The United States is resisting the push for retail Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) due to a strict executive order from Trump. Meanwhile, many countries around the world are eagerly exploring these digital currencies. we’ve spent years analysing financial reports and the ongoing discussions from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), and the situation appears concerning. Currently, 11 countries have successfully launched CBDCs, while an additional 49 are experimenting with pilot programs. Digital IDs are also gaining traction, with at least a dozen countries implementing biometric systems that monitor citizens, effectively turning them into data points for global organizations. This is not a distant possibility; it is currently unfolding and presents a clear framework for increased control. But thanks be unto God, we have overcome them.

And right now, the globalist cabal—the World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab cult, the Bank for International Settlements’ shadowy overlords, and their Soros-slicked puppets in every bloated bureaucracy—is unleashing their endgame: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) fused with Digital IDs. This isn’t “progress” or “convenience,” you gullible sheep—it’s a full-frontal assault on your God-given sovereignty, a digital iron fist designed to choke out freedom, family, and faith. They peddle it as a shiny app for your phone, but it’s the noose around every person’s neck, tightening with every supranational summit. No isolated CBDC exists without its Digital ID Siamese twin; they’re the interconnected tentacles of a beast that devours nations whole.

Let’s break this down by country to understand the situation better. Starting with the CBDC adopters, there are nations where your money is now under the control of central banks. Three countries have fully launched operational CBDCs: The Bahamas, the Sand Dollar was introduced in 2020 and is now essentially required for financial access. While it has a catchy name, it continuously tracks transactions. Jamaica; The JAM-DEX was launched in 2022. Although it aims to enhance financial inclusion, it also serves to monitor and potentially restrict individuals who deviate from expected behaviour. In Nigeria, that failed attempt since 2021, the eNaira has gained over 13 million wallets. While it appears inclusive, it poses risks of freezing funds for political dissent or protests. By early 2025, the number of full CBDC launches has risen to 11, with China’s e-CNY leading the charge. Since its pilot in 2020, it is now operational in 26 cities, where the government controls your currency based on a loyalty score. They have even tested the concept of expiring money to encourage spending, integrating it with their social credit system. Additionally, 49 countries are currently piloting their own CBDCs, serving as testing grounds for broader implementation. India’s e-Rupee is circulating in four cities and can be programmed to withdraw stimulus funds if certain conditions aren’t met. Brazil’s Drex is incorporating identification technology for enhanced surveillance. South Korea is experimenting with deposit tokens, Nepal recently launched its basic system in April, and other countries like Thailand and the Philippines are also exploring similar initiatives. The European Union plans to roll out its CBDC—the digital euro—in October of this year, despite overwhelming opposition from the majority of EU citizens.

Let’s talk about Digital IDs, which play a crucial role in making Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) effective. In various regions, these IDs utilize your facial recognition, fingerprints, or iris scans for a wide range of services. Singapore; Since 2003, Singpass has facilitated 41 million logins each month for 5.7 million users, covering everything from taxes to health records—essentially a comprehensive life management tool. India: With Aadhaar established in 2009, 1.3 billion people have biometric identification. The system processes 446 million verifications monthly, linking welfare benefits to biometric scans. Estonia; Digital cards have been mandatory since 2002, achieving a 99% adoption rate. They even offer e-Residency for expatriates, allowing them to access digital services as if they were citizens. Sweden: BankID, introduced in 2003, handles 6.8 billion signatures annually, with 99% of adults using it for various documentation needs. It’s efficient but raises privacy concerns.

Germany: The Personalausweis, implemented in 2010, integrates with the EU’s eIDAS framework, utilizing biometrics for secure access, though its adoption is gradual. Japan: Since 2016, the My Number system has achieved a 67% adoption rate for taxation and emergency services, moving towards comprehensive tracking. Canada: The PCTF wallet promotes “user control” for inter-provincial benefits, but it can feel like a polite form of surveillance. China: The upcoming “voluntary” National Online ID, launching in July 2025, will monitor your online activities for potential issues—voluntary in the same way a root canal might be. Additionally, new initiatives are emerging, such as Costa Rica’s digital card set to launch in September 2025, which will create a physical-digital hybrid. Other countries like Denmark, the UAE, South Korea, Austria, and Bosnia are also rolling out similar systems. The UK is exploring a “BritCard,” and Thailand is gradually introducing its system through 2027. Ex-investment banker Catherine Austin Fitts says it perfectly. Digital ID—once linked to AI and programmable money—enables authorities to monitor, manipulate, and ultimately control every aspect of human behaviour.

The digital currency and the digital ID are directly connected to the mark of the Beast

The trend is clear: these implementations are not random; they reflect a coordinated effort by organizations like the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) to ensure that CBDCs are seamlessly integrated with Digital IDs for comprehensive surveillance. The e-CNY in China parallels systems like Aadhaar, while European pilots are connected to eIDAS. This creates a centralized platform managing everything from your finances to voting and personal choices.

No Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) can operate independently without a Digital ID framework. The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) emphasized the importance of “interoperability” at its Innovation Summit in September 2025, highlighting how your FedCoin could connect with Europe’s euro through a universal ID system, facilitated by leading digital innovators. The World Economic Forum’s EDISON Alliance aims to promote “digital inclusion” for one billion people by 2025, but it risks excluding those who resist conformity.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

Ensuring Big Banks Respect Customers’ Rights

A top banking regulator is taking decisive action to put an end to the era of “debanking,” a practice where big banks deny services to individuals and businesses based on their political beliefs, industry, or ideology. This move comes after numerous instances of banks, including Google, Paypal, and Amazon, cancelling accounts and restricting access to financial services for those who held dissenting views on topics like the origins of Covid-19 and the BLM movement.

Under the Biden administration, several banks were accused of blacklisting entire sectors, such as firearms, and denying services to individuals based on their political affiliations, with a noticeable bias against non-Democrats. However, Jonathan Gould, head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), has announced that supervisors are now closely monitoring banks to ensure they have ceased these discriminatory practices. This oversight is a direct result of a June executive order issued by President Donald Trump, which explicitly directs banks to refrain from denying services based on industry type or political considerations. Reuters reports that supervisors are working to ensure the largest banks are in compliance with this updated approach, marking a significant shift in the banking sector’s treatment of customers.

The practice of debanking has been shrouded in secrecy, with only specialists openly discussing its implications. However, its effects can be devastating, denying individuals and businesses access to essential financial services without any recourse or appeal. The issue has sparked concern among advocates, including Christian organizations and conservatives, who claim to have been targeted by these practices. Notably, former First Lady Melania Trump has spoken out about her own experience with debanking, revealing that she and her son Barron were victims of this practice in 2021, after her husband left office. The Trump family has been vocal about the concerted efforts to erase their legacy, with Eric Trump sharing his family’s ordeal.

Banks Denying Services Based on Political Views

What is the main purpose of banks?

· Keep money safe for customers

· Offer customers interest on deposits, helping to protect against money losing value against inflation

· Lend money to firms, customers and homebuyers

· Offer financial advice and related financial services, such as insuranceBanks are intermediaries between depositors (who lend money to the bank) and borrowers (to whom the bank lends money)

This should be the scope of all commercial banks. However, debanking is a form of main stream cancel culture and this is what prophecy has told us about cancel culture.  

Debanking: The Nigel Farage Case study

The banking systems were being utilized to exert social and political control, as evidenced by the compliance of Canadian banks with Trudeau’s request to freeze the bank accounts of truckers involved in the Canadian Freedom protests. Banks actively played politics, mirroring the actions of PayPal and other payment gateways, which froze the accounts of journalists. Graham Phillips, an independent journalist reporting from the Donbass in Eastern Ukraine, had his assets completely frozen last year by UK authorities for merely reporting the truth about the conflict. Alina Lipp, a German journalist living in Donbas, was labeled a Russian terrorist and criminally charged by German authorities for her pro-Russian reporting, resulting in the shutdown of her bank accounts and those of her father. In the US, JP Morgan Chase allegedly severed ties with the faith-based non-profit National Committee for Religious Freedom (NCRF) last year, although the bank has since denied doing so due to the organization’s religious and political views. In 2023, Nigel Farage’s bank announced that it was closing his accounts, a decision that came without initial explanation, despite the controversial UK politician having been a customer for 40 years. Since then, Farage had attempted to open accounts at nine other banks but was unsuccessful. Banking discrimination was not limited to political figures like Farage or high-profile journalists, as banks were actively targeting individuals, with the National Australia Bank (NAB) announcing a plan to ‘cut off’ customers accused of being financial abusers, a practice known as ‘debanking’, which involves suspending, cancelling, or denying access to accounts.

Journalists reported that Nigel Farage had his bank account closed by Coutts, a prestigious bank catering to affluent clients, which is owned by the National Westminster Bank, a institution largely controlled by the British government since the 2008 banking crisis. As a prominent figure, Farage was instrumental in the 2016 referendum vote for Britain to leave the European Union, earning him both admiration and detestation from the public. Investigators found that Farage, who had been acquainted with Donald Trump, had voiced opposition to extreme transgender ideology and the pursuit of zero emissions, but had not been implicated in any illegal activities. Despite this, Coutts terminated his account, although the bank acknowledged that Farage had always conducted himself in a polite and courteous manner in his dealings with them.

Bank documents revealed that the institution perceived significant reputational risks in associating with N F, given his high profile and the substantial amount of adverse press surrounding him. Although he had no criminal convictions, his commentary and behaviours were deemed to be at odds with the bank’s purpose and values. The bank took issue with his comments and articles on ESG and diversity and inclusion, which did not align with their views or purpose. One document highlighted N F’s history of contentious actions, including his role in campaigning for Britain’s exit from Europe on stringent terms, his opposition to Covid restrictions, and his revived hostility towards addressing the climate emergency. The document also criticized his stance on “disinformation”, citing specific tweets in which he opposed clamping down on the spread of false information. These findings were compiled into a 40-page dossier, which was the result of extensive research and labour, funded by the bank’s depositors and shareholders, including the government, and were intentionally included in the bank’s files.

As much as Mr. Farage may not always be right, but the real issue was whether banks had the authority to scrutinize their clients’ views and deny them service if those views conflicted with those of the chief executive. Banks were actively examining the political beliefs of their clients, sparking concerns about their role in society. The chief executive of Coutts’ parent bank, Alison Rose, had explicitly stated that tackling climate change and promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion were central to the bank’s purpose, but it appeared that this diversity did not extend to individuals with conservative views or those with less than $1 million to deposit. Investigations revealed that when Mr. Farage initially announced that Coutts had closed his account, the bank claimed it was due to insufficient funds, but documents obtained by Mr. Farage later proved that the account was closed for purely political reasons. Furthermore, Mr. Farage alleged that nine other banks, acting as a cartel, had refused to open accounts for him, demonstrating a disturbing trend of financial institutions suppressing freedom of opinion.

Bank refuses to open account for parental rights group opposing ‘trans’ surgeries for kids

We also uncovered that another UK-based bank, Metro Bank, had refused to open a business account for a parental rights group, Our Duty, which opposed transgender surgeries for children. The bank’s spokesman attributed the decision to commercial reasons, but the group believed it was due to their political stance. Metro Bank had recently allied itself with pro-LGBT ideology, joining most major UK banks in promoting this cause.

The actions taken against Mr. Farage and the parental rights group served as a warning to the wealthy to conform to the prevailing ideology or risk losing access to their funds. The Canadian government’s introduction of bank bail-in legislation and the potential implementation of a centralized digital currency raised concerns about the erosion of individual freedoms, particularly the ability to control one’s own body and make choices about healthcare, such as vaccine status. With the ability to withhold funds, individuals might be forced to comply with certain requirements, such as taking quarterly vaccinations, in order to access basic necessities like food and housing. As the regulator continues to crack down on debanking, it remains to be seen how this will impact the banking sector and its treatment of customers. One thing is certain, however: the era of debanking is officially over, and big banks are being held accountable for their actions.

The Proposal: Taxing Your Home to “Solve” a Crisis of Their Own Making

Australia is currently grappling with a severe housing crisis, as young families are being priced out of the market due to soaring prices and rents. The Albanese Labor government has made a commitment to construct 1.2 million new homes over the course of five years, but as of August 2025, they are already facing a significant shortfall of 250,000 homes, primarily attributed to construction delays, regulatory obstacles, and a shortage of skilled labour. In a bid to address this issue, property research firm Cotality has proposed a radical concept, known as the “spare bedroom tax”, which was recently presented at the government’s Economic Reform Roundtable in mid-August 2025, sparking a new wave of debate and discussion.

Eliza Owen and Cotality is pushing for a tax on unused bedrooms, claiming over 60% of Aussie households have just one or two people, yet most homes have three or more bedrooms. This proposed tax, potentially paired with scrapping stamp duty and introducing a land tax, aims to encourage downsizing and renting out spare rooms, supposedly shifting demand towards smaller units. However, critics argue that this tax won’t add new dwellings, instead punishing hardworking Aussies who’ve saved for their dream homes. The real issue, they claim, is years of unchecked mass immigration, foreign investor speculation, and stifling zoning laws, which have manufactured the housing crisis. The public is fiercely opposing the tax, with many calling it a “crazy idea” that targets retirees and families, rather than addressing the root causes of the crisis. Critics, including opposition figures, argue that the tax would hit middle-class asset holders hardest, pitting generations against each other, while foreign investors would snap up freed-up properties at inflated prices. With over 13 million spare bedrooms nationwide, taxing them won’t solve poverty or supply shortages, and instead, would be a regressive move that ignores real fixes like cutting immigration or easing building regulations. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is considering reforms, but the proposed tax has sparked outrage, with many calling for a reality check on the true causes of the housing crisis.

The Globalist Great Reset: Erasing Ownership for Elite Control

Here’s the bigger picture: the spare bedroom scheme is just the tip of the iceberg, exemplifying the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Great Reset” agenda, a master plan unveiled by WEF founder Klaus Schwab in June 2020 to radically transform global economies into a “stakeholder capitalist” model. The Great Reset is actively pushing for a major overhaul of taxes, regulations, and investments, prioritizing “equity” and sustainability, often at the direct expense of individual property rights. Klaus Schwab is using the pandemic as a catalyst to build back a greener and fairer world, with governments working together to implement wealth taxes, eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, and leverage cutting-edge technologies like AI and surveillance for what he calls the “public good.” Meanwhile, Klaus Schwab’s daughter, Nicole Schwab, is actively promoting the WEF’s ‘Great Reset’ plan, which is deliberately designed to exploit crises to gain control. Nicole Schwab explicitly reveals their strategy: use crises as a smokescreen to dismantle the existing economy and replace it with a so-called “sustainable” system, which would be firmly controlled by the elite.

Here’s the lowdown: the clique of powerful, unelected elites gathering at Davos is secretly orchestrating a massive power play, backed by over 1,000 gigantic corporations like Google, Apple, and BlackRock. Under the guise of combating inequality and climate change, they’re actually working to centralize control and reshape the global economy. The World Economic Forum’s infamous slogan, “You’ll own nothing and be happy,” is the smoking gun that exposes their true intentions. This mantra originated from a 2016 essay by Danish politician Ida Auken, published on the WEF’s website, which envisioned a world by 2030 where people would rent everything – from homes and cars to appliances and clothes – through shared services and drones. Auken painted a picture of a city where “I don’t own anything… everything you considered a product has now become a service.” The WEF amplified this idea in a video summarizing their predictions for 2030, sparking a global debate. Although Auken later backtracked, claiming it was just a thought-provoking scenario to discuss the pros and cons of technology, the damage was already done. Whether or not you believe in conspiracy theories, the fact remains that this concept perfectly encapsulates the Great Reset’s push for a subscription-based economy, where corporations own all the assets and individuals are forced to lease them, lining the pockets of Big Tech and finance giants while stripping away the security and freedom that comes with ownership.

The Great Reset ties directly to housing: Schwab’s plan emphasizes “green urban infrastructure” and ESG (environmental, social, governance) metrics to force denser living and reduce private land use, aligning with UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. In Australia, this manifests as the bedroom tax, which would coerce downsizing into high-rise rentals—echoing the UK’s failed 2013 “bedroom tax” that harmed vulnerable tenants without boosting supply. Pauline Hanson of One Nation have called Labor’s housing tweaks a “first step” toward this Reset, where government stakes in homes (up to 40%) morph into outright control. Globally, it’s the same script: Tax private property to fund “equitable” redistribution, while elites like amass billions during crises.  This isn’t about fairness—it’s about dependency. When you own nothing, you rent from the state-corporate nexus, losing the autonomy that homeownership provides. As property theory shows, ownership isn’t just financial; it’s tied to human dignity and happiness, fostering personhood and security. The Reset rejects that, promoting a “happy” serfdom where surveillance tracks your every move for “sustainability.” Ex-investment banker Catherine Austin Fitts says that the ‘Great Reset’ is a plan “to sell to people a vision of a world where the average person has a much smaller command on resources and assets and is subject to complete central control.”

Defending Personal Values Against Globalist Overreach

From a finance standpoint, homeownership has always been the great equalizer—building equity, hedging inflation, and passing wealth to heirs. Australia’s “homeowners’ welfare state” (as economists dub it) has fuelled middle-class prosperity, but the Reset views it as inequality’s root. Taxing spare bedrooms would accelerate wealth transfer from families to governments and corporations, widening the gap while claiming to close it. It’s politically suicidal—polls show Aussies cherish their quarter-acre dream—but globalists thrive on top-down imposition, bypassing democracy via forums like Davos.

The USA Housing Crisis: A Man-Made Supply-Demand Nightmare

But it’s not just Australia. This thing takes different shapes in different places. America’s housing market is in freefall for the average citizen, with affordability at its worst since the 2008 crash. As of mid-2025, the median sale price for an existing home stands at $435,300, a staggering 48% jump from June 2020’s $294,400. Rents average $1,382 monthly, consuming over 30% of income for half of all renters—a record high. And first-time buyers? In cities like Portland, Maine, a two-bedroom starter home lists for $400,000+, outbidding young families with cash-flush investors. The crisis spans urban, suburban, and rural areas: 76% of Americans see it worsening, with rural folks (80%) hit hardest by skyrocketing costs. At the heart is a supply shortage of 3.7-4.5 million units, per Freddie Mac and Zillow estimates. Construction starts for single-family homes dropped 6.9% in October 2024 to just 970,000 annually, far below the 1.5 million needed. Inventory sits at a 4.7-month supply—below the balanced 5-6 months—keeping prices elevated despite high mortgage rates (6.74% for 30-year fixed as of July 2025).

US housing market hijacked by BlackRock, Vanguard & State Street – RFK Jr.

The US housing market is being aggressively dominated by Wall Street giants BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street. According to US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, inflation is only part of the problem, as these corporate behemoths are actively driving up prices by paying 20-50% over the asking price for single-family homes. BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street are quietly buying up every available property, with a clear goal of controlling a massive 60% of all single-family homes in the US by 2030. RFK Jr. sounded the alarm, warning that these giants are deliberately targeting the middle class as part of their “Great Reset” agenda, which aims to leave individuals with no assets and no control. The CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, is actively pushing this agenda as now the chairman of the World Economic Forum. The result is a deliberate and systematic takeover of the US housing market, with the middle class firmly in the crosshairs.

WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars

The Reset rejects homeownership as “inequality’s root,” promoting “happy serfdom” via surveillance and shared assets. It destabilizes markets, forces renting, and widens gaps.  Elites benefit from scarcity; policies like zoning preserve it for the wealthy.

Ownership builds equity, hedges inflation—key to middle-class prosperity. The Reset views it as a threat, pushing dependency on small space rentals. It’s the Globalist plan to have you own nothing. Alex Jones also exposed the WEF and BlackRock’s public plans to ban single-family homes and private cars, tax families, and herd us into tiny “smart cities” using a fake climate emergency.

The WEF will not control the nations

Don’t let globalist mantras like “own nothing and be happy” become policy. Happiness comes from freedom and ownership, not enforced sharing. If Australia falls for this, it’ll be a cautionary tale for the world: The Reset isn’t reset—it’s regression to feudalism, where elites own everything, and we’re just happy to rent. Stand firm; your home is your castle, not their experiment.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order, “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” on August 7, 2025, which actively prohibits financial institutions from denying or restricting access to banking services based on individuals’ or businesses’ political affiliations, religious beliefs, or lawful business activities, a practice commonly known as “debanking.” This move directly addresses concerns surrounding past government-influenced programs, such as “Operation Chokepoint,” where regulators allegedly pressured banks to limit services to specific industries or groups without conducting objective risk assessments, targeting those associated with conservative views, firearms sales, or digital assets. The order explicitly highlights instances where banks, under the influence of federal regulators, have restricted services to law-abiding customers, including flagging transactions involving terms like “Trump” or “MAGA,” or purchases from retailers like Bass Pro Shop or Cabela’s, without any evidence of wrongdoing. It asserts that such practices actively violate principles of free expression, erode trust in the banking system, and potentially contravene laws like the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The order mandates that banking decisions must be based solely on individualized, objective, and risk-based analyses, rather than political or ideological biases, to ensure fair and unbiased access to banking services for all Americans.

The Executive Order titled “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,”

The administration is taking decisive action to combat financial discrimination, building on previous initiatives such as dismantling “Operation Chokepoint 2.0” and launching task forces like the DOJ-Virginia Equal Access to Banking Task Force. Citing concrete examples of banks unfairly denying services to Republican events, conservative groups, and cryptocurrency firms – including those owned by former President Trump – the order sends a clear message. Regulators, including the OCC and FDIC, are actively affirming their commitment to ensuring fair access to financial services, leaving financial institutions on notice that they will face intense scrutiny. Institutions that have engaged in debanking practices may now face investigations, penalties, or referrals to the DOJ, and will be required to prioritize reinstating services to previously denied clients. This move is poised to benefit industries such as cryptocurrencies, firearms, and conservative causes by reducing discriminatory practices, although some critics argue that it may limit the ability of financial institutions to manage risk. Conservatives and crypto enthusiasts are widely hailing the order as a major victory against censorship and “woke” banking practices, with many noting its potential to curb the ability of payment processors like Visa and Mastercard to pressure platforms over content. Alliance Defending Freedom’s Ryan Bangert discussed the new executive order on debanking.

Main Directives of Executive Order Banning Political Debanking

Federal agencies are now required to eradicate debanking practices

Federal agencies are now required to take immediate action to eradicate debanking practices, and they must do so in a swift and efficient manner. All federal banking regulators, including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, are ordered to take the following steps within 180 days: remove any language related to “reputation risk” from their guidance, manuals, and materials, excluding regulations that require notice and comment, as this could be used to justify debanking practices. They must also issue formal guidance to examiners and consider rescinding or amending existing regulations to ensure that assessments are based on risk and are apolitical in nature.

Marc Andreesen spoke on Elizabeth Warrens agency Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which has spent the last 4 years terrorizing people via debanking. Consumer Complaints to CFPB from 2023–2024 were over 8,000. Complaints documented improper account closures without explanation.

The Small Business Administration has been given a deadline of 60 days to provide notice and 120 days to take action, and during this time, they must notify all institutions under their jurisdiction to identify and reinstate any clients who were debanked unlawfully, notify potential clients who were previously denied services and offer them renewed access, and specifically address any instances of payment processing denials.

All federal banking regulators have been given 120 days to review financial institutions for any past or current policies that may have promoted debanking, and if any violations of laws such as the Federal Trade Commission Act or the Consumer Financial Protection Act are found, they must impose remedies, including fines, consent decrees, or disciplinary actions. Within 180 days, all federal banking regulators must examine supervisory and complaint data to identify any instances of debanking based on religion, and if any violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act are found, they must refer these cases to the Attorney General for potential civil action. The Secretary of the Treasury, in conjunction with the Economic Policy Advisor, has been given 180 days to develop a comprehensive strategy to combat debanking, including exploring legislative or regulatory options to prevent this practice from occurring in the future.

Debanking: a form of lawfare and censorship

Some notable recent examples from 2023–2025 highlight patterns involving major banks like JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo, as well as crypto-related cases. In 2024, Marc Andreessen, a Billionaire Investor, prominent venture capitalist and Trump supporter involved in crypto, was debanked by an unspecified bank. He described it as a form of “lawfare and censorship” targeting those exposing corruption or opposing narratives, making it a rallying cry among crypto advocates. 30 Tech Founders were secretly debanked in late 2024 with no warning, explanation, or appeals, described as “pure, silent government power” destroying companies. Cryptocurrency Companies were also targeted. In early 2023, federal regulators (Fed, FDIC, OCC) issued a joint statement on heightened risks from crypto, leading to debanking of related firms. This built on a 2022 FDIC memo pausing services, with ongoing impacts into 2025. Additionally, in May 2025, Montana’s DOJ demanded answers from Wells Fargo for debanking practices tied to Biden-era net-zero goals.

The despicable workings of Operation Chokepoint

Marc Andreessen introduced the topic of Operation Chokepoint. Let’s delve into it. Back in 2013, under the Obama administration, the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched this thing called Operation Chokepoint. Officially, it was sold as a crackdown on fraud and money laundering by going after “high-risk” businesses that banks were servicing. The idea? Pressure banks and payment processors to cut off accounts for industries the feds didn’t like, effectively “choking” them out of the financial system without ever proving any wrongdoing in court. The DOJ teamed up with regulators like the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) to label these businesses as “reputational risks” for banks. If a bank kept serving them, they’d face extra scrutiny, audits, or even threats to their own operations. No due process, no trials—just backroom arm-twisting. It was classic big government overreach, using the financial system as a weapon to enforce policy without Congress’s say-so. Small businesses got crushed, jobs lost, all while the feds played judge and jury. By 2014, Congress caught wind and investigated. House reports slammed it as an abuse of power, saying it “choked out” companies the administration just didn’t favor. Lawsuits piled up, and in 2017, under President Trump, the DOJ officially shut it down, calling it unfair and ineffective. Good riddance, right? But like a zombie, it never really died—it just morphed. Enter Chokepoint 2.0 in the Biden years, and this time aimed at the crypto industry.

Regulators like the FDIC and OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) started whispering to banks about “risks” in digital assets, leading to mass debanking of crypto firms. Accounts closed overnight, no explanations, just because they dealt in Bitcoin or blockchain tech. It was the same playbook: Use vague “reputational risk” to scare banks away from innovative sectors that threaten the status quo.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

The trend reflects growing geopolitical tensions, including the 2022 freezing of Russian reserves, US-China friction, and a push by BRICS nations to diversify away from dollar and euro reliance. Central banks cited diversification and protection against sanctions as key reasons for increasing gold holdings. Despite the euro’s stable share at around 20% when measured at constant exchange rates, gold’s price rally elevated its market value above the euro’s. The US dollar still dominates reserves at 46%, though its share is declining.

This is a big deal, and it’s a wake-up call for anyone who values economic stability, national sovereignty, and sound money. Let’s break down why this matters and what it means for you. Gold overtaking the euro signals a crisis of confidence in fiat currencies—those paper promises backed by nothing but trust in governments. Fiat currencies are backed by empty promises, and when those promises fail, confidence collapses. ‘Fiat’ is Latin for currency by force.

The euro, once hailed as Europe’s answer to the dollar, is losing ground because central banks are questioning its long-term stability. And who can blame them? The eurozone’s been grappling with sluggish growth, political fragmentation, and the fallout from years of loose monetary policy. Meanwhile, gold—tangible, timeless, immune to sanctions—has become the go-to for nations looking to protect their wealth.

Why EU’s Currency Is DONE

The Euro suffered a record collapse to its low in 2022. However, this fall isn’t done and the crash has worsened in 2025. The Euro could crash further which could escalate deindustrialization as well!

ECB’s Digital Euro set to launch in October

But this is by design because, the European Central Bank is set to unveil its Digital Euro in October, sparking widespread concerns about the erosion of our financial freedom. A major issue is the real-time monitoring of every single transaction, allowing banks to track each purchase made by individuals, thereby raising significant privacy concerns. The threat of payment blocking becomes increasingly real, with the government potentially freezing funds if they disagree with an individual’s actions. Furthermore, the introduction of automatic tax deductions is a looming possibility, where the ECB could directly deduct taxes from digital wallets. The implementation of cash withdrawal limits may also be on the horizon, restricting access to one’s own money. The Digital Euro will introduce programmable money, enabling the imposition of expiration dates on funds, which will disappear if not spent within a specified timeframe. Having failed to convince the public to adopt this system voluntarily, authorities now appear to be relying on fear tactics, potentially exploiting a new crisis to forcibly impose the Digital Euro on the population, effectively ushering in a financial Great Reset. This move would grant total control over individual purchases, tracking movements, and potentially even dictating dietary choices, essentially establishing a system of pervasive financial surveillance that monitors every aspect of one’s life. By accepting the Digital Euro, individuals would be paving the way for a future devoid of financial privacy, where every transaction is tracked and controlled. The ECB’s plan raises urgent questions about the future of financial freedom and the potential for governments to exert excessive control over citizens’ lives. Will the introduction of the Digital Euro mark the beginning of a new era of financial surveillance, and what implications will this have for individuals and society as a whole?

How Geopolitics has favoured Gold

Now, let’s talk geopolitics, because this is where the rubber meets the road. The 2022 freezing of Russia’s reserves by Western powers sent shockwaves through the global financial system. Countries like China and India took note and said, “We’re not going to be next.” They’re diversifying away from the dollar and euro, stockpiling gold to shield themselves from sanctions and currency wars. BRICS nations are even talking about a gold-backed alternative to the dollar. This isn’t just a financial shift; it’s a power shift.

From a conservative perspective, this is a vindication of what we’ve been saying for years: fiat currencies are vulnerable. The US dollar, still king at 46% of reserves, isn’t invincible either. Its share is shrinking, weighed down by America’s $33 trillion debt and reckless money printing. Gold’s rise is a reminder that sound money—backed by something real—matters. It’s why central banks are acting like preppers, stocking up on gold like it’s the financial apocalypse.  But this isn’t just about central banks. Everyday investors are jumping in, too. Gold ETFs and physical bullion sales are booming as people hedge against inflation and currency devaluation. And let’s be honest: with governments spending like there’s no tomorrow, who trusts paper money to hold its value? Gold’s surge is a vote for economic sanity in a world gone mad with debt and deficits.  But Like I said, Its by design because they want to introduce CBDC.

Gold overtaking the euro is sign that the global financial system is cracking.

So, why should you care? Because gold overtaking the euro is a warning shot. It’s a sign that the global financial system, built on trust in fiat currencies, is cracking. For investors, it’s time to ask: are you diversified? Do you have assets that can’t be printed or sanctioned away? For policymakers, it’s a call to get back to basics—cut spending, shore up currencies, and stop treating debt like a game. And for all others, it’s a reminder that in uncertain times, gold isn’t just shiny metal; it’s a hedge against chaos.