Harari is a first-class collector of esoteric, interesting information. However, it’s his interpretation that is problematic, and I suspect even his fellow historians are probably aghast at his penchant for sweeping generalizations.

In Harari’s view, it would seem the greatest tool at the hand of the globalists is the story, the narrative, or mythology that supports a society. In his book SAPIENS, he confronts the question of how people collaborated to build the pyramids of Egypt. He writes of the problems that develop when technology allows for a population to move beyond the hunter-gatherer stage and live in villages or cities:

-
…The mere fact that one can feed a thousand people in the same town or a million people in the same kingdom does not guarantee that they can agree how to divide the land and water, how to settle disputes and conflicts, and how to act in times of drought or war. And if no agreement can be reached, strife spreads, even if the storehouses are bulging. It was not food shortages that caused most of history’s wars and revolutions. The French Revolution was spearheaded by affluent lawyers, not by famished peasants. The Roman Republic reached the height of its power in the first century, B.C., when treasure fleets from throughout the Mediterranean enriched the Romans beyond their ancestors’ wildest dreams. Yet it was at that moment of maximum affluence that the Roman political order collapsed into a series of deadly civil wars.
-

For the typical reader (myself included), I find that to be a fascinating, thoughtful paragraph. Harari raises an interesting possibility, namely, that revolutions often start in times of relative prosperity.

This idea deserves further exploration.

But rather than exploring the possibilities, Harari wants to give you his answer and make you believe it. Indeed, it doesn’t appear as if he’s an academic interested in exploring possibilities, but a propagandist for a certain point of view, wanting to convince you to join his merry band:

-
The problem at the root of such calamities is that humans evolved for millions of years in small bands of a few dozen individuals. The handful of millennia separating the Agricultural Revolution from the appearance of cities, kingdoms and empires was not enough time to allow an instinct for mass cooperation to evolve.

Despite the lack of such biological instincts, during the foraging era, hundreds of people were able to cooperate thanks to their shared myths. However, this cooperation was loose and limited.
-

In my opinion, this is where Harari starts to go off the rails. Or if you want to take a less charitable view, this is when he reveals how he wants to brainwash you. Does Harari genuinely believe that the French Revolution and the Fall of the Roman Republic were due to a failure of mass cooperation and that if these cultures only had a shared myth, they’d have survived their challenges? That seems like an enormous leap of logic, and one that most traditional historians would vigorously challenge. In this vein, it’s interesting to read Harari’s critical acclaim and see how few of his endorsements come from academic historians.

Indeed, it seems to come mostly from the ranks of the elite who might find themselves at a meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland.


The Great Reset and the War for the World pp. 98-100