History

After well over a year of two weeks to flatten the curve, the emergence and "emergency" of an allegedly novel coronavirus turned into an opportunity to accelerate longstanding agendas to radically transform society by way of ID2020, The Great Reset & Agenda 2030.

First, some context for those still believing the official story as it's being told. The mainstream narrators frequently compare covid to the so-called Spanish Flu of 1918, which is said to have claimed up to 100 million lives, at a time when the world population was estimated to be 1.8 billion. As it turns out, without even accounting for population growth since then, or the fatal flaws with current testing and counting, the official numbers would still only put covid within the range of the pandemics of the 50s and 60s.

Remember, even after the 1918 flu, the world returned to normal and moved on.

1957-1958: Asian Flu Pandemic

Back in 1957, when the world population was only 2.8 billion, there was a global pandemic that is said to have claimed between 1-4 million lives, commonly referred to as the "Asian Flu". There was no hysteria, no lockdowns, no mandates and no radical reordering of society.

1968-1969: Hong Kong Flu

In 1968, when the world population was only 3.5 billion, there was another global pandemic, it too is said to have claimed between 1-4 million lives, commonly referred to as the "Hong Kong Flu". This barely registered as a historical footnote, as the famous music festival Woodstock went on at the time. There was again no hysteria, no lockdowns, no mandates and no radical reordering of society.

1976: Swine Flu

History repeats itself indeed. During the Swine Flu epidemic of 1976, mainstream media fearmongered about the return of a 1918-like event. There was also much fear induced on the count of it being "novel". And out came a rushed plan to vaccinate everybody. While most articles have since been scrubbed, you can still watch the 60 Minutes documentary describing the devastating effects on the uncensorable video archive.

2009: Swine Flu

2009 saw the resurgence of "swine flu" hysteria, again playing the novelty card and the parallels to 1918 as billions of dollars in vaccines were sold. Much was written on how and why the world overreacted, even a Forbes article - "Why the WHO Faked a Pandemic". Documentaries were produced covering the fraud and conflicts of interest. People from all walks of life spoke out. Much of which has since been censored, so the world forgot all about it. Some papers were written about the adverse effects of the rushed vaccines.

2010: Lock Step

In 2010, the Global Business Network & Rockefeller Foundation published within "Scenarios For The Future Of Technology And International Development" what has come to be known as the Lock Step document, where they wrote of a "ficticious future 2012 pandemic scenario" that describes precisely the same narrative we are now seeing propagandized the world over. In case the link becomes inaccessible, here is a complete transcription (emphasis added):

Lock Step
A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback
In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009's H1N1, this new influenza strain - originating from wild geese - was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.
The pandemic blanketed the planet - though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States's initial policy "strongly discouraging" citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better - China in particular. The Chinese government's quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.
China's government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems - from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty - leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.
At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty - and their privacy - to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.
Across the developing world, however, the story was different - and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens' overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high-emitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more authoritarian leadership worked less well - and in some cases tragically - in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.
There were other downsides, as the rise of virulent nationalism created new hazards: spectators at the 2018 World Cup, for example, wore bulletproof vests that sported a patch of their national flag. Strong technology regulations stifled innovation, kept costs high, and curbed adoption. In the developing world, access to "approved" technologies increased but beyond that remained limited: the locus of technology innovation was largely in the developed world, leaving many developing countries on the receiving end of technologies that others consider "best" for them. Some governments found this patronizing and refused to distribute computers and other technologies that they scoffed at as "second hand." Meanwhile, developing countries with more resources and better capacity began to innovate internally to fill these gaps on their own.
Meanwhile, in the developed world, the presence of so many top-down rules and norms greatly inhibited entrepreneurial activity. Scientists and innovators were often told by governments what research lines to pursue and were guided mostly toward projects that would make money (e.g., market-driven product development) or were "sure bets" (e.g., fundamental research), leaving more risky or innovative research areas largely untapped. Well-off countries and monopolistic companies with big research and development budgets still made significant advances, but the IP behind their breakthroughs remained locked behind strict national or corporate protection. Russia and India imposed stringent domestic standards for supervising and certifying encryption-related products and their suppliers - a category that in reality meant all IT innovations. The U.S. and EU struck back with retaliatory national standards, throwing a wrench in the development and diffusion of technology globally.
Especially in the developing world, acting in one's national self-interest often meant seeking practical alliances that fit with those interests - whether it was gaining access to needed resources or banding together in order to achieve economic growth. In South America and Africa, regional and sub-regional alliances became more structured. Kenya doubled its trade with southern and eastern Africa, as new partnerships grew within the continent. China's investment in Africa expanded as the bargain of new jobs and infrastructure in exchange for access to key minerals or food exports proved agreeable to many governments. Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid. While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states, one-size-fits-all solutions yielded few positive results.
By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them.
Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict. Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away - largely in developing countries - incited civil unrest. In 2026, protesters in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption. Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the strictness of national boundaries. The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world's governments had worked so hard to establish.

2015: UN Agenda 2030

In September 2015, Canada and 192 other countries signed onto UN Agenda 2030, a totalitarian wolf in social justice sheep's clothing. A central part of UN's Agenda 2030 is health, including vaccinating everybody. Bill Gates, one of the most prominent proponents of Agenda 2030 and among the largest funders of the WHO, has become one of the most influential figures in public health and is said to be treated as a head of state. Here he is saying every human being on the planet will need to be vaccinated.

2016: Implants within 10 years

While the idea of "microchipping people" is something that goes back decades - and increasingly been ridiculed as "conspiracy theory" - in 2016, Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum was openly talking about implanting human beings.

2019: UN & WEF partnership

In June 2019, the World Economic Forum partners with the UN to accelerate Agenda 2030.

2019: Event 201

While the likes of Johns Hopkins, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation unsurprisingly insist it's all just a coincidence, Event 201 is another incredibly prescient event, a "pandemic exercise" taking place hardly a month before the first official claim of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan, China in late December 2019. Watch Event 201 here and here.

2019: Military Games in Wuhan

The 2019 Military Games just so happened to be taking place in Wuhan at the very same time as the pandemic exercises of Event 201.

2020: The Great Reset

As the hysteria of 2020 unfolded, Klaus Schwab wrote the book on leveraging said hysteria as an opportunity to radically reshape the world, COVID-19: The Great Reset. He then sent politicians around the world a free copy, and made a number of media appearances where he spoke of merging man with technology, a core concept of his Fourth Industrial Revolution.