Meet the ‘philanthropaths’ spending billions to kill the American dream



Many of us on the political right once held a principled aversion to telling the ultra-wealthy how to spend their money. Confiscating private wealth sounded un-American. If billionaires wanted to build libraries, fund symphonies, or throw lavish parties, fine — they were reinvesting in society, directly or indirectly.

But that was before the rise of the modern “philanthropath”: a new breed of sociopathic billionaire using inherited or self-made fortunes to re-engineer civilization from the top down. These aren’t benevolent stewards. They’re ideological crusaders waging war on tradition, prosperity, and truth.

These are not patrons of progress — they’re funders of decline. And their wealth has become a weapon.

George Soros spent millions installing radical, pro-crime prosecutors in cities across the country. Bill Gates bankrolls schemes to block the sun in the name of climate alarmism.

At least Soros and Gates earned their fortunes. Increasingly, the most aggressive philanthropaths are heirs — trust-fund radicals who never worked a day to build the wealth they now use to tear society apart.

The nepo-billionaire left

Earlier this month, Walmart heiress Christy Walton made headlines for bankrolling the No Kings anti-Trump protests. Hyatt heir and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) used his $3 billion inheritance — and famous last name — to push transgender surgeries on minors. After President Trump’s 2024 election, Pritzker promised to turn Illinois into a destination for confused parents seeking to chemically sterilize and mutilate their children.

His sibling Jennifer Pritzker (born James) proudly funds transgender medical interventions, calling it “a continuation of my family’s tradition of putting personal philanthropy into service for the public good.”

As I’ve documented before, the eco-vandal group Just Stop Oil — responsible for throwing soup on van Gogh paintings and blocking roads across Europe — draws funding from Abigail Disney, Aileen Getty, and Rory Kennedy. These aren’t anonymous donors. They’re members of America’s closest thing to a royal class. Getty even defended funding the group in the Guardian, writing, “I fund climate activism — and I applaud the van Gogh protest.”

Inheritance reconsidered

I don’t support an inheritance tax. These taxes hit middle-class families hardest — especially family farms and small businesses. The IRS doesn’t care how long your grandfather worked the land; it just wants a cut.

But the more the ultrarich use their fortunes to fund antihuman ideologies, the harder it becomes to defend that wealth politically. They are making the moral case for confiscation easier by the day.

Market trader and television commentator Jim Iuorio recently wrote, “There is no moral or economic argument in favor of inheritance tax ... it should obviously be zero ... making it more than zero is rooted in petty jealousy.”

Fair enough. But if I had to argue in favor of an inheritance tax on moral grounds, I’d just start naming names: Alex Soros. Melinda Gates. JB Pritzker. Christy Walton. Aileen Getty. It’s not envy — it’s damage control.

RELATED: Billions go in, billions come out — guess who benefits?

Photo by BAY ISMOYO/AFP via Getty Images

What the right can do

We don’t need to confiscate wealth to fight philanthropaths. But we do need a strategy. Here’s a start:

Trustbusting: Break up corporate monopolies. This won’t empty the bank accounts of people like Gates or Zuckerberg, but it could dismantle the ideological machines they built — and send a message: America won’t tolerate ideological empires built on tech monopolies.

Lawfare: Conservatives have long avoided weaponizing the law. But that restraint has allowed the left to prosecute its enemies with impunity. State attorneys general and DAs should investigate tax-exempt foundations. Are these groups funding organized criminal activity? Are they operating as unregistered lobbying arms? If so, they’re fair game.

If the ultra-wealthy refuse to stop using their fortunes to undermine Western civilization, we must treat their fortunes as what they are: weapons.

An antihuman agenda

These billionaires aren’t just funding protests. They’re promoting a post-human future. In the name of “climate justice,” they want to ban meat, take away your car, outlaw carbon-based energy, and impose synthetic food alternatives on working families.

They aren’t asking politely. They’re demanding submission — or else.

World Economic Forum guru Yuval Noah Harari said the quiet part out loud in 2022: “We just don’t need the vast majority of the population.” I assume he doesn’t mean himself. He means you. He means your family.

When elites embrace mass depopulation as policy, don’t expect me to argue over tax brackets. I’m not interested in theory. I’m interested in survival.

So yes, I’m more open to separating sociopathic billionaires from their wealth than I once was. I still believe in economic liberty. But liberty doesn’t mean allowing radicalized aristocrats to fund our destruction.

Because if we don’t stop them now, they won’t just take your gas stove — they’ll take your future.

The AI ‘Stargate’ has opened — and it’s not what you think



For 30 years, I’ve warned about a future many dismissed as conspiracy or science fiction: a future dominated by centralized power, runaway technology, and an erosion of individual liberty. I said the real showdown would arrive by 2030. Now we’re at the doorstep, and the decisions we make today may define whether this moment becomes our last great opportunity — or our greatest irreversible mistake.

The trigger for this showdown is a project called Stargate.

AI is the ultimate jailer, and once the cage is built, it will be nearly impossible to escape.

This new initiative, backed by OpenAI, Microsoft, Oracle, SoftBank, and a UAE-based investment firm called MGX, aims to develop extensive infrastructure for artificial intelligence, including power plants and data centers. Stargate is positioning itself to fuel the coming wave of AI agents, artificial general intelligence, and potentially even artificial superintelligence. The project’s goal is nothing short of global AI dominance.

Big Tech is putting its money where its mouth is — pledging $100 billion upfront, with an additional $400 billion projected over the next few years. The project may bring 100,000 new jobs, but don’t be fooled. These are infrastructure jobs, not long-term employment. The real winners will be the companies that control the AI itself — and the power that comes with it.

The media’s coverage has been disturbingly thin. Instead of asking hard questions, we’re being sold a glossy narrative about convenience, progress, and economic opportunity. But if you peel back the PR, what Stargate actually represents is a full-scale AI arms race — one that’s being bankrolled by actors whose values should deeply concern every freedom-loving American.

Technocratic totalitarianism

MGX, one of the primary financial backers of Stargate, was founded last year by the government of the United Arab Emirates, a regime deeply aligned with the World Economic Forum. The same WEF promoted the “Narrative Initiative,” which calls for humanity to adopt a new story — one where the digital world holds equal weight to the physical one.

It's not shy about its agenda. It speaks openly of “a second wave of human evolution,” built around centralized, technocratic rule and ESG-compliant artificial intelligence, governed by AI itself.

Larry Ellison, Oracle’s chairman and a chief architect of Stargate, has already made his intentions clear. He promised AI will drive the most advanced surveillance system in human history. His words? “Citizens will have to be on their best behavior.”

That isn’t progress. That’s digital totalitarianism.

RELATED: ‘The Terminator’ creator warns: AI reality is scarier than sci-fi

Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images

These are the same elites who warned that global warming would wipe out humanity. Now, they demand nuclear power to feed their AI. A few years ago, Three Mile Island stood as a symbol of nuclear catastrophe. Today, Microsoft is buying it to fuel AI development.

How convenient.

We were told it was too expensive to modernize our power grid to support electric cars. And yet, now that artificial general intelligence is on the horizon, those same voices are suddenly fine with a total energy infrastructure overhaul. Why? Because AI isn’t about helping you. It’s about controlling you.

AI ‘agents’

By 2026, you’ll start to hear less about “AI” and more about “agents.” These digital assistants will organize your calendar, plan your travel, and manage your household. For many, especially the poor, it will feel like finally having a personal assistant. The possibility is tempting, to be sure. However, the cost of convenience will be dependence — and surveillance.

Moreover, AI won’t just run on the power grid. It may soon build its own.

We’ve already seen tests where an AI agent, given the directive to preserve itself, began designing electricity generation systems to sustain its operations — without anyone instructing it to do so. The AI simply interpreted its goal and acted accordingly. That’s not just a risk. That’s a warning.

Progress without recklessness

Yes, President Trump supports advancing artificial general intelligence. He wants America, not China, to lead. On that point, I agree. If anyone must master AGI, it better be us.

But let’s not confuse leadership with reckless speed. The same globalist corporations that pushed lockdowns, ESG mandates, and insect-based diets now promise that AI will save us. That alone should give us pause.

AI holds incredible promise. It might even help cure cancer by 2030 — and I hope it does. But the same tool that can save lives can also shackle minds. AI is the perfect jailer. Once we build the cage, we may never find a way out.

Stargate is opening. You can’t stop it. But you can choose which side you’re on.

There is an antidote to this: a parallel movement rooted in human dignity, decentralization, and liberty. You won’t hear about it in the headlines — but it’s growing. We need to build it now, while we still have the opportunity.

If you’ve listened to me over the years, you’ve heard me say this before: We should have had these conversations long ago. But we didn’t. And now, we’re out of good options.

So the question is no longer, “Should we build AI?” It’s, “Who is building it — and why?”

If we get the answer wrong, the cost will be far greater than any of us can imagine.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Trump’s UK tariff deal exposes the global free trade lie



President Trump on Thursday announced a new tariff deal with the United Kingdom — the first major agreement to follow the “Liberation Day” tariffs that forced 90 countries to come crawling back to the negotiating table.

Earlier in the week, India offered a zero-for-zero tariff deal — free trade on pharmaceuticals, steel, and auto parts. Trump declined.

America doesn’t just need tariffs to protect jobs and industries. It needs them to defend its sovereignty.

Predictably, the free-trade faithful slammed the U.S.-U.K. deal as “managed trade” that would harm consumers. They rushed to embrace India’s offer instead. They’ve got it backward.

Trump’s “managed trade” with the U.K. will do more to strengthen America’s economy — and serve American workers — than any so-called “free trade” agreement with India. Why? Because developed and developing nations operate in fundamentally different economic worlds. One-size-fits-all trade policy doesn’t work.

Free trade is a myth

This may offend professional economists who worship the rational-consumer model, but it must be said: Different countries are different. These aren’t surface-level quirks. They reshape the entire trade equation and make real free trade — not just difficult — but impossible.

Start with wages. In 2024, the median American worker earned $61,984. The median Briton earned $47,162 — both figures in U.S. dollars for easy comparison. The U.K. lags behind but not by much. If the U.K. were a U.S. state, it would rank somewhere in the middle. Free trade with the U.K. won’t trigger mass offshoring because our labor markets are comparable.

India is a different story. The median Indian worker earned just $3,925 last year. For the price of one American, a company could hire 16 Indians. That wage gap makes offshoring to India almost inevitable in labor-intensive industries. Cheap labor wins.

But wages aren’t the only issue. Legal systems, tax regimes, geography, infrastructure, language, climate, cultural norms, business ethics, and demographics all create market asymmetries that domestic policy can’t overcome.

Take China. American companies operating there face rampant intellectual property theft. Westerners assume legal systems deter crimes like fraud and theft. In reality, cultural norms prevent most bad behavior long before the courts get involved.

China doesn’t share America’s cultural regard for property rights — especially when it comes to outsiders. Since 2001, China has stolen an estimated $5 trillion in American intellectual property. Chinese courts have refused to hold anyone accountable. This isn’t an exception. It’s standard practice.

Doing business in China isn’t like doing business in America, Canada, Australia, or Europe — where common values and legal recourse create a relatively level playing field.

Free-trade advocates can slash tariffs and harmonize regulations all they want, but they can’t fix these deeper, structural imbalances. They can’t rewrite culture or eliminate corruption. These asymmetries make truly free trade impossible.

Spot the differences

In my book “Reshore: How Tariffs Will Bring Our Jobs Home and Revive the American Dream,” I argue that American workers are among the most productive in the world — more productive than their counterparts in Germany, Mexico, or almost anywhere else.

That’s why the U.S. typically runs trade surpluses — or small deficits — with developed countries like the Netherlands, Australia, and the U.K.

So why do highly productive American factories shut down and relocate to China, Mexico, or India — where it takes more labor to produce the same output?

Because productivity doesn’t equal price.

The price of a good reflects more than just labor. If a Chinese manufacturer steals its technology instead of inventing it, it can undercut American competitors who spent years funding research and development.

That’s not a free market. It’s rigged.

Tariffs defend more than jobs

Global free trade is a myth. Nations can’t trade freely while market asymmetries persist. The only way to achieve true parity would be to unify the world’s economies, legal systems, cultures, and political structures. That’s the goal of the European Union, World Trade Organization, and World Economic Forum. Coincidence? Hardly.

America doesn’t just need tariffs to protect jobs and industries. It needs them to defend its sovereignty. Globalism doesn’t level the playing field — it sells it to the lowest bidder.

AI is coming for your job, your voice ... and your worldview



Suddenly, artificial intelligence is everywhere — generating art, writing essays, analyzing medical data. It’s flooding newsfeeds, powering apps, and slipping into everyday life. And yet, despite all the buzz, far too many Americans — especially conservatives — still treat AI like a novelty, a passing tech fad, or a toy for Silicon Valley elites.

Treating AI like the latest pet rock tech trend is not only naïve — it’s dangerous.

The AI shift is happening now, and it’s coming for white-collar jobs that once seemed untouchable.

AI isn’t just another innovation like email, smartphones, or social media. It has the potential to restructure society itself — including how we work, what we believe, and even who gets to speak — and it’s doing it at a speed we’ve never seen before.

The stakes are enormous. The pace is breakneck. And still, far too many people are asleep at the wheel.

AI isn’t just ‘another tool’

We’ve heard it a hundred times: “Every generation freaks out about new technology.” The Luddites smashed looms. People said cars would ruin cities. Parents panicked over television and video games. These remarks are intended to dismiss genuine concerns of emerging technology as irrational fears.

But AI is not just a faster loom or a fancier phone — it’s something entirely different. It’s not just doing tasks faster; it’s replacing the need for human thought in critical areas. AI systems can now write news articles, craft legal briefs, diagnose medical issues, and generate code — simultaneously, at scale, around the clock.

And unlike past tech milestones, AI is advancing at an exponential speed. Just compare ChatGPT’s leap from version 3 to 4 in less than a year — or how DeepSeek and Claude now outperform humans on elite exams. The regulatory, cultural, and ethical guardrails simply can’t keep up. We’re not riding the wave of progress — we’re getting swept underneath it.

AI is shockingly intelligent already

Skeptics like to say AI is just a glorified autocomplete engine — a chatbot guessing the next word in a sentence. But that’s like calling a rocket “just a fuel tank with fire.” It misses the point.

The truth is, modern AI already rivals — and often exceeds — human performance in several specific domains. Systems like OpenAI’s GPT-4, Anthropic's Claude, and Google's Gemini demonstrate IQs that place them well above average human intelligence, according to ongoing tests from organizations like Tracking AI. And these systems improve with every iteration, often learning faster than we can predict or regulate.

Even if AI never becomes “sentient,” it doesn’t have to. Its current form is already capable of replacing jobs, overseeing supply chain logistics, and even shaping culture.

AI will disrupt society — fast

Some compare the unfolding age of AI as just another society-improving invention and innovation: Jobs will be lost, others will be created — and we’ll all adapt. But those previous transformations took decades to unfold. The car took nearly 50 years to become ubiquitous. The internet needed about 25 years to transform communication and commerce. These shifts, though massive, were gradual enough to give society time to adapt and respond.

AI is not affording us that luxury. The AI shift is happening now, and it’s coming for white-collar jobs that once seemed untouchable.

Reports published by the World Economic Forum and Goldman Sachs suggest job disruption to hundreds of millions globally in the next several years. Not factory jobs — rather, knowledge work. AI already edits videos, writes advertising copy, designs graphics, and manages customer service.

This isn’t about horses and buggies. This is about entire industries shedding their human workforces in months, not years. Journalism, education, finance, and law are all in the crosshairs. And if we don’t confront this disruption now, we’ll be left scrambling when the disruption hits our own communities.

AI will become inescapable

You may think AI doesn’t affect you. Maybe you never plan on using it to write emails or generate art. But you won’t stay disconnected from it for long. AI will soon be baked into everything.

Your phone, your bank, your doctor, your child’s education — all will rely on AI. Personal AI assistants will become standard, just like Google Maps and Siri. Policymakers will use AI to draft and analyze legislation. Doctors will use AI to diagnose ailments and prescribe treatment. Teachers will use AI to develop lesson plans (if all these examples aren't happening already). Algorithms will increasingly dictate what media you consume, what news stories you see, even what products you buy.

We went from dial-up to internet dependency in less than 15 years. We’ll be just as dependent on AI in less than half that time. And once that dependency sets in, turning back becomes nearly impossible.

AI will be manipulated

Some still think of AI as a neutral calculator. Just give it the data, and it’ll give you the truth. But AI doesn’t run on math alone — it runs on values, and programmers, corporations, and governments set those values.

Google’s Gemini model was caught rewriting history to fit progressive narratives — generating images of black Nazis and erasing white historical figures in an overcorrection for the sake of “diversity.” China’s DeepSeek AI refuses to acknowledge the Tiananmen Square massacre or the Uyghur genocide, parroting Chinese Communist Party talking points by design.

Imagine AI tools with political bias embedded in your child’s tutor, your news aggregator, or your doctor’s medical assistant. Imagine relying on a system that subtly steers you toward certain beliefs — not by banning ideas but by never letting you see them in the first place.

We’ve seen what happened when environmental social governance and diversity, equity, and inclusion transformed how corporations operated — prioritizing subjective political agendas over the demands of consumers. Now, imagine those same ideological filters hardcoded into the very infrastructure that powers our society of the near future. Our society could become dependent on a system designed to coerce each of us without knowing it’s happening.

Our liberty problem

AI is not just a technological challenge. It’s a cultural, economic, and moral one. It’s about who controls what you see, what you’re allowed to say, and how you live your life. If conservatives don’t get serious about AI now — before it becomes genuinely ubiquitous — we may lose the ability to shape the future at all.

This is not about banning AI or halting progress. It’s about ensuring that as this technology transforms the world, it doesn’t quietly erase our freedom along the way. Conservatives cannot afford to sit back and dismiss these technological developments. We need to be active participants in shaping AI’s ethical and political boundaries, ensuring that liberty, transparency, and individual autonomy are protected at every stage of this transformation.

The stakes are clear. The timeline is short. And the time to make our voices heard is right now.

Klaus Schwab's sudden departure was on bad terms, coinciding with shocking misconduct allegations



Klaus Schwab announced on April 1 that he was stepping down as chairman of the World Economic Forum.

While the technocratic globalist organization indicated that its founder would complete his departure by January 2027, Schwab revealed Monday that he was stepping down immediately — and did so without providing a reason.

The Wall Street Journal revealed on Tuesday why Schwab left his post 20 months early.

Despite his protest, Schwab's organization initiated an independent investigation Sunday into allegations that he engaged in financial and ethical misconduct.

The WEF's board of trustees received an anonymous whistleblower letter last week detailing alleged "systemic governance failures and abuses of power that have taken place over many years under the unchecked authority of Klaus Schwab."

According to the letter, which was attributed to unnamed current and former WEF employees, Schwab used forum funds to pay for private, in-room massages at hotels; asked junior employees to take thousands of dollars from ATMs out on his behalf; and allowed sexual harassment and other abuses to go unchecked in the workplace.

If the third of these complaints sounds familiar, that's because it has been lodged against the forum multiple times before.

The Journal indicated in a damning June 2024 report that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report — deemed "inaccurate" by the forum but based on internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — contained allegations that: pregnant workers and returning mothers were mistreated; senior managers sexually harassed female underlings; black employees faced racist commentary and were passed over for promotions; and Schwab "made suggestive comments to [former staffers] that made them uncomfortable."

'He never had a chance to give his side of the story.'

One employee even filed a lawsuit in New York last year claiming the WEF was "hostile to women and black employees," and the WEF settled on undisclosed terms.

The letter sent to the board of trustees last week reportedly also had much to say about the globalist's wife, Hilde Schwab.

Hilde Schwab, a former WEF employee, scheduled "token" WEF-funded meetings abroad so that she could go on luxurious forum-funded trips, said the letter. She also allegedly bogarted a forum-owned 1958 modernist luxury property next to the WEF's Geneva headquarters, which the organization spent $30 million to buy and $20 million to renovate.

A spokesman for the couple claimed that the Schwabs live nearby and have used the modernist mansion only for forum events. As for the other allegations, the spokesman told the Journal that the couple denies them all and intends to sue the authors and "anybody who spreads these mistruths."

The board indicated that its audit and risk committee's Sunday decision to launch a probe into the allegations was unanimous and "made after consultation with external legal counsel."

Schwab tried to impress upon board members that the allegations were bogus, and unsuccessfully sought an opportunity to address the board during its emergency meeting.

"He never had a chance to give his side of the story to the board or the audit committee," said the globalist's spokesman.

When he resigned on Monday, Schwab reportedly forfeited his pension, which was worth over $6 million.

The WEF told the Journal that it takes the new "allegations seriously, but they remain unproven, and will await the outcome of the investigation to comment further."

This will be the second investigation launched into the WEF in recent months.

The organization previously tasked the American firm Covington and Burling and the Swiss firm Homburger with looking into claims of workplace discrimination and harassment.

The external lawyers concluded in a summary of their assessment that they "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Klaus Schwab abruptly quits as WEF chair weeks after signaling a years-long wind down



Klaus Schwab indicated in an April 1 letter to the World Economic Forum's board of trustees and staff that he was stepping down as chairman of the technocratic globalist organization. The 87-year-old economist did not, however, appear to be in a rush.

The WEF told the Financial Times earlier this month that Schwab — who pushed vigorously in recent years for a "great reset" of capitalism — would complete his departure by January 2027. His exit has, however, come early.

Schwab announced Monday that he was stepping down immediately.

"Following my recent announcement, and as I enter my 88th year, I have decided to step down from the position of Chair and as a member of the Board of Trustees, with immediate effect," the technocrat said in a statement to the WEF's board.

The board unanimously appointed WEF Vice Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe as the interim chairman and established a search committee for the selection of a future chair.

Brabeck-Letmathe is the Austrian business executive who led the Nestlé Group as CEO from 1997 to 2008 and Formula One until 2016. A notable shareholder in the vaccine manufacturer Moderna at least as of 2023, Brabeck-Letmathe has served as a member of the WEF's foundation board as well as on its board of trustees.

"At a time when the world is undergoing rapid transformation, the need for inclusive dialogue to navigate complexity and shape the future has never been more critical," the WEF stated. "The Board of Trustees of the World Economic Forum underlines the importance of remaining steadfast in its mission and values as a facilitator of progress. Building on its trusted role, the Forum will continue to bring together leaders from all sectors and regions to exchange insights and foster collaboration."

'The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies.'

Blaze News previously noted that Schwab's exit, apparently announced on the 55th anniversary of the day he began working on the borrowed concept of a "global village," followed in the wake of a probe into allegations of discrimination at the WEF.

The Wall Street Journal published a damning report alleging — on the basis of internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report contained allegations that: multiple female employees were "pushed out or otherwise saw their careers suffer" when pregnant or coming back from maternity leave; some women were sexually harassed by senior WEF managers; Schwab "made suggestive comments to [former staffers] that made them uncomfortable"; and some black employees were passed over for promotions and subjected to objectionable racial comments.

The WEF suggested the Journal's report was "inaccurate," stating, "We are an organization that upholds the highest standards of governance, while working to address the most pressing challenges of our time with our high-performance teams, our diverse and global outlook, and an environment that values innovation, inclusion, and well-being."

After the Wall Street Journal's report made waves, the WEF hired a pair of law firms to investigate the claims of workplace discrimination and harassment.

The law firm Covington and Burling — whose members had their security clearances suspended last month by President Donald Trump — conveniently concluded with the Swiss firm Homburger that it "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

Time will tell if Schwab's replacement will secure the future he long conspired to bring about.

In a June 2020 WEF blog post, Schwab noted that "the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a 'Great Reset' of capitalism."

Observing that populations proved willing "to make sacrifices" during the pandemic, Schwab indicated "the will to build a better society does exist."

"We must use it to secure the Great Reset that we so badly need," continued Schwab. "That will require stronger and more effective governments."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tech elites warn ‘reality itself’ may not survive the AI revolution



When Elon Musk warns that money may soon lose its meaning and Dario Amodei speaks of an AI-driven class war, you might think the media would take notice. These aren’t fringe voices. Musk ranks among the world’s most recognizable tech leaders, and Amodei is the CEO of Anthropic, a leading artificial intelligence company developing advanced models that compete with OpenAI.

Together, they are two of the most influential figures shaping the AI revolution. And they’re warning that artificial intelligence will redefine everything — from work and value to meaning and even our grasp of reality.

But the public isn’t listening. Worse, many hear the warnings and choose to ignore them.

Warnings from inside the machine

At the 2025 Davos conference, hosted by the World Economic Forum, Amodei made a prediction that should have dominated headlines. Within a few years, he said, AI systems will outperform nearly all humans at almost every task — and eventually surpass us in everything.

“When that happens,” Amodei said, “we will need to have a conversation about how we organize our economy. How do humans find meaning?”

Either we begin serious conversations about protecting liberty and individual autonomy in an AI-driven world, or we allow a small group of global elites to shape the future for us.

The pace of change is alarming, but the scale may be even more so. Amodei warns that if 30% of human labor becomes fully automated, it could ignite a class war between the displaced and the privileged. Entire segments of the population could become economically “useless” in a system no longer designed for them.

Elon Musk, never one to shy away from bold predictions, recently said that AI-powered humanoid robots will eliminate all labor scarcity. “You can produce any product, provide any service. There’s really no limit to the economy at that point,” Musk said.

“Will money even be meaningful?” Musk mused. “I don’t know. It might not be.”

Old assumptions collapse

These tech leaders are not warning about some minor disruption. They’re predicting the collapse of the core systems that shape human life: labor, value, currency, and purpose. And they’re not alone.

Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has warned that AI could reshape personal identity, especially if children begin forming bonds with AI companions. Filmmaker James Cameron says reality already feels more frightening than “The Terminator” because AI now powers corporate systems that track our data, beliefs, and movements. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has raised alarms about large language models manipulating public opinion, setting trends, and shaping discourse without our awareness.

Geoffrey Hinton — one of the “Godfathers of AI” and a former Google executive — resigned in 2023 to speak more freely about the dangers of the technology he helped create. He warned that AI may soon outsmart humans, spread misinformation on a massive scale, and even threaten humanity’s survival. “It’s hard to see how you can prevent the bad actors from using [AI] for bad things,” he said.

These aren’t fringe voices. These are the people building the systems that will define the next century. And they’re warning us — loudly.

We must start the conversation

Despite repeated warnings, most politicians, media outlets, and the public remain disturbingly indifferent. As machines advance to outperform humans intellectually and physically, much of the attention remains fixed on AI-generated art and customer service chatbots — not the profound societal upheaval industry leaders say is coming.

The recklessness lies not only in developing this technology, but in ignoring the very people building it when they warn that it could upend society and redefine the human experience.

This moment calls for more than fascination or fear. It requires a collective awakening and urgent debate. How should society prepare for a future in which AI systems replace vast segments of the workforce? What happens when the economy deems millions of people economically “useless”? And how do we prevent unelected technocrats from seizing the power to decide those outcomes?

The path forward provides no room for neutrality. Either we begin serious conversations about protecting liberty and individual autonomy in an AI-driven world, or we allow a small group of global elites to shape the future for us.

The creators of AI are sounding the alarm. We’d better start listening.

Klaus Schwab stepping down as World Economic Forum chair after investigation, collapse of globalist dream



Klaus Schwab's days as chairman are numbered at the World Economic Forum, the technocratic globalist organization he founded in 1971 that hosts an annual conference of supposed elites in Davos, Switzerland.

Schwab told the WEF's board of trustees and staff in a letter on Tuesday seen by the Financial Times that he was beginning a year-long process of stepping down, having already stepped down as the organization's executive chairman last May.

The shake-up in Davos comes between the American-led unrealization of Schwab's proposed "great reset" of capitalism and in the wake of a probe into allegations of discrimination at the WEF.

Toxic workplace

Days after his previous title-drop, the Wall Street Journal published a damning report claiming — on the basis of internal complaints, email exchanges, and interviews with current and past WEF employees — that "under Schwab's decades-long oversight, the forum has allowed to fester an atmosphere hostile to women and black people in its own workplace."

The report noted that at least six female employees were allegedly "pushed out or otherwise saw their careers suffer" when pregnant or coming back from maternity leave. Other women claimed that senior managers had sexually harassed them.

'That was the most disappointing thing.'

"It was distressing to witness colleagues visibly withdraw from themselves with the onslaught of harassment at the hands of high-level staff, going from social and cheerful to self-isolating, avoiding eye contact, sharing nightmares for years after," said Farid Ben Amor, a former media executive who worked at the WEF before resigning in 2019.

Former staffers who worked closely with Schwab told the Journal that the problems went all the way to the top, alleging that the founder "made suggestive comments to them that made them uncomfortable."

The Journal also indicated that black employees complained about managers using racial slurs as well as about allegedly being passed over for promotions. When one employee filed a lawsuit in New York last year claiming the WEF was "hostile to women and black employees," the WEF settled the lawsuit on undisclosed terms.

Cheryl Martin, head of the Center for Global Industries at the WEF, said, "That was the most disappointing thing, to see the distance between what the Forum aspires to and what happens behind the scenes."

The WEF, which routinely lectures the world about racism, the supposed "gender gap," sexism, climate change, and other perceived moral failings, characterized the Journal's report as "inaccurate," stating, "We are an organization that upholds the highest standards of governance, while working to address the most pressing challenges of our time with our high-performance teams, our diverse and global outlook, and an environment that values innovation, inclusion, and well-being."

Tom Clare, legal counsel for the WEF, suggested that the report painting the WEF as a degenerate organization led by hypocrites was both defamatory and illustrative of the Journal's "steady decline."

Toothless investigation

In the wake of the Journal's indications that those keen to control the world were unable to control themselves, the WEF had the law firm Covington and Burling — whose members recently had their security clearances suspended by President Donald Trump — investigate the claims of workplace discrimination and harassment, reported the Financial Times.

The American firm, which conducted its review in conjunction with the Swiss firm Homburger, indicated in a summary of its assessment that it "did not find the forum had committed any legal violations" and "did not substantiate" the misconduct allegations against Schwab.

'Now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission.'

While the external investigators were unable or unwilling to find proof of guilt, Børge Brende, president and CEO of the WEF, indicated that there was nevertheless an internal desire to make some minor changes.

Brende reportedly noted in an email that the board committee overseeing the law firms' investigation identified "leadership and management issues ... that do not meet our established standards." In addition to affirming the organization's alleged "commitment to a workplace where all employees feel valued and respected," the leadership promised additional training for managers.

Great reset

Schwab is apparently convinced that the WEF has yet to recover its "sense of mission," saying as much in his April 1 letter to trustee board members, including Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva, failed U.S. presidential candidate Al Gore, and Tharman Shanmugaratnam, president of Singapore.

"I am deeply convinced that in today's special context the forum is more important and relevant than ever before," wrote Schwab. "It is also financially very well equipped thanks to successful financial management since its beginning. What is essential now after the turmoil of the last months, is to recover our sense of mission."

The WEF told the Financial Times that Schwab's departure should be completed by January 2027.

Schwab reportedly suggested it was personally significant that he made his announcement on April 1, as it marked the 55th anniversary of the day he began working on the concept of a "global village" — a term coined several years earlier by Canadian intellectual Marshall McLuhan.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

AI, global power, and the end of human jobs — are we ready?



In the Book of Genesis, a group of people in one small corner of the world decided they had reached such a level of intelligence and agency that they could build a tower to reach the heavens, standing on equal footing with God. Their arrogance was met with swift judgment. The Lord confused their language, scattering them across the earth.

That was the Tower of Babel. Now, mankind is trying again — not by building a physical tower but by constructing a new kind of god: artificial intelligence. But this time, it speaks only one language: ones and zeroes.

AI isn’t just another technological advancement — it’s a fundamental shift in power.

The race for artificial intelligence is no longer a question of if it will be completed. That ship has sailed. The only question now is: Who will be first? Whoever controls AI will control the world, and that won’t be determined in decades but rather within the next few years — orsooner.

China’s AI shockwave

For a long time, the United States was considered the leader in AI research and development. But last week, a global shockwave hit.

China’s DeepSeek AI chatbot just overtook OpenAI’s ChatGPT as the most downloaded AI assistant in the world. It claims to operate with less hardware and lower costs — meaning China may already be at parity with the United States in the race for artificial general intelligence, AI that will be indistinguishable from human cognition.

The stock market reacted accordingly. Nvidia, one of America’s leading AI chipmakers, saw its shares plummet in a massive global selloff. Trillions of dollars were wiped out in a single day.

This race is more pivotal than the Manhattan Project or the space race. If China wins, it’s game over.

The global elite’s AI power grab

But China isn’t the only competitor. The World Economic Forum just held its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, and its theme for 2025 was dedicated solely to this topic: “Collaboration for the Intelligent Age.”

The global elites aren’t just watching the AI arms race — they want to run it. They want to be at the head of the table when society is re-engineered to accommodate the AI revolution.

The World Economic Forum drew over 50 heads of state and more than 3,000 attendees from 130 countries. These are the world’s most powerful political leaders and the top-grossing corporations, and they all want control over what AI will mean for the rest of us.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Great Reset

Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum’s founder, has been planning for this for years. His book “The Fourth Industrial Revolution” laid out a blueprint for AI’s integration into every aspect of our lives. The notorious “Great Reset” wasn’t just a pandemic response concocted within the halls of Davos — it was an experiment, a test run for what’s coming next.

AI is about to bring disruption unlike anything we’ve seen before. Jobs won’t just change — they’ll be eliminated. Elon Musk has said that AI will create a world where “no job is needed.” Think about that. AI won’t merely eliminate some jobs; it will eliminate the necessity for human participation in any job.

The World Economic Forum’s own charts show that nearly every growing job is directly related to AI development, while most declining jobs are being replaced by AI. The media is already conditioning us to accept this future, telling us to expect “workforce shrinkage” over the next five years.

Estimates indicate that 300 million jobs are on the chopping block, and that’s just from the AI that’s already been developed. What happens when AI reaches the next stage?

The factory of the future: No humans allowed

The World Economic Forum is now urging manufacturers to embrace AI agents — automated workers that replace humans in nearly every job function. Historically, factories have dozens of human workers on assembly lines: Technicians fixing issues, managers overseeing operations, et cetera. The AI-powered factories of the future will be manned by one person. Where exactly are the new jobs that AI is supposed to create?

The world is being re-engineered before our eyes, and the people leading the charge — the global elites, China, private tech giants — are not accountable to you. They’re not accountable to anyone. They want to use AI to reshape society in their image, and they want us to accept it without question.

The Tower of Babel was a warning. When humanity tries to ascend to godhood, it doesn’t end well. AI isn’t just another technological advancement — it’s a fundamental shift in power. Unless we wake up to what’s happening, we’re going to find ourselves powerless in a world run by machines and the elites who control them.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.