The WEF et al. don't have the power to force - only the ability to anticipate.
The NWO is not an agenda - it's an inevitability.
Technology (the internet et al) is totally disrupting every nook so society.
Not since the "advent" of fire has humanity seen this rate of advancement (i.e., it's like going 0 - 100 all over again, but starting at 100 and going to 1000 - if that makes sense).
The NWO is simply the result of an unprecedented technological revolution.
"Do you support the NWO?" is a false question.
The question needs to be: whom will the NWO benefit?
The NWO could benefit all of humanity.
Fire can be used to cook an egg or set a village ablaze.
It's our choice how AI et al. impacts humanity.
But it will impact humanity - and much much more than it has already.
To be (living) implies within solution (process of dying); hence not being a quest towards outcome; but the struggle to resist origin. What if the few suggest questions to tempt the many to seek answers (progressivism)?
What if ones free will of choice cannot be shared; only the consequences of every choice?
Can you describe anything that those within (living) the natural order (process of dying) have added, that wasn't supplied to them by it?
What if artificial intelligence (suggested information) represents the inversion of natural knowledge (perceivable inspiration)? What if ignoring perceivable for suggested corrupts ones growth of comprehension within perceivable?
AGENDA; A'GENT, adjective - "acting power" implies RE'GENT; adjective - "reactive power"
As a reactive power (living) within an enacting power (process of dying) one a) represents the inevitable effect (reaction) of cause (enacting) and b) the temporary expression of an ongoing impressing system.
What if the existence of "not" (nothing) was suggested to you, as to tempt the ignorance of the perceivable ongoing origin (everything)?