Britain’s vaccine passport policy is Klaus Schwab’s ‘stakeholder capitalism’ in action

Vaccine passports are about to be rolled out in Britain. When that day comes (likely within the next few months), Britain will lose any vestigial claim it has to being a free nation.

Of course we knew this was inevitable, but the way they’re going about it offers a neat illustration of The Great Reset in practice.

Yesterday (March 24, 2021) The Evening Standard reported the following:

Pubs are likely to be able to ban customers who haven’t had their coronavirus vaccine, Boris Johnson suggested this afternoon. The Prime Minister said the idea of vaccine passports scheme could be left up to landlords.

In a huge hint, Mr Johnson told MPs during the Commons Liaison Committee: “I do think that the basic concept of vaccine certification should not be totally alien to us.”

Asked if such a certificate could be required for the pub, he added: “I think that that’s the kind of thing – it may be up to individual publicans, it may be up to the landlord.”

Ministers led by Michael Gove are reviewing how vaccine certificates may work for foreign travel and large events like football stadiums.

Mr Johnson said yesterday: “This is an area where we’re looking at a novelty for our country.

“We haven’t had stuff like this before, we’ve never thought in terms of having something that you have to show to go to a pub or theatre.

“So there are deep and complex issues that we need to explore, ethical issues about what the role is for government in mandating people to have such a thing or, indeed, banning people from doing such a thing.

“There are complex issues we need to work out.”

Mr Johnson is playing with words here, suggesting that the “complex issues” are potential moral objections when in fact the only issues Whitehall are working on resolving are logistical.

Already a “call for evidence” is underway on proposals for “COVID-status certification.” Normally public consultations are open for six months; this one runs for just two weeks, from Monday 15 March to Monday 29 March, because it is a fig leaf, a box ticking exercise designed to give a veneer of credibility to a forgone conclusion.

What’s interesting here is not that the vaccine passports are coming in, but the manner in which they are being rolled out – under the guise of ‘freedom of choice for businesses’ rather than as government mandate.

This hiding behind business interests is in fact one of the pillars of the Great Reset.

In an article titled Now is the time for a ‘great reset’, published by the World Economic Forum on its website in June 2020, Klaus Schwab wrote: “populations have overwhelmingly shown a willingness to make sacrifices for the sake of health-care and other essential workers and vulnerable populations, such as the elderly. And many companies have stepped up to support their workers, customers, and local communities, in a shift toward the kind of stakeholder capitalism to which they had previously paid lip service.”

Stakeholder capitalism is defined by Klaus in a separate article from 2019 as a model which “positions private corporations as trustees of society”. He compares it favourably to “shareholder capitalism” in which companies are geared toward profit, and “state capitalism,” which, as he puts it, “entrusts the government with setting the direction of the economy”.

Stakeholder capitalism is therefore corporatism by another name, the merging of government with big business to enact social control through markets instead of by diktat.

This is nothing new. One of the starkest pieces of evidence that America and other formerly free nations are no longer so comes through ‘cancel culture’ – the ability of private companies such as Twitter and Facebook to silence dissidents by cutting off their access to the public square. It’s astonishing to witness the speed at which leftists — who normally spend all their waking time denouncing capitalism — will readily cry “free enterprise!” when a right-winger gets thrown off a platform.

“Facebook are a private company, they can do what they like!” they insist, often only moments after doxxing some baker or photographer for refusing to service a gay wedding.

As I said on the Tamar Yonah show back in January – in the 21st century, communism, or totalitarianism or whatever you want to call it, comes through private companies, not through governments.

And so we see here. “We don’t want to introduce vaccine passports!” government ministers insist. “It will cause all manner of headaches! … But if pub landlords want to, well that’s none of our concern. Of course private businesses must do as they please.”

The weasel words are disingenuous for many reasons, not least because government ministers must know full well by now that the majority of British pubs aren’t owned by the person who pulls your pint. As Johnson said, “it may be up to the landlord”.

There are some 48,000 pubs in the UK according to the Pub Experts Guide (down from 64,000 in 1990), and of those, just 18,000 (37.5%) are privately owned freehold and leasehold pubs. So it won’t be 48,000 pub managers making a decision on whether to require passports, it will be a handful of corporate board men who will in all likelihood be offered some subsidy or handout in return for rolling out a vaccine policy on their premises.

One only has to look at the way travel companies have jumped on the vaccine requirement bandwagon to know that something is up.

I will leave the last word to David Davis, not because I think he’s better than anyone else in that rat-hole of a Parliament, but because he at least puts on a good show of opposition and makes some useful points. Perhaps that is his redeeming feature.

Speaking at the same meeting as Johnson yesterday, he said: “It seems to me that we are creating a permanent solution for a temporary problem. You and I have both been in government. We know that Whitehall loves the concept of identitive action, loves the concept of having control of this data. I don’t think there’s a very good reason for this. I think that this is a permanent solution for a temporary [problem] and one which is very different, very antagonistic to our national traditions. Not for the last several centuries have we allowed the State or anybody else to demand of us that we provide our papers, we provide our explanation for who we are or what our health status is. This is a very bad time to start.”