My summary and opinions regarding ‘The Great Reset’ – Part 6: Conclusion

Hi Everyone,


In Part 6, I summarise the conclusions made by the book ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ and I express my opinions about the conclusions made in the book. In Part 6, I also include my own general opinions of the content of the book and my views regarding the motivations behind ‘The Great Reset’. I strongly recommend that you read the previous five parts of this series of posts to gain a better understanding of the various sections. Below are the links to the previous posts.

Conclusion of the book


In the conclusion, the authors reemphasise the importance of change and conclude that change is desirable as well as universally considered necessary. However, the authors question if we are able to make the necessary changes. The authors emphasise that the changes described, as part of ‘The Great Reset’ is the only path forward to make the world a better place. The authors state that in terms of almost all metrics, average quality of life has been improving for decades. However, average figures do not give a fair representation of those who have fallen behind. The book uses the example of inequality in the USA, which the authors believe was highlighted by the death of African-American George Floyd. The authors believe the responses to George Floyd’s death is an indication that we need ‘The Great Reset’.

The authors mention that the Covid-19 pandemic is mild in comparison to many pandemics from the past. The authors provide examples of the Spanish Flu, HIV/AIDS, the Plague of Justinian, and the Black Death (1347-1351) as more lethal pandemics than Covid-19.

The authors express that the pandemic has exposed many of the weaknesses and underlying problems of our society and economy. The authors also express that the pandemic has sparked changed. These changes are likely to be for the benefit of society as a whole. Areas such as inequality, the environment, and social contracts can be revisited. Technology can be used to fast track these changes.

The book leaves us with the message that increased collaboration and cooperation within and between countries is necessary for positive changes to be possible.

My views on the conclusions of the book


I agree that change is necessary. I do not agree that ‘The Great Reset’ is the change that we all need. I agree that using simple averages is an inadequate method of viewing society. I do not agree that the death of George Floyd was the breaking point that demonstrated excessive inequality. The death of George Floyd was used as political propaganda to create racial tensions and provide support to socialist agendas. However, inequality is a problem in western society and many people from minority groups are more exposed to the flaws of the existing systems.

I agree with the authors that Covid-19 is not as serious as many other pandemics. I would also state that the response to Covid-19 has been extreme and Governments and mainstream media have used excessive fearmongering in an attempt to pressure people into accepting the extreme measures that are being taken. I agree that Covid-19 has exposed many of the weaknesses of our existing social, economic and political systems. I agree that we are presented with a great opportunity to make changes that will benefit society, and the environment. I agree that technology can help us achieve many desirable changes. I agree that better outcomes can be achieved through better collaboration and cooperation within and between countries. However, I believe it is more important that cooperation between professionals and experts from various fields as well as between businesses be achieved.

My overall view on the book


The book raises several important problems such as inequality and damage to our environment. However, the explanations of many of the underlying causes of these problems are not accurate. The book takes a strong bias against free market operations. The authors blame either free markets or Governments for not intervening in society and the economy sufficiently. In several sections, the book implies that if Government/s intervene and follow the ‘right’ script (i.e. the ‘Great Reset’), problems would be greatly minimised. The authors appear to fail to understand that being able to control the input (i.e. Government intervention) does not necessarily result in the best-desired outcome for society.

Government is deeply flawed because it relies on a select few people to make decisions. Even if we assume all people in Government have purely noble intentions, many of the decisions they will make will not be optimal for society. Free markets are far from perfect. Free markets have struggled to provide public goods and mostly fail to include externalities in pricing mechanisms. However, Government intervention has done little to resolve these problems. Solutions that support the free market and compensate for its weaknesses should be discussed.

The book persistently blames Covid-19 and defends the harsh responses to it. The authors are following the same fearmongering strategy that is repeatedly pushed by Government and the mainstream media. This approach greatly hurts the credibility of the book and the responses proposed. The book should have more aggressively interrogated the actions taken by Government instead of blindly assuming that they are necessary. In the conclusion, the book was more realistic about the relative threat of Covid-19 in comparison to other pandemics that did not solicit such extreme responses.

In several places, the book emphasizes the importance of a centralised global approach and global governance. The book refers to several global issues but fails to mention that these global issues affect different countries and regions differently. Therefore, dealing with them globally would offer little value. Centralised control limits ideas and reduces feedback loops. Centralisation also greatly reduces freedom in various forms. A decentralised approach offers far more value than a centralised one. With advancements in blockchain technology, efficient decentralisation has become feasible.

Motivations behind the Great Reset


The book claims to be offering solutions to build a better world. We should not assume the claims of the book are either true or false. Instead, we should interrogate the information we have and explore the possible motivations based on that evidence.

All actions are motivated by something. It is not always easy to determine these motivations or fully understand them even when they become more apparent. In regards to ‘The Great Reset’, I suggest we look at what we have discovered so far. For this series, I have limited myself to the contents of the book but I suggest for others to explore the World Economic Forum website as well as any other sources of information available.

Below are my key observations regarding the opinions of the authors of the book ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’.

  • They strongly supported centralisation of control and governance for both Government and the private sector.
  • They strongly supported globalisation through centralisation of governance through international bodies.
  • They opposed predominantly free market economies.
  • They emphasised that Covid-19 exposed existing weaknesses in economic, political, and social systems.
  • They heavily focused on climate change as the most pressing issue.
  • They pushed the narrative that ‘The Great Reset’ is the only viable option to save us.

To provide additional perspective, I have included Figure 1 from the book. Figure 1 demonstrates the authors’ perception of the magnitude and relationships between various identified risks.

Figure 1: Relationship and Magnitude between Risks (The Great Reset)


At the centre of the diagram is climate change. It has been given the largest magnitude and is linked as a cause of most of the other key risks. These include:

  • Water Crises
  • Food Crises
  • Involuntary Migration
  • Global Governance Failure
  • Extreme Weather
  • Biodiversity Loss

Social instability is also considered a risk with a large magnitude. It is linked to other key risks. These include:

  • Involuntary Migration
  • Global Governance Failure
  • National Governance Failure

It is also interesting, which risks are not included in the diagram. Below are some of the most prominent risks that I believe should have been included.

  • Inflationary Pressure (Economic Risk)
  • National Debt (Economic Risk)
  • Externalities (Environmental Risk)
  • Excessive Physical Infrastructure Development (Environmental Risk)
  • Bureaucracy and Overregulation (Geo-political Risk)
  • Monopoly of Governance and Control (Geo-political Risk)
  • Private Debt (Societal Risk)
  • Family Disintegration (Societal Risk)
  • Censorship of Information (Technological Risk)
  • Loss of Privacy (Technological Risk)

I believe the authors of ‘The Great Reset’ have been selective in the risks they have highlighted and they have framed these risks to align with the solutions they are offering. Those that directly benefit the most from the proposed ‘Great Reset’ are Governments, large businesses, and international governance bodies. Many world leaders openly support the World Economic Forum agendas.


Many of the largest companies in the world in areas such as banking, healthcare, and information technology sponsor or partner with the World Economic Forum.

Source: World Economic Forum

The Great Reset proposal by the World Economic Forum was organised very quickly in response to Covid-19. I would argue that many of the proposed ideas in the book already existed and were already a key area of focus for the World Economic Forum and many of the participating world leaders and representatives. Covid-19 was an important trigger to advance these ideas.

Not done with ‘The Great Reset’ yet


This post wraps up my series of posts discussing the contents of the book ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’. However, the book is only the tip of the iceberg in regards to ‘The Great Reset’. The World Economic Forum is regularly updating its website with new content regarding ‘The Great Reset’. I will investigate some of the more relevant content posted on the website. There are also many other publications online that discuss various versions of resets, which bear some resemblance to the type of reset that the World Economic Forum is discussing.

The authors of the book ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ often refer to their idea of reset as the only alternative to returning to a pre-pandemic world. However, there are alternative views. The ‘Greater Reset’ is one of these alternative views. The ‘Greater Reset’ launched on 25 January 2021 with five days of presentations from various speakers. These presentations are available on the Greater Reset Odysee, Bitchute, Flote, and LBRY channels. There is also a DVD containing all the presentations from the event. I will be watching these videos and I will follow up with a post sharing my opinions. I will also make comparisons with the proposed ‘Great Reset’.

More posts


If you want to read any of my other posts, you can click on the links below. These links will lead you to posts containing my collection of works. These 'Collection of Works' posts have been updated to contain links to the Hive versions of my posts.





My New CBA Udemy Course


3 columns
2 columns
1 column