https://brownstone.org/articles/american-totalitarian-crypto-dollar-may-come-before-the-election/
American Totalitarian “Crypto Dollar” May Come Before the Election
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) threaten to replace the cash we use with programmable, trackable, and censorable tokens controlled by governments. Your financial choices could be suppressed, and privacy eliminated. Based on what I’ve learned and experienced directly, this could happen before the 2024 election. The best way to stop it is through direct action, not through politics.
In my 30 years as a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist, I have never encountered a more significant or urgent threat to human freedom and liberty than CBDCs. My direct experience with cryptocurrency, insights from researching my book about the threat of CBDCs called The Final Countdown, and an understanding of the political realities regarding CBDCs from my experience running in the 2024 Republican Presidential primary, have propelled me to dedicate 100% of my time and attention to sounding the alarm on this issue. We are at DEFCON 1.
The Political Landscape for CBDCs in the United States
This is why I believe a CBDC might be rolled out in the United States before the 2024 Presidential election.
1/ President Biden has Authorized the Exploration of a CBDC, and There Isn’t any Real Resistance in Congress.
On March 9, 2022, President Biden signed Executive Order 14067. This EO places “the highest urgency on research and development efforts into the potential design and deployment options of a United States CBDC.” It also calls for a whole-of-government approach to regulating digital assets. As you will see in a further section below, the technology for a US CBDC has already been developed.
The crackdown on digital assets has been ongoing and aggressive, directly impacting people I know personally and respect for their activism in the furtherance of liberty. Ian Freeman, a longtime liberty activist, radio host, and early mover as part of the Free State Project was sentenced to federal prison for 8 years for simply selling Bitcoin (my wife and I attended the sentencing hearings). He operated a number of ATMs and would help people exchange their dollars for cryptocurrency. The Federal government wanted to make an example of Ian and have a chilling effect on person-to-person methods for people to get into crypto. Other services, like LocalBitcoins, have also been forced to close due to added government pressure.
Another liberty activist I know personally and who is also part of the Free State Project, Jeremy Kaufmann, created a company called LBRY (also known as Odyssey). Jeremy’s offering provided a decentralized and censorship resistant version of YouTube using blockchain technology (the underlying technology used in Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies). He was sued and harassed by the SEC. Despite many other cases that were clearly in violation of the SEC guidelines, Jeremy was targeted because his offering was a successful use of technology that also was in direct conflict with the federal government’s extensive efforts to censor America’s social media interactions. His business was forced to shut down in October 2023.
In total, the SEC has targeted 127 companies for crypto enforcement action, and a whopping 24 of those came in 2023 alone. In addition to individual companies, they have aggressively targeted crypto exchanges like Binance, Bittrex, Coinbase, Kraken, and FTX, making it difficult for people to buy and sell cryptocurrency.
During my presidential campaign, I had the opportunity to speak with many current members of Congress who are actively working to stop CBDCs. US Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has been leading the battle against CBDCs in the United States Senate. In 2023, he introduced a bill to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a CBDC. Alarmingly, Cruz informed me that the bill is dead in the water and that the votes aren’t there in the US Senate to block a CBDC. He also expressed concern that the Federal Reserve might attempt to act unilaterally and bypass Congress by introducing a CBDC.
He further suggested that if a CBDC is not introduced this term, it is very possible that Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) could become the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, which would oversee the push for a CBDC. Warren has recently expressed her enthusiastic support for and advocacy for CBDCs.
“We need a digital version of the dollar that can be exchanged quickly and cheaply by anyone, anywhere in the world. A CBDC would make it easier for people to access their money and participate in the economy.” She has also taken the national security angle, stating, “A CBDC could help reduce the risks associated with cryptocurrencies, which are often used for illicit activities and are subject to changing technology and market conditions.”
I have also spoken with Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyoming), Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), former Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO), and Congressman Warren Davidson (R-OH) and can report that while there is some opposition to CBDC, it isn’t anywhere near what is necessary to stop CBDCs before the election.
On the presidential candidate front, I had the opportunity to speak with and/or get my book in front of numerous candidates. In June of 2023, I had my first conversation with Vivek Ramaswamy. I gave him a copy of my book and was very pleasantly surprised that he actually read it.
I had three subsequent conversations with him about it and aggressively pushed him on the CBDC issue, explaining that it was my sole reason for running for President and that there is a risk of it being implemented before the election.
The first thing Vivek did after exiting the race after the Iowa Caucus was to convince Donald Trump that he should oppose CBDCs. On January 17, 2024, in my home state of New Hampshire immediately before the Presidential primary, Trump made the following statement: “I want to thank my friend Vivek for bringing this important issue to my attention. He’s been a great help in understanding the dangers of CBDCs, and I’m grateful for his guidance. Together, we’ll make sure that these digital dollars never see the light of day in America.”
I have also given copies of my book to RFK, Jr. and have received pledges from Libertarian Presidential Candidates Mike Ter Maat and Dr. Michael Rectenwald, confirming their full opposition to CBDCs.
With that said, President Biden is pushing full steam ahead. With Cruz’s concern about unilateral action by the Federal Reserve, I wouldn’t want to rely solely on the commitment of candidates who may or may not win the race. In my decades of experience with politicians, I have found few who actually followed through on their promises, so I take their stated positions with a grain of salt.
The main theme you will hear from me over and over again is that the only way we can guarantee CBDCs are stopped is by the direct action of individuals boycotting the dollar and moving into self-custody crypto, gold, and silver, and using those alternatives as cash in a parallel economy BEFORE everyone’s fiat is mandatorily converted to CBDC, and we have no other choice.
2/ The Technology for a US CBDC has Already Been Developed and Could be Deployed Quickly.
The Federal Reserve has already completed three successful pilots. The technology works and is only pending the creative “legal and marketing” spin before it is rolled out. I describe the pilot programs in detail, along with the involvement of the MIT Media Lab and their ties to Jeffrey Epstein, in this article.
The exploration of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) through projects like Project Hamilton, Project Cedar, and the Regulated Liability Network (RLN) raises significant concerns over privacy, autonomy, and the consolidation of power within the hands of a few centralized entities. These pilots, while technically impressive, venture into dangerous territory, potentially undermining individual freedoms and enabling unprecedented levels of surveillance and control by governments and globalist organizations.
Project Hamilton, a collaboration between the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and MIT, demonstrates a leap in transaction-processing capabilities with its digital dollar concept. However, the capability to process 1.7 million transactions per second not only underscores the technical feasibility of replacing traditional cash but also suggests a future where every transaction can be monitored and controlled. The involvement of the MIT Media Lab, with its murky financial connections to controversial figures, further taints the project, suggesting underlying agendas that may prioritize control and surveillance over public benefit.
Project Cedar focuses on the wholesale market, exploring the use of a digital dollar among financial institutions. While it claims to aim for efficiency and security in high-value transactions, the reality is that it could lead to a financial system where the public has even less visibility and say in the monetary operations that underpin their economy. The engagement of major banks and the MIT Media Lab in this project does little to dispel fears about the increasing influence of powerful financial and technological elites in dictating the terms of our economic future.
The Regulated Liability Network (RLN), meanwhile, represents a further step towards a dystopian future where every asset, from your house to your car, could be tokenized and tracked on a government-controlled ledger. This proof-of-concept project not only threatens the fundamental idea of ownership as we know it, but also opens the door to chilling possibilities like remotely disabling access to your own possessions based on your behavior or social credit. The involvement of globalist organizations and the potential for such technologies to be abused for political or social control cannot be overstated.
In essence, these CBDC pilots, while cloaked in the language of innovation and efficiency, may well be Trojan horses for a world in which individual freedom and privacy are relics of the past. The advancements they propose come at too high a cost when the price is our autonomy and the right to live without every transaction and movement being scrutinized and controlled by a centralized power.
3/ Most Americans are Unaware of What CBDCs are and Could be Easily Manipulated in an Emergency.
An article in Forbes on March 8, 2023, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell stated “Given the very modest and biased mainstream media coverage on this topic, most Americans are fairly complacent about the issue.” The Cato Institute recently conducted a survey on the issue, and while it shows that 34% oppose a “central bank digital currency,” most don’t know enough yet to have an opinion.
The Patriot Act passed with public support after 9/11. I suspect if the issue had been polled prior to 9/11, the majority would have been against it. Now, more than two decades later, a majority of Americans are opposed to it.
The CBDC issue is flying under the radar intentionally, and will likely not receive mainstream attention until after an emergency so that people will make a fight-or-flight decision out of fear.
4/ In Recent History, Emergencies Have Driven Major Legislation That Strips Us of Our Rights.
There has been a recent trend of passing larger and larger emergency legislation in shorter and shorter timeframes with less scrutiny over time. Winston Churchill stated, “Never let a good crisis go to waste” and the US Congress and Senate have not missed this opportunity to use an emergency to strip US citizens of their freedoms.
In fact, there are some in Congress today, such as Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi, whose eagerness to pass monumental bills under the guise of urgency spans across various administrations and crises. All three, along with many others, voted for the Patriot Act, TARP, and the CARES Act.
This is why I am deeply concerned that we could see the introduction of CBDC and a Cyber Patriot Act in the blink of an eye.
The Patriot Act, rushed into law just 45 days post-9/11, expanded the surveillance state to Orwellian proportions, making a mockery of privacy and due process.
TARP, a knee-jerk reaction to the financial meltdown of 2008, saw billions of taxpayer dollars funneled into the coffers of the very institutions whose greed-fueled incompetence necessitated the bailout, all within 18 days.
And then the CARES Act, enacted in a 16-day frenzy as Covid-19 gripped the nation, not only crushed small businesses to the benefit of large, multinational corporations but also opened floodgates for potential misuse of funds and expanded the surveillance state, all under the convenient veil of emergency.
Following this trend, we could see a CBDC passed in under two weeks.
Understanding that legislation like this is often passed during an emergency, the strategy is to onboard early adopters now (to self-custody crypto, gold, and silver) and prepare an online workshop that can scale to millions so that when the emergency is declared, Americans can be presented with an option.
They are likely to roll out a CBDC using the problem-reaction-solution approach. Problem-reaction-solution is a concept often used to describe a pattern of manipulation and control that can occur in various aspects of society. It suggests that those in positions of power or influence can deliberately create or exacerbate a problem or crisis (the “problem” stage) to provoke a strong emotional reaction or fear among the public (the “reaction” stage). Once this reaction is triggered, it becomes easier to implement a predetermined solution (the “solution” stage) that may not have been accepted under normal circumstances. This process has been observed in politics, the media, and even marketing. Sadly, it works every time.
Given the precarious state of the global geopolitical situation, I can very easily see a terrorist attack or a cyberattack used as the “problem” mentioned above. The reaction would be fear. The solution would be a CBDC which would be marketed as a way to keep us safe from terrorism and money laundering. The goal, then, is to have an alternative solution that can scale at the time of an emergency. “Don’t let the arsonist become the firefighter. Let’s exit fiat before they turn it into CBDC.”
Don’t Believe the Hype
You should be aware that the people pushing CBDCs (central banks, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, Bank of International Settlements, and others) have refined their messaging and will be presenting a full propaganda campaign extolling the virtues of CBDCs. I have provided a quick table so that you can understand their argument and the counterargument.
These talking points address the official narrative, yet it’s
clear that the primary aim of CBDCs is control, a fact that is scarcely
concealed. Below are direct quotes from advocates of CBDCs:
Agustín Carstens, General Manager of the Bank for International Settlements, stated, “We don’t know who’s using a $100 bill today, and we don’t know who’s using a 1,000-peso bill today. The key difference with the CBDC is the central bank will have absolute control over the rules and regulations that will determine the use of that expression of central bank liability, and also we will have the technology to enforce that.”
Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, remarked, “Without CBDC, we risk losing the role of anchor.”
Neel Kashkari, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, observed, “CBDC doesn’t solve any actual problems, other than enabling central bankers to monitor all transactions and deduct taxes directly from people’s accounts.”
....
https://brownstone.org/articles/france-teeters-on-the-brink/
France Teeters on the Brink
Upon first seeing videos of the European farmers’ recent protests, I, along with many others across the Atlantic, was deeply impressed. Like Canadian truckers on steroids, these supposed hayseeds gave the world a lesson in determination, ingenuity, courage, and organizational skill beyond the wildest dreams of the appalling bureaucratic yahoos who lord over them and seek to drive them to extinction. Rumors of French President Emmanuel Macron avoiding Paris hinted on possible lasting effects for the better.
In their protests, the farmers also displayed several of the highest of human character traits, including an admirable level of restraint against violence, and even a wicked sense of humor. It was inspiring and hilarious all at once. Watching them block roadways to major cities for weeks, simply “off-roading” in their tractors when confronted by the so-called authorities, was awesome.
When the farmers sprayed tons and tons of manure on various government buildings (talk about gilding the lily!) two questions entered my mind.
My first question, borne in part out of sympathy for the poor workers who would have to clean up the mess, was:
When scrubbing layer upon layer of bullshit off the halls of government, when does one stop?
My second question, more process-oriented, I suppose, was:
What permanent change will come from all this?
The subsequent actions of the French National Assembly on Valentine’s Day answered my questions.
To my first question, the answer is: never stop scrubbing.
To my second question, the answer is: nothing.
On February 14, the French National Assembly passed article 223-1-2 du code pénal. Contained therein, in Article 4 of that law, Robert Kogon writes:
Article 4 introduces a new crime into the French penal code: incitation to abandon or refrain from medical treatment or to adopt a would-be treatment, if, “in the current state of medical knowledge”, doing so “clearly” may cause harm to the person or persons in question. This crime is made punishable by one year in prison and a fine of €30,000 (£26,000) or, if the “incitation” has effect, i.e. the medical advice is followed, three years in prison and a fine of €45,000 (£39,000).
Kogon notes that this must pass the French Senate to become law. Still, it is an extremely ominous piece of legislation that clearly criminalizes medical dissent.
In effect, this is an extreme gag order on physicians, other health care personnel, and indeed anyone who dares speak out against official medical orthodoxy. In terrifyingly broad wording, it criminalizes – with hard time and crippling fines – advising against the received medical wisdom, even if the advice is not followed.
It does not take a doctor, lawyer, or medical ethicist to imagine the effect this will have on medical practice. Put simply, this law will destroy the doctor-patient relationship.
Throughout Covid, it became apparent how compliant and complicit the medical profession is to pressure from above. Doctors have been revealed to be a highly conformist bunch. This is understandable (although not excusable) given the nature of their training, professional conditioning, and employment structures.
With this law on the books, the few non-conformists must wonder, every time they advise a patient or place an order contrary to any “official” vaccine schedule, society practice guideline, or hospital protocol, if they will be reported to the authorities, and subject to criminal conviction, prison time, and huge financial penalties.
In the wake of Covid, this legislation demonstrates a blatant, damn-the-torpedoes attitude toward medical freedom. The Macron government has apparently learned nothing from Covid, save for adapting its excesses as templates for further governmental power grabs.
In the wake of the farmer’s protests, it looks something like a test balloon. Massive, extremely well-organized protests by the farmers did reportedly win them some concessions. A rational person would think such civil unrest would also have chastened the French government from immediately attempting another outrageous assault on civil rights. Perhaps the government is just too stupid to see the connection. After all, what do farmers have to do with doctors?
Fortunately, brave activists like Annie Arnaud (@arnaud_annie26) in France and Kat Lindley (@klveritas) in the USA, among others, have brought the issue to the forefront worldwide.
Will French physicians fight Article 4? Will ordinary Frenchmen fight it? For medical freedom, and for the doctor-patient relationship, this is a watershed case. The impact on French society will be profound and pernicious, perhaps even beyond the intentions of the wicked fools who are pushing it.
If Article 4 becomes law, the French government will have openly declared itself as totalitarian. The effects will ripple across Europe. For centuries, even long before the European Union, the fate of Europe has often been like a chain of dominoes, with France or Germany usually the first one tipped over. Can France – and Europe – be saved? Or was Burke indeed prophetic when he wrote, way back in the 1790s, that
…the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever.
To those cleaning up after the farmers’ protests, I offer one simple bit of advice. Never stop scrubbing, mes amis. Never stop scrubbing.
....
https://www.globalresearch.ca/2024-last-year-free-speech-democracy-western-world/5849998
2024 Is the Last Year of Free Speech and Democracy in the Western World
Redefining Democracy in a Way which Eliminates Democracy
Don’t let the alarmist sound of this column’s title put you off. It is not a “conspiracy theory.” This column is a factual report as you will see if you read on.
Everyone needs to understand that the ruling elite in the US are implementing a decision to redefine democracy in a way that eliminates democracy, makes Congress superfluous, voting pointless, and discards the Constitution as an outdated document inconsistent with the power the ruling elite intend to wield over Americans and the rest of the world.
The decision has been made to redefine democracy from the will of the people to protecting “the sanctity of democratic institutions.” Precisely, what are “democratic institutions”? They are not the institutions, such as Congress and representative government or the rule of law and an independent judiciary, that we currently regard as democratic institutions. “Democratic institutions” are the institutions of the censorship industry, such as the military/security complex, State Department, NATO, CIA, FBI, IMF, World Bank, NGOs, the Atlantic Council, the Aspen Institute, the presstitutes, Black Rock, JP Morgan/Chase and other of the consensus-building institutions that set agendas and control the narratives. To express disagreement with the consensus these elite institutions build is considered to be “an attack on democracy.” In other words, “democracy” is the property of the elite institutions, and the sanctity of these elite institutions must be protected from the people defined by Hillary Clinton as “the Trump deplorables.” The will of the people is eliminated from the picture.
It might surprise you, but universities (Stanford, for example, is fully involved), major corporations especially the tech companies and social media, law schools, medical associations, and governors and members of Congress associated with the WEF accept the redefinition of democracy that excludes the will of the people. They also agree that the Constitution is inconsistent with the power they intend to wield over citizens. As I write the State Department is busy at work obstructing the House of Representatives inquiry into the executive branch’s use of taxpayers’ money to censor what we may hear about Covid, the Covid “vaccine,” election fraud, the Ukraine war, Iran, Russia, China, etc. See this.
On February 16, Tucker Carlson interviewed Mike Benz, the world’s leading expert on the censorship industry. Here you have a complete and accurate explanation of who rules us–and No it is not the Rothschilds and the Bilderbergs–and why the US government has decided to deep-six the First Amendment: see this.
The decision has been made, and it is currently being implemented. It means that suppression will be used to convert the entirety of the Internet and social media into a propaganda ministry serving official narratives. All of the hope that libertarians had of the freedom to speak that the Internet would provide has turned out to be unrealistic. You can see already the trouble Elon Musk is in for permitting free speech on X. The government has launched investigations of Musk and his companies with the intent of forcing him out. Both the state of California and the EU have moved against Elon Musk to force him via enormous financial penalties to turn over to the censorship industry the information that the previous owner was supplying, information used in AI programs to determine who to ban and what tweets to take down.
Soon the alternative and social media will exist only as propaganda sites for the “consensus-building elite institutions.”
The disintegration of Western civilization is proceeding so rapidly that I cannot keep up with it even as a full time job. As I reported yesterday the French government has just criminalized medical truth, and WHO is about to do so in May of this year. People will no longer have control over their own health decisions.
The US government not only keeps the US border wide open for “people of color,” Washington also supplies the NGOs who are recruiting the immigrant-invaders with hundreds of millions of dollars with which to provide the immigrant-invaders with food, water, medical care, and sleeping accommodation along the mapped routes. See this.
It can’t happen you say? But it is happening right in front of our eyes.
Insouciant gullible Americans are expert at fleeing from unsettling bad news. Thus, they pave their own path to tyranny. Tyranny is easy to establish over peoples who have confidence in their Constitutional rights and integrity of their institutions. The more patriotic the population is, the more susceptible it is to deception and betrayal by government. Try telling patriots what is happening to them, and they will call you a commie for speaking badly about their beloved country.
Christian evangelicals have no opposition to the evil that is engulfing us, because they have been brainwashed that they will escape it by being wafted up to Heaven. The growth of evil is actually their escape from a sinful world into Heaven. The more evil, the sooner their escape.
For most of the rest, liberal interventionists and hegemonic neoconservatives have taught that America is exceptional and indispensable, so how can anything go wrong.
Combine these awareness-blockers with the fact that uncomfortable truths are a bad news turnoff, and that censorship is being established as a national security matter with the argument that it makes us safe and “protects democracy.”
Consequently, the criminalization of truth is rushing ahead. Even the word “truth” is slated to become a hate word that cannot be spoken.
Any information that you have saved that helps you to understand the tyranny that is engulfing us should be stored in thumb drives and not in the cloud as all information undermining of the “consensus-building institutions” will be consigned to the memory hole.
Note: at the 47-48 minute mark in the interview, the redefinition of democracy is explained. As there are more US government agencies committed to the death of the First Amendment than you have ever heard of, watch the one hour video several times in order to gain an appreciation of how deep the rabbit hole is.
Note: The Atlantic Council, one of the main anti-democratic “consensus-building (false narrative) organizations,” is possibly associated with the Burisma/Hunter Biden scandal. Burisma, a Ukrainian company, put Hunter Biden on its board and paid him large sums of money for his father’s protection against prosecution of the company by Ukrainian authorities. US Vice President Biden actually admitted on TV, indeed he was proud of it, that he used billions of dollars in US taxpayers money to threaten Ukraine to withhold the US aid unless Ukraine fired the prosecutor, an offer Ukraine could not refuse. Atlantic Council board members Sally Painter is under investigation by the US Justice (sic) Department for illegal lobbying on behalf of Burisma. She and former Atlantic Council board member Karen Tramontano created a partnership between the Atlantic Council and Burisma.
Burisma contributed $300,000 to the Atlantic Council. Perhaps it was the purchase price for Burisma officials to speak at Atlantic Council forums and for prestigious Atlantic Council members to speak at a Burisma conference in Ukraine in 2018. All of this to show American protection of the company to Ukrainian prosecutorial authorities.
In 2021 the United Arab Emirates Embassy donated more than $1 million to the Atlantic Council, and the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs added another $100,00-250,000. This might have been the purchase price for the Atlantic Council to use its influence to have the UN choose the UAE for the location of its 2023 climate change conference.
Apparently, the Atlantic Council did not make the required or proper disclosures of the UAE’s donations.
The Atlantic Council, a principal member of the anti-democratic censorship industry is supported by the hapless, unaware American taxpayers by grants of taxpayer’s money from the Departments of Defense, State, and Energy and by the US Agency for International Development. Thus, it is clear that “our” government in Washington is financing the replacement of American Democracy subject to the will of the people with the government’s protection of the elite institutions that have changed the definition of democracy to mean the service of their agendas.
Here are other major donors to the Atlantic Council:
Adrienne Arsht, Facebook, Goldman Sachs, the Rockefeller Foundation, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the United Arab Emirates, a Swiss company System Capital Management, Abu Dhabu National Oil Company, the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the US Department of State, the Embassy of Bahrain, the Embassy of Japan, the Finish Ministry of Defense, the Lithuanian Minister of Defense, the Norwegian Ministry of Defense, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Chevron Corporation, Google, Crescent Petroleum, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Raytheon Technologies, John F.W. Rogers (Goldman Sachs), Carnegie Corp of New York, Delegation of the EU to the US, Foreign Ministry of Germany, JP Morgan Chase Foundation, US Department of Defense, US Department of Energy, Charles Koch Foundation. Amazon, Verizon, Pfizer, Aramco, Lockheed Martin, Omidyar Network.
All of this information is available on the Atlantic Council’s website.
So, No, it is not a conspiracy theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment