That argument doesn't make sense. It is like saying that the policies Bharatiya Janata Party are a conspiracy theory because the party is basically just a big social club, and upsetting a few key members of the BJP executive doesn't imply anything. It doesn't, but then later in unrelated news a billion Indians might start making life difficult for our hypothetical upsetter at the direction of the Indian parliament.

The social club is convened for the purpose of high status people deciding how to influence the direction of the World Economy. It isn't a literature club. Their consensus opinions and the voices in the room matter a lot.

> .. people talk about the WEF ... rather than the actual policy makers

The names aren't a mystery. Klaus Schwab organises the thing. Lists of the politicians and businessmen are published. It is easier to say WEF than to say "9 of the 10 wealthiest people except Adani". Especially since Adani still attends some of the meetups.

https://qz.com/davos-2023-world-economic-forum-attendees-184...

The BJP is in fact not just a big social club.

The WEF is in fact not just a big social club either. People go their to coordinate, discuss policy and make deals.

They aren't going for the merch. They are there to lobby and influence, dare I say, the World Economy.

I mean, https://www.weforum.org/focus/the-great-reset . They're not talking about the weather. They're looking at the future and coordinating a response.

EDIT https://www.weforum.org/great-reset was a better link.

The WEF is if anything less than a social club. It's a series of social events. It's nothing. The only potential energy it has at all is people imputing it power on threads about how it's the secret architect of the global economy. That is not something you can say about the BJP, which has real power.

What powers do you think the BJP has that the WEF doesn't?

The BJP is one of the two largest political parties in India.

So say someone walks in and argues that the BJP has no power other than adding a tag to names in an election, and we should rather talk about the actual policy makers making decisions? Seem like a fair argument to you for why the BJP is not a real political entity?

Because that misses the points just as much as it does in describing the WEF. There is coordination going on beyond the official powers of the organisation. The organisation exists to coordinate political action!

That is drastically more power than the WEF has.

> no power other than arranging the name tags on the lunch tables

The WEF itself would starkly disagree.

For more than 50 years, the Forum has engaged global Partners to drive significant impact – creating historic initiatives, industry breakthroughs, economic solutions and tens of thousands of projects and collaborations – improving the state of the world

That's a lot more than arranging name tags.

https://www.weforum.org/impact

The WEF says it's important. Shocking.

That’s not what “power” means. They don’t have the power to force anything to happen outside their little get together.

The only “power” they have is limited to what participants can or can’t do while attending. Such as: they have the power to require attendees wear their name tags as a condition for attending.

(Not sure if that’s actually a thing; it’s merely illustrative)

If you only think power = force, you don't understand how real power is wielded. You're absolutely correct, WEF will not jail you if you do something its members don't like. If you assume that means it doesn't have any power other than enforcing name tag rules, you're naive.

Can you give an example where they have wielded this power? That is, can you give a single, solitary example where the WEF has implemented something that goes against the wishes of the electorate somewhere? Anything?

I don't think you'll find a single person, including hardcore climate deniers, (let alone an entire "electorate") that would endorse 1000+ private jets all heading to the same event. Why not hold the conference over Zoom?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment...