We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
De-banking… Not even Jeremy Corbyn, the most odious public figure in Britain since Oswald Mosley, should be de-banked due to political views. Banking is a highly regulated state protected cartel, they should no more be allowed to do this than to de-bank people for being Jews or Black.
If what was done to Farage (and even people simply related to him) is allowed to stand, that’s it, we are now in China territory, an actual full-blown tyranny.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
When people hear the word “bank” most people (still) think of a “Shylock” – a person lending out gold for interest, a more modern example would be the “Iron Bank of Braavos” (in the story that Mr Martin never finished) – again the Real Savings (the actual sacrifice of consumption) goes into the bank – and is physically lent out, so no wonder that the savers who put their gold in the bank (and control it) are a very upset indeed if they are not paid back – it is very much “pay back our gold – or we will find someone who will”.
But modern banking is nothing like this – Perry talks of banking being a “state protected cartel”, but that is because a “banking license” is a license to create “money” (officially “NOT money – we create Credit not Money” – but it is treated as money and when the banking Credit Bubble inevitably bursts the banks are supported – openly or in some hidden way) from NOTHING – not gold, not silver, not even the token notes and coins of the government, the “lending” of banks is mostly just corrupt book keeping entries (“crediting to the account”) – these days just lights on a computer screen. When the bank “lends you money” you do not leave the bank with a bag full of money – because the bank has very little money, “Shylock” may have been a nasty man but he was an honest man, this system is not honest, it has no honesty in it.
Which is why, for example, Argentina keeps being lent more “money” even though it repeatedly (every few years) defaults on its debts – it keeps being lent more “money”, because the “money” it is lent does-not-exist – Argentina is a criminal state, but the people (the bankers – both commercial and government, IMF and World Bank) it deals with are also criminals – so there is a match and the farce goes on and on. “We are not really hurting anyone – this is not Real Savings, the money never really existed in the first place” is the excuse given, privately, by BOTH sides (and it “justifies” their big pay, perks and bonus payments).
There can not be free competition in such an “industry” – because it is based on legalised fraud, everyone can not have a “banking license” (and not can “banking licenses” be abolished – not in this system) to engage in such legalised criminality, as that would mean utter chaos and almost instant economic collapse – so a small group of enterprises get the “banking licenses” – what Perry calls a cartel, because it is a cartel.
But all this does NOT just dominate banking, turning if from honest money lending to whatever you want to call the, legalised, criminal mess it is now.
The flow of money (or “money”) dominates everything – it means that the entire economy is dominated by a handful of corporations, and that means that the cultural aspect of Agenda 21 – Agenda 2030 (“Sustainable Development Goals”) can proceed. Along with the other aspects such as the control of all land use by government and “partner” corporations under “Stakeholder Capitalism”.
People with dissenting political and cultural opinions will be frozen out of economic life (de facto terminated – even if they formally survive by begging for food on the streets “we have not murdered them – look they are over there, living in that cardboard box”)
The “Cantillon Effect”, named after Richard Cantillon of some three centuries ago, taken to its logical end point – Credit Money dominating everything, and the international economy under the control of a handful of “Woke” Corporations (really owned by no one – and having nothing but hatred and contempt for ordinary customers) in “partnership” with governments – national and international.
Henri Saint-Simon would be delighted – this system of Collectivism is what he wanted two centuries ago.
Still – let us leave aside the economic system side, as this side of total economic collapse, many people are just not going to believe me.
What can be done whilst we are still under Credit Money Corporate State – the present economic system (which is FALSELY called “Capitalism” or “Free Enterprise”).
Well, yes, something can be done – even whilst we are under the present economic system.
A law could be passed and enforced (enforcement is important) that no Corporations (incorporation being a gift from government) bank or non bank, may discriminate against people (victimise them) on the basis of their political or cultural opinions.
No more “you are against abortion – so we must demand your resignation from this business” or “you are against the European Union so no bank account for you”.
Neither customers nor employees should be discriminated against on the basis of their political or cultural opinions – people must be allowed to express their opinions (yes even “I love the IRA” or “I think that Mr Putin is a wonderful chap”) without being victimised by corporations – either as customers or as employees.
Such a law could be passed right now (there are already a vast number of “anti discrimination” laws – it would just be another one) – without any change to the present economic system.
So, even though I hate the present Credit Money Corporate State economic system – and believe it to be inherently destructive and doomed” the problem of discrimination against people for peacefully expressing their opinions can be dealt with.
So the question is – why is this not done?
Why do Conservatives in Britain and Republicans in various American States not pass laws forbidding Corporations (banks and non banks) from discriminating against employees and customers for peacefully expressing their opinions?
This did not start with Mr Farage – it has been going on for years, and getting worse and worse.
So why no action from British Conservatives and American Republicans?
Are they compromised by the money of the “Woke” Corporations?
That is a real question – I do not know they answer.
Why when executives who had worked in Corporations for many years, were forced out for their political or cultural opinions (say they were against “Gay Marriage”, or abortion, or whatever) did British Conservatives and American Republicans do absolutely nothing?
They could have passed an anti discrimination law forbidding such conduct by Corporations – but they did NOT.
The principle was conceded many decades ago – there are many anti discrimination laws, this would just be a matter of extending them to the peaceful expression of political and cultural opinions outside of work time – for it is for what they did in their private lives that various Corporate executives were forced out.
The stranglehold that the left now has over the major international corporations (banks and non banks) did not just happen – non leftist executives were either forced out, as “racists”, “sexists”, “homophobes”, “Islamophobes”, “Transphobes” and-so-on, or scared into silence.
And American Republicans and British Conservatives did nothing to stop this.
It need not even be sincere leftism.
Say you have a rival for promotion in a corporate bureaucracy (bank or non bank) or there is someone above you – and you want their job.
Now you could work very hard – and earn the job.
But that is difficult – much easier to look into the private life of your rival and declare “this evil person campaigned for British independence – he must be dismissed!” or “this evil person is against abortion – she must be dismissed!”
Then the job you want is yours – without you having to do any work at all.
And to cover yourself – you do not even have to make the charge (the charge of “racism”, “sexism”, “homophobia”, “Islamoboia”, “Transphobia”, “Climate Change Denialism” or whatever) yourself, you can get an Activist Group to make the charge.
Just privately leak the information about your rival for a Corporate job, to an Activist Group – and watch as they tear your rival to pieces.
Corporations, banks or non banks, must be forbidden to victimise people (customers or employees) on the basis of the peaceful expression of their political or cultural opinions.
Historically this all started with “Mission Statements”, “Statements of Values” and the teaching of “Corporate Responsibility” (and-so-on) in “Business Schools” – and all that goes back as far as the 1970s (yes as far back as that – even at the Wharton School of Business, but gradually getting worse and worse over time).
The agenda was always totalitarian – which can be shown by looking into the political beliefs of the people who first introduced these things. “Stakeholder Capitalism”, “Public-Private Partnership”, the international Corporate State – none of it just appeared, it has been a long time in the making.
It also shows how dangerous central bank currencies are and why they must be resisted.
I’m hoping that the CEO of NatWest is forced out. People will close accounts at Coutts. I wouldn’t entrust my money to them.
The U.K. taxpayer owns 39% of NatWest.
Much of the Western banking system isn’t even close to laissez faire capitalism, a point that socialists who rail against “neoliberalism” are too thick or dishonest to grasp.
Having read the information they collected on Farage. I would be checking if they have not collected data outside the Data Protection requirements for data. They have legal obligations regarding the collection, storage and processing of data that I suspect has not been followed in this, and potentially many other cases.
A complaint to the right authorities by Farage should be of interest.
I did note that all the released internal docs from Coutts referred to Farage as “NF”. Is that deliberate given the connotations?
It’s technically the king’s government, right? Couldn’t Farage ask the king to look into the matter and the king make a couple of phone calls and demand answers? I get the sovereign isn’t supposed to take sides, but if his government is unjustly abusing one of his subjects then it becomes one of his duties to intervene.
Of course, in the real world neither Liz nor Chuckles would or will do anything more than cut ribbons at groundbreaking ceremonies and give worthless speeches.
Johnathan Pearce – it is easy to call the bluff of the “Free Bankers”.
Just say – “O.K. then – no Central Bank and no regulations. But when you can not pay cash-on-the-nail on demand – you go bankrupt, really bankrupt, you close and you do not reopen.
No “suspension of cash payments” (the old game of the Scots Courts in the days of supposed “Free Banking”) and no bailouts – open or hidden.
Then we will see how long this Credit Bubble farce lasts.
By the way I have a massive problem with the “Iron Bank of Braavos” (from the stories of Mr Martin) – not the way it is run (gold in – gold out – gold back in with interest, yes fine), but who it lends money to.
It seems to specialise in lending money to governments to fund their wars – rather than invest in anything productive.
In the end lending money to governments is a mug’s game.
You end up with a wasteland (created by endless wars or “Social Reform” – “Social Reform” having destroyed so many American cities) which can not possibly pay you back.
I do not care how good your hired killers are (“Faceless Men” or whatever) – if you create a wasteland you are going to end up going bankrupt. No one is going to be around to pay you back with interest – not in the blood soaked chaos.
An update:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk2j5D-y_oM
Apparently banks are to be subjected to stricter rules about the closure of accounts for political purposes.
We hold a big election/
The ship of state sets sail./
The winner gets the White House,/
The loser goes to jail.
In England they don’t lock you up
They’re much too nice for that.
You won’t even get debunked.
Instead you get de-banked!
Andrew Neil reports there’s a Facebook group with thousands of members for people who’ve had their accounts binned by NatWest now planning to follow Farage’s lead and submit DPA Subject Access Requests. If true, this will lead to not insignificant costs to the bank, before anything revealed bites them in the arse.
TwatWest or even more wankerish than (Kan)Ye West.
Yes, I bank with them. The smallish town I live had two NatWests and an RBS. They tried to keep all three going through Covid and the rise of online banking and all and now we have none. They could have kept one. I sometimes get paid by cheque(!) or in folding money so it is a right pain in the arse. Anyway, why did the RBS Group feel the need to maintain both brands in the consumer/small business sector running in parallel?
I used to bank with Northern Rock. I’m going to switch from NatWest. I’ll post here who I change to to let you who not to bank with 😉
Billll
Good poem – but debanking will come to America. Unless the ESG and DEI agenda is rejected – and unless the Federal Reserve system is rejected as well.
If government backed Credit Money remains the system, even banning ESG and DEI will not stop the decay – because they will just introduce totalitarian control under some other name.
Sorry to be late here; this only just popped up in my feed.
I saw rumours that a certain Tommy R, who must not be named, was debanked a while ago.
I don’t recall hearing NF kicking up a fuss about it.
Ah, the eternal relevance of Pastor Niemöller …
If so, it’s equally scandalous, but I suppose MSM would make a point of keeping it off the front page. Farage is too major a figure for that.