I’ve written the lead comment piece for today’s Sunday Express. This is how it begins:
I’ve spent the past couple of weeks trying to whip up support for Nigel Farage in his battle against woke British banks.
Closing people’s accounts for expressing the ‘wrong’ views is a brutally effective type of censorship that originated in Communist China and has no place in a supposedly free country like ours.
My first thought was to create a meme based on the old advert for the National Lottery.
A giant hand holding a pair of rainbow-coloured scissors would emerge from a high street bank.
Then it would cut up the credit card of an unsuspecting member of the public, with the caption: “It could be you!”
But I realised this wouldn’t capture the threat posed by this sinister new form of cancel culture because not everyone is equally at risk.
The people most in danger of losing their accounts are those with unfashionable views, whether it’s the former leader of the Brexit Party or Richard Fothergill, a Church of England vicar who was de-banked by the Yorkshire Building Society after he objected to its promotion of trans ideology.
I think that’s why almost no one on the Left of British politics has taken Nigel’s side in this dispute.
So far, broadcasters Paul Mason and Emily Maitlis, Remoaner propagandist Alastair Campbell, Labour’s Rachel Reeves and comedian Omid Djalili have defended Coutts’s decision to defenestrate the GB News presenter.
A YouGov opinion poll last week revealed 24 percent of Labour voters think banks should be allowed to remove customers who have personal or political beliefs that don’t align with their values.
Labour leader Keir Starmer did eventually mutter something about how no one should be refused banking services because of their views, but it had to be dragged out of him.
Think how different the reaction would have been if it had been Jeremy Corbyn who’d been de-banked and not Nigel Farage, particularly if the lender then leaked confidential details of his finances to the BBC in an effort to pretend the reason he’d lost his account was for purely “commercial reasons”.
The entire Liberal Establishment would have been up in arms, demanding the head of the bank’s CEO.
The same people who’ve been sniggering at Nigel’s misfortune would have been loudly proclaiming that having a bank account is a basic human right, like access to water and electricity.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Watch me talking to Jacob Rees-Mogg on GB News about how paper thin the new woke ideology is.
‘What about the due process for poor old Nigel?’@Jacob_rees_mogg talks to Free Speech Union’s Toby Young about the FCA’s insistence that due process should have been upheld over the NatWest CEO Alison Rose’s resignation.
— GB News (@GBNEWS) July 26, 2023GB News on YouTube https://t.co/Wa58gYGZwF pic.twitter.com/7X4vLCTtVN
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
On a similar topic of leaking data to suit their own ends: Virgin Trains releasing selective CCTV footage to discredit Jeremy Corbyn after he commented about sitting on the floor of a packed train. It turned out he was correct once all the footage was available.
Did Virgin Trains ban him from travelling on their services?
Boom
Welcome to the world where corporate meddling is not challenged to the extent it should be. They become emboldened.
The Labour leader who became leader as a result of a concerted smear campaign against his predecessor. A prime example of media meddling long before COVID.
Farage and Corbyn are no different in one respect: “wrongly calibrated” individuals in the eyes of Other Interests.
My mistake, same time as COVID. Convenient.
There is so much that is fundamentally wrong with our society that one would be forgiven for thinking that there is any possibility that we’ll ever be able to resolve our differences and live progressive, peaceful lives. The crux of the problem seems to be our reluctance as a species to listen to the other side. If the free expression of ideas is seen as anarchy by our masters, it will require a fundamental shift in human consciousness to bring about any kind of peaceful utopia.
Prayer might be our only solution. Intellectual solutions will fall short and not everyone will agree with the opposing point of view.
It is only the left that has the purpose, Will and means to do this. They have planned and penetrated and now they are using their power.
it came to fruition when Conservatives led the government. Many of their MPs have supported the left while most others were unaware of the significance of what was happening. Likely it is now too late.
I doubt utopia is possible or desirable if you see it as resolving our differences. There will always be differences. Listening to different sides of arguments is generally a good thing though where those arguments concern fundamental issues that relate to your view of the works and your morality there may come a point where further dialogue is a waste of energy. The problem is not differing views but the selective suppression of those views and the attempt to impose them on others.
You mention “our masters” – I know who you mean but believe thinking of them in that way is not helpful and that it contributes to the problem.
The real definition of the word anarchy is lost on most, it seems…
an – without
archos – leader
Without leader. That’s all it means. But a lot of good stuff stems from that.
Anarchy is not about petrol bombs nor fighting coppers nor burning down 5G masts. None of that.
I think that what is happening in society is ‘The Great Conditioning’, not so much a conditioning of thinking but a conditioning of behaviour. All of what is happening is Left-driven and if you have the nerve to speak out you are smeared, derided and labelled ”far-right”, hence you are effectively censored. I think this article is relevant in that the author draws parallels with Islam and the Left, focusing on belief vs compliance, or apostasy and blasphemy, Farage being found guilty of the latter in this context. What is happening in society is that we are being bullied into compliance irrespective of whether we believe in the narrative or not.
”Every day, and from virtually every official institution and channel — academia, media, government, etc. — we are bombarded with very obvious lies, for example, that women can become men, that men can become pregnant, and so on and so forth. Does that mean that most Americans believe this? No. But that’s never really been the goal — to get you to believe what is unbelievable.
Rather, the ultimate goal is to condition you never to publicly challenge such sacred “dogmas” — that you never openly blaspheme against or openly apostatize away from this new cult, thereby encouraging others to blaspheme and apostatize — the dreaded snowball effect which every regime fears.
As with Islam, the Left cares little if in the quiet of your own mind you refuse to play along. All that matters is that you formally go along — that you formally acquiesce — even if through silent though implicit consent.
In short, the Left wants you to dread the consequences of openly defying their narrative, one which, like Islam, is also built atop an easily collapsed pack of cards.
This is what many miss. They tell themselves, “Well, I won’t openly say anything against these nonsensical claims concerning gender, pronouns, etc. — after all, I don’t need to be canceled or lose my job. That said, I certainly know better.”
That may well be true, but by not openly opposing these dogmas, the Left establishes a monopoly on the narrative, which is all that matters.”
https://www.meforum.org/64637/shut-up-or-else-the-true-link-between-islam
Propaganda has always sought to change behaviour, not beliefs, usually in the belief (partly justified) that compliant behaviour produces compliant thinking.
On the latter, consider whether it’s easier to justify obedience to foolish or evil authority by saying, “Rules are rules,” or “We all agree on this,” rather than “I am a cowardly fool willing to silence my better judgement.”
But since propaganda always fails, it must always be backed up by coercion, and the latter eventually produces a mass-reaction.
The ‘secret’ to Islam’s success ( although not exactly secret, despite how much the MSM try to cover it up and enable it ) is its brutality. Name another religion which rules by the threat of torture or death in this modern age. Other religions also do not have an incredibly negative view and preoccupation with non-Muslims, so much so that their holy book is taken up mostly of encouraging the hate and justification of mistreatment/subjugation of non-believers as opposed to the actual teachings of their religion.
Therefore it’s the Christians living in predominantly Muslim countries that I feel for because their lives are made hell. Imagine being a Christian in Pakistan, Afghanistan or even African countries where they have Boko Haram and similar Islamic extremists. But what I’ve never understood is why is it not these very persecuted Christians who are travelling West to seek asylum, which would be entirely justified, who would have at least similar values to us, but instead we get all the Muslims?
Well said, Mogs!
At all times, humanity can be split into two “sides”: those who follow rules, and those who think.
Great that TY has been given the chance to cover this in a leading article of a mainstream newspaper.
One picky point – I am not sure that Corbyn was the right example to use. Accusing him of antisemitism may have been sufficient to justify his de banking in many people’s minds.
But then accusing Farage of racism has the same effect.
I guess my point was that TY is using him as an example of a “metropolitan elite” figure who would be defended by his own should be be de-banked, and that I think that if the accusations were of anti-semitism then his metro elite peers might be quite happy to throw him under the bus.
I thought Corbyn was a poor example because the metro elite were more than happy to throw him under a bus politically anyway – isn’t he currently suspended from the Labour Party for being ‘hard left’? Wrong type of metro elite, obvs.
Exactly
“Wrong type of metro elite”
Spot on. I just read this after posting a similar comment.
Corbyn seemed to be the wrong type of Left for Other Interests. The bus would have reversed just to make sure.
Giving it both barrels
Last year Harriet Hageman ousted Liz Cheney to become the Congress Woman for Wyoming. she is a clever lawyer and the start of this clip seems quite dry and formal but at her conclusion she gives it both barrels in defence of free speech and the first amendment;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2ma2HuIuKc
Farage should not have been treated that way but he had no problem getting heard, was offered a bank account, and managed to get the boss of Nat West sacked. Meanwhile various disadvantaged communities have been debanked for decades and have been unable to make their voices heard. Let’s have free speech for all not just the elite whether they be left or right.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/forget-nigel-farage-and-coutts-banks-have-been-locking-ordinary-people-out-of-accounts-for-years
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/27/muslim-leaders-decry-double-standard-of-farage-bank-account-closure-furore
“before granting any new power or prerogative to the state, first imagine that power wielded by the politician you hate most, because one day it will be.”
Coyote’s Law
Wise words.
I should add that this is El Gato Malo’s paraphrasing of Coyote’s Law
Indeed.
Free exchange of ideas is how civilisation develops. Taking the ability to speak freely away means we no longer live in a free society.——-So do we want to be free or not? Two things to remember about Free Speech is that (1) It is Free and (2) It is ONLY SPEECH. If you disagree, then the answer is more Speech not less.
It is very funny indeed that the Chairman of Nat West is the very same Bank of England employee who set up the Financial Services Authority, now the Financial Conduct Authority, and became its first Head.
The FSA, you may recall, and its uselessness had a great deal to do with the banking debacle of 2008.
This very same ‘Useless Eustace’, hoist on his own petard, now clings on, like a limpet to a sinking ship’s hull, to his position ‘to ensure continuity’…….
You would have said that kind of continuity almost guarantees the sinking, again, of Nat West and, with it, yet more taxpayers money.
To give an idea of the massive intrusiveness foisted on Companies by no hoper lunatics like Davies (he also had a hand in the LSE accepting donations from the Gaddafi Foundation….ye gods…!) take a look at the Politically Exposed Person guidance issued by The Law Society.
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/anti-money-laundering/peps
Then imagine trying to start up a Company in this country burdened with that kind of regulation……
What has this hopeless government been doing, exactly, for thirteen years and how could they possibly think anyone might vote for them….excepting the good burghers of Uxbridge who clearly demonstrated just how unpopular yet more and ever more regulation really is
Hello……hello……is anyone in Westminster listening……..?
No, they are too busy submitting their taxpayer funded expenses claims. In between eating and drinking at taxpayer subsidised bars and restaurants. With their taxpayer funded office staff who also happen to be their immediate family members.
Nigel will not have triumphed until RatNest and the other 7 political banks have re-instated his accounts.
Dame Alison Rose should be prohibited from ever working in the financial sector ever again for her blatant breach of client confidentiality.