seen as a significant component of the ecosystem. Overall, the speaker communicates a philosophy of inclusivity and broad collaboration, integrating political, business, civil society, media, scientific, religious, and entrepreneurial voices. The emphasis on continuous partnerships with governments worldwide indicates an ongoing, collaborative approach to governance, policy, and implementation across different regions. The repeated references to a future oriented by technological development signal a strategic priority placed on innovation and science as drivers of forthcoming solutions, informing how they engage with the various stakeholder groups and respondents to emerging challenges. In sum, the speaker presents a multi-stakeholder framework that spans business, politics, governments, NGOs, trade unions, media, experts, scientists, academia, religious leaders, and social entrepreneurs, all contributing to a future shaped by technological progress and collaborative problem-solving.

Our upcoming elections in the UK are being influenced by a transition to stakeholder capitalism, led by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. This new political system gives stakeholders control over companies and lives. UK leaders like Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer are promoting this transition. The stakeholders are canceling and censoring those who oppose them, while pushing propaganda to manipulate the public. To learn more, watch the documentary series "Stakeholder Communism" for free.

Richard Wolff and Glenn discuss the future of the West, NATO, Europe, and the international economic system. - The central dynamic, according to Wolff, is the rise of China and the West’s unpreparedness. He argues that the West, after a long era of Cold War dominance, is encountering a China that grows two to three times faster than the United States, with no sign of slowing. China’s ascent has transformed global power relations and exposed that prior strategies to stop or slow China have failed. - The United States, having defeated various historical rivals, pursued a unipolar, neoliberal globalization project after the Cold War. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of that era left the U.S. with a sense of “manifest destiny” to shape the world order. But now time is on China’s side, and the short-term fix for the U.S. is to extract value from its allies rather than invest in long-run geopolitics. Wolff contends the U.S. is engaging in a transactional, extractive approach toward Europe and other partners, pressuring them to concede significant economic and strategic concessions. - Europe is seen by Wolff as increasingly subordinated to U.S. interests, with its leadership willing to accept terrible trade terms and militarization demands to maintain alignment with Washington. He cites the possibility of Europe accepting LNG imports and investments to the U.S. economy at the expense of its own social welfare, suggesting that Europe’s social protections could be jeopardized by this “divorce settlement” with the United States. - Russia’s role is reinterpreted: while U.S. and European actors have pursued expanding NATO and a Western-led security architecture, Russia’s move toward Greater Eurasia and its pivot to the East, particularly under Putin, complicates Western plans. Wolff argues that the West’s emphasis on demonizing Russia as the unifying threat ignores the broader strategic competition with China and risks pushing Europe toward greater autonomy or alignment with Russia and China. - The rise of BRICS and China’s Belt and Road Initiative are framed as major competitive challenges to Western economic primacy. The West’s failure to integrate and adapt to these shifts is seen as a strategic misstep, especially given Russia’s earlier openness to a pan-European security framework that was rejected in favor of a U.S.-led order. - Within the United States, there is a debate about the proper response to these shifts. One faction desires aggressive actions, including potential wars (e.g., Iran) to deter adversaries, while another emphasizes the dangers of escalation in a nuclear age. Wolff notes that Vietnam and Afghanistan illustrate the limits of muscular interventions, and he points to domestic economic discontent—rising inequality, labor unrest, and a growing desire for systemic change—as factors that could press the United States to rethink its approach to global leadership. - Economically, Wolff challenges the dichotomy of public versus private dominance. He highlights China’s pragmatic hybrid model—roughly 50/50 private and state enterprise, with openness to foreign participation yet strong state direction. He argues that the fixation on choosing between private-market and public-control models is misguided and that outcomes matter more than orthodox ideological labels. - Looking ahead, Wolff is optimistic that Western economies could reframe development by learning from China’s approach, embracing a more integrated strategy that blends public and private efforts, and reducing ideological rigidity. He suggests Europe could reposition itself by deepening ties with China and leveraging its own market size to negotiate from a position of strength, potentially even joining or aligning with BRICS in some form. - For Europe, a potential path to resilience would involve shifting away from a mindset of subordination to the United States, pursuing energy diversification (including engaging with Russia for cheaper energy), and forming broader partnerships with China to balance relations with the United States and Russia. This would require political renewal in Europe and a willingness to depart from a “World War II–reboot” mentality toward a more pragmatic, multipolar strategy. - In closing, Wolff stresses that the West’s current trajectory is not inevitable. He envisions a Europe capable of redefining its alliances, reconsidering economic models, and seeking a more autonomous, multipolar future that reduces dependency on U.S. leadership. He ends with a provocative suggestion: Europe might consider a realignment toward Russia and China as a way to reshape global power balances, rather than defaulting to a perpetual U.S.-led order.

- In collusion with the world's most powerful people, the heads of our governments have enacted a ten year transition to a universal political system called stakeholder capitalism. - It's a funeral of shareholder capitalism and it's a birth of stakeholder capitalism. - The World Economic Forum is now very much engaged into this initiative of shaping a great reset. - Stakeholder capitalism replaces both shareholder and state capitalism with a single global political system that provides authority to a group of people called stakeholders. - To ensure that both people and the planet prosper, four key stake holders play a crucial role. They are governments, civil society such as education bodies, companies, and the international community such as the UN and European Union. - The heads of these organizations are exclusive elite members of the World Economic Forum. - The Chinese social credit system forces compliance by punishing people who break the government's rules.

Shlomo Kramer argues that AI will revolutionize cyber warfare, affecting critical infrastructure, the fabric of society, and politics, and will undermine democracies by giving an unfair advantage to authoritarian governments. He notes that this is already happening and highlights growing polarization in countries that protect First Amendment rights. He contends it may become necessary to limit the First Amendment to protect it, and calls for government control of social platforms, including stacking-ranked authenticity for everyone who expresses themselves online and shaping discourse based on that ranking. He asserts that the government should take control of platforms, educate people against lies, and develop cyber defense programs that are as sophisticated as cyber attacks; currently, government defense is lacking and enterprises are left to fend for themselves. Speaker 2 adds that cyber threats are moving faster than political systems can respond. He emphasizes the need to use technology to stabilize political systems and implement adjustments that may be necessary. He points out that in practice it’s already difficult to discern real from fake on platforms like Instagram and TikTok, and once truth-seeking ability is eliminated, society becomes polarized and internally fighting. There is an urgent need for government action, while enterprises are increasingly buying cybersecurity solutions to deliver more efficiently, since they cannot bear the full burden alone. Kramer notes that this drives the next generation of security companies—such as Wiz, CrowdStrike, and Cato Networks—built on network platforms that can deliver extended security needs to enterprises at affordable costs. He clarifies these tools are for enterprises, not governments, but insists that governments should start building programs and that the same tools can be used by governments as well. Speaker 2 mentions that China is a leading AI user, already employing AI to control the population, and that the U.S. and other democracies are in a race with China. He warns that China’s approach—having a single narrative to protect internal stability—versus the U.S. approach of multiple narratives creates an unfair long-term advantage for China that could jeopardize national stability, and asserts that changes must be made.

The speaker discusses who will lead the fourth industrial revolution and mentions the technological advancements made by China. They differentiate between state capitalism and shareholder capitalism, stating that state capitalism has short-term advantages due to its ability to mobilize resources. However, they believe that the future lies in a combination of stakeholder capitalism and social responsibility.

Publicly traded companies like Pepsi, Nike, and Starbucks are in billions of dollars of debt. To maximize profit, CEOs take on debt to open new markets, then make more stock available to the public. Investment firms like BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street buy the stock, gaining enough ownership to influence corporate boards. Board members are aware that firms like BlackRock can replace them if they don't comply. BlackRock demands companies practice ESG, pushing climate change and social agendas. Failure to comply can result in the removal of board members and the CEO. Private companies like X and Bass Pro Shop are protected from this influence. Elon Musk made X a private company, preventing firms like BlackRock from leveraging it. Bass Pro Shop, controlled by its founder, doesn't promote social agendas. The speaker advocates supporting private companies and promotes his private homeschool community and books on topics like the Bill of Rights, free speech, and ESG.

Klaus Schwab advocates for stakeholder capitalism, where companies serve various stakeholders including governments. This is likened to fascism, merging state and corporate power. The World Economic Forum collaborates with China and the UN for global communist goals. Schwab's ties to Lenin and support for globalist agendas highlight his role in the totalitarian master plan.