Showing posts with label ECB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ECB. Show all posts

Saturday, August 8, 2026

The Slow Demise of France’s Enduring Colonial Currency System in Africa

There is a currency circulating across 14 African nations. Designed in Paris, printed in France, it required for decades that its users deposit up to half their foreign reserves in the French Treasury. Called the CFA franc (officially Communauté Financière Africaine, i.e. African Financial Community), it has operated continuously since 1945. The same instrument created to control and manage France's colonial possessions in sub-Saharan Africa still functions in many ways today. More than 155 million people use it; 14 formally sovereign nations depend on it. And the debate over whether it represents stability or subjugation has never been louder.

UEMOA + CEMAC + Comoros = CFA franc zone.
 
A country that controls another country's currency controls that economy. France understood this better than almost anyone. While the British pound zone dissolved France held on and the invisible scaffolding linking Paris to Dakar, Abidjan, Yaoundé and Libreville has never been dismantled.

Return to 1945. Europe lies in ruins. France, liberated from Nazi Germany, struggles to feed itself. Inflation spirals; the metropolitan franc loses value weekly. Across the Atlantic the Bretton Woods agreements establish the postwar financial order: the gold-backed dollar as global anchor, every nation required to declare its currency's value to the new IMF. France's shattered economy forces a sharp devaluation of the metropolitan franc against the dollar.
 
West African CFA franc—fiat bills with zero intrinsic value, backed
only by an ECB-mandated fixed exchange rate to the euro.
 
De Gaulle's finance minister Pleven applies different rates to the metropole and the colonies. In France the franc falls hard. In French West Africa, French Equatorial Africa, and the Comoros a new currency is born at a stronger rate: one CFA franc equals 1.7 metropolitan francs. By 1948 the ratio is two to one. The colonies suddenly possess a currency stronger than France's own.

Presented as generosity, the mechanics tell another story. A strong currency in a raw-material exporter that imports finished goods acts as an import subsidy and export tax. It cheapens French manufactures for the colony and makes the colony’s own goods less competitive abroad. From day one the CFA franc's pricing structure channeled African purchasing power toward French industry and quietly strangled the development of competitive local export sectors. Solid Rothschild architecture designed to endure.

A fixed exchange rate set below equilibrium creates excess demand for foreign currency
(Qd > Qs), which the central bank must cover by selling reserves to maintain the peg.
 
And its original name said everything: Colonies Françaises d’Afrique—French Colonies of Africa. No euphemism. Notes were printed then, and still are, in Chamalières by the Banque de France. Four pillars underpinned the system and proved remarkably durable: a fixed exchange rate with the French franc (later the euro) guaranteeing unlimited convertibility by the French Treasury; free capital movement between the CFA zone and France; and the operations account requiring the zone's central banks to deposit a large share of foreign-exchange reserves in the French Treasury.

At founding that share was 100 percent. By 1973 it fell to 65 percent; by 2005 to a 50 percent ceiling. Even at half, 'sovereign nations' handed over half their foreign exchange wealth to a former colonial power in exchange for a guarantee against currency collapse. Defenders cite stability: relatively low inflation compared with much of Africa, insulation from crises that wrecked Zimbabwe or Venezuela. Outside one massive 1994 devaluation the CFA franc has tracked the French franc and then the euro almost lockstep for nearly eighty years. But stability for whom, and at what cost?
Viral 2019 Italian TV clip of Giorgia Meloni (then opposition leader, now Prime Minister) holding a CFA franc note and calling it France's "colonial currency" to exploit resources via seigniorage and export controls.  
Pegged at 655.957 CFA francs to the euro, member states cannot adjust the exchange rate to their own conditions. They cannot devalue to boost exports, expand the money supply in a downturn, or set independent interest rates. Monetary policy—the core tool of any sovereign country—is outsourced to the European Central Bank, which sets policy for Germany, France and the Netherlands, not Senegal, Cameroon or Chad. In 2008 and again during the COVID-19 plandemic, countries with sovereign currencies printed money and cut rates; CFA countries could not.

Economists have long argued the franc is chronically overvalued relative to the productive capacity of its users. Overvaluation makes imports cheap and exports expensive—fine for comprador elites buying luxury goods in Paris, devastating for farmers selling cocoa or cotton against competitors with weaker, flexible currencies. The structural result is a permanent tilt toward importing rather than producing and deep dependence on foreign capital. This is a design feature, not an accident.
 
Olympio, murderedlike Kennedyby the small hat money printers in 1963.
 

Sylvanus Olympio, first president of Togo, was elected in 1961 and immediately pushed to leave the CFA system and establish a national central bank. He saw monetary and political sovereignty as inseparable. On January 13, 1963, less than three years after independence, he was assassinated in a coup led by a French-trained sergeant. The new government proved far more amenable to French interests; Togo remained in the CFA zone. Leaders who challenge French economic control tend to meet violent ends or removal; those who cooperate enjoy long, French-supported tenures.

Thomas Sankara, revolutionary leader and president of Burkina Faso, addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York on October 4, 1984. His speech remains a definitive manifesto for anti-imperialism, global solidarity, and self-reliance.
Sankara—radical anti-imperialist, pan-Africanist and austere leader
prioritized self-reliance, massive social reforms, and integrity.
Murdered by the small hat money printers in 1987. 

The most iconic case is Thomas Sankara. In 1983, aged 33, he seized power in Upper Volta and renamed it Burkina Faso—"land of upright people." He ran mass vaccination campaigns, planted over ten million trees against desertification, banned female genital mutilation, appointed women to high office, refused air-conditioning, drove a modest Renault 5 and cut official salaries including his own. His greatest offense in Paris's eyes was open challenge to the CFA franc and Françafrique—the web of political, military and economic ties binding former colonies to France. On October 15, 1987 he was assassinated in a coup led by his deputy Blaise Compaoré, who then ruled the country for 27 years and reversed the anti-French course. In April 2022 a Burkinabe military tribunal convicted Compaoré and associates in absentia; Compaoré, living in exile in Ivory Coast, received a life sentence. The tribunal confirmed French agents were in Ouagadougou the day after the coup. Sankara's family formally accused France of masterminding the killing. Macron pledged in 2017 to declassify related documents; they have not been fully released.

Françafrique operates on a larger scale still: French bases, advisers inside ministries, preferential access for French firms to African resources, and the CFA franc as monetary backbone. Comprador elites enjoyed convertibility that let them move wealth to Paris, an overvalued currency that made luxury imports affordable, and French political and military protection. Ordinary citizens faced scarce credit, interest rates dictated by European conditions, import competition that crushed local firms, and capital mobility that functioned largely as a one-way valve outward.

France confronts rising anti-French sentiment in West Africa—Bamako,
Mali, 2020: "France get out" demonstration against French, EU and UN forces. 

By the late 1980s the franc was severely overvalued. Commodity prices—cocoa, coffee, cotton, oil—were falling while the French franc appreciated, dragging the CFA with it. On January 12, 1994 the CFA franc was devalued 50 percent overnight. The decision was taken in Paris, not in any African capital. French Prime Minister Édouard Balladur later confirmed it was done at France's instigation "to help these countries in their development." Overnight the purchasing power of roughly 150 million people was halved. Prices of imported food, medicine and fuel doubled; urban poverty surged; foreign-currency public debt effectively doubled. The cost fell entirely on African citizens who had no vote and no veto. The event laid bare the system's reality: sovereign in name, monetary dependencies in fact.

When France joined the euro in 1999 the CFA franc was pegged at 655.957 to the euro—a rate that still holds. The anchor changed; the dynamics did not. Monetary policy is now set by the European Central Bank for a union of wealthy European states with zero representation or accountability to the African economies bound to it. Notes continue to be printed in Chamalières; until recent reforms the operations accounts still funneled reserves to the French Treasury; French representatives sat on the boards of the BCEAO in Dakar and the BEAC in Yaoundé.

 
By the 2010s a new generation of African intellectuals and leaders challenged the system with growing force. Senegalese economist Ndongo Samba Sylla called the CFA franc "an anachronism requiring orderly elimination." In 2015 Chadian President Idriss Déby declared that a "cord preventing development in Africa" must be severed—everyone knew which cord. In 2019 Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni held up a CFA note on television and accused France of exploitation, an accusation that resonated widely.
 
In December 2019, under pressure, Macron and Ivory Coast's Alassane Ouattara announced reforms in Abidjan: the West African CFA franc would become the Eco; the 50 percent reserve deposit requirement would end; French board seats at the BCEAO would disappear; the operations account would close and reserves return to Dakar. Headlines called it historic. The fine print was more cautious: the fixed euro peg remained, French convertibility guarantee continued, and France retained a backup credit line. The most symbolically offensive features were removed; the macro-economically decisive peg stayed.

Muammar Gaddafi's African gold dinar was a 2009-2011 pan-African initiative to introduce a single, gold-backed currency aimed to replace the US dollar and the French-backed CFA franc across Africa, allowing nations to sell oil and resources for gold to achieve complete financial independence from Western systems. Murdered by the small hat money printers in 2011.
Critics call it rebranding. The name Eco had already been chosen for a broader ECOWAS common currency that would have included Nigeria; a francophone-only Eco complicated that project. The reforms covered only the eight West African states. The six Central African users of the BEAC franc—Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon—still deposit 50 percent of reserves in Paris and still have French board representation. As of today, the Eco has not launched; the latest ECOWAS target of 2027 is viewed with widespread skepticism.

Meanwhile the Sahel transformed. Coups between 2020 and 2023 toppled governments in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and Guinea, each fueled in part by anti-French sentiment over military presence, European and US sponsored Jihadist terrorism, economic extraction and the CFA franc. In 2024 Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger left ECOWAS and formed the landlocked Alliance of Sahel States, explicitly rejecting French influence and discussing exit from the CFA franc toward national or shared Sahelian currencies. Chad and Senegal demanded withdrawal of French troops, Niger the retreat of the French and Americans. 
 
» The slave that cannot carry out his own revolt deserves no pity. «
Ibrahim Traoré, President of Burkina Faso.
 
Senegal's president Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his prime minister Ousmane Sonko campaigned in 2023 on economic sovereignty; Sonko declared in 2025 that the CFA franc is "both a symbolic and an economic problem." The cry "La France dégage" (France, get out!) has echoed from Niamey to Bamako to Ouagadougou to Dakar, encompassing French military bases, mining concessions and, above all, monetary sovereignty. The CFA franc had become the most visible symbol of unfinished decolonization.

» Jub, Jubal, Jubanti. «
(Be upright, act with integrity, and rectify what is crooked.)
Faye, elected president of Senegal in 2024, had expelled French troops by March 2025 and was
elected Chairman of ECOWAS in July 2026; however, Senegal has not left the CFA franc. Hello Eco...

What replaces it remains complicated. Exit without credible alternatives requires building central-bank capacity, reserve management, monetary-policy frameworks and market confidence from scratch. Countries that left earlier—Guinea in 1960, Madagascar and Mauritania in 1973—faced significant turbulence. Yet defenders must confront the system's record: the 14 CFA countries include some of the world's poorest; Niger, Chad, the Central African Republic and Burkina Faso rank near the bottom of the UN Human Development Index; per-capita GDP remains a fraction of the global average. Eighty years of promised stability have not delivered development, poverty reduction or structural transformation. The question is no longer only whether these countries can afford to leave, but whether they can afford to stay.
 
Dual world map showing each country's largest trading partner (exports + imports) in 2000 vs. 2024 among the US, EU, and China. In 2000, the US led most of the Americas, parts of Asia-Pacific, and some of Africa; the EU dominated Europe, much of Africa and Asia, and parts of South America; China led only a few smaller economies (e.g., Myanmar, Mongolia, North Korea, Oman, Sudan, Yemen). By 2024, China dominates nearly all of Asia, much of Africa, and most of South America; the US retains North America and select South American countries; the EU leads much of Europe and nearby regions but with reduced global reach. China’s total trade rose from $474B (2000) to $6.2T (2024), surpassing both the US and EU.
Why would-should-could all these countries remain in the CFA franc zone? 

A monetary system whose notes are printed in France, whose reserves have historically been held in the French Treasury, whose exchange rate is set by a European institution, and in which the actual users long had no meaningful say, was designed under colonialism, preserved through co-optation, coercion and violence, and maintained by institutional inertia and the complicity of local comprador elites who benefit. 
 
At no point in history has the CFA franc been closer to its demise, just coinciding with the scheduled 2027 rollout of the
Eco—the proposed new ECOWAS common currency, directly pegged to the Euro. Again. One couldn't make this up.
And it just sounds, looks, and smells as fantastic and promising as the Euro...
 
The CFA franc is a monument to the idea that independence can be granted with one hand while economic sovereignty is withheld with the other. The most effective control is not always exercised with guns and borders; sometimes it is exercised with exchange rates, reserve requirements and banknotes printed thousands of kilometers from the pockets that carry them.
 
Whether or when the CFA franc system collapses, adapts once more as the Eco, national sovereign currencies, or something else remains open. What is clear is that a reckoning is already under way across the Sahel and beyond. A new generation asks the question Sankara asked four decades ago: "If a nation does not control its own money, can it truly call itself free?"
 

Friday, March 21, 2025

Europe's Date with Destiny: Collapse by 2029 is Inevitable | Martin Armstrong

Comment by Hans: Mr. Armstrong, thank you for speaking the truth about the timeline of this war with Ukraine. Every news story here in Europe says the same thing. Russia was unprovoked. Never in my entire life have I ever witnessed such outright lies by the press. I do not see the Europeans rising up to overthrow these governments. We are sheep being led to the slaughter. You have forecasted that the euro will no longer exist, and they are rapidly moving to digital currencies, which will be, as you say, for capital control. We will not be able to leave or get our money out. [...] I think it is time to prepare for the future sooner than later.

» From about May 15th 2025 on, Europe is going into war, 
Europe will lose, and the Euro will become extinct. «
Martin Armstrong, March 1, 2025.

Reply by Martin Armstrong: It gives me no pleasure to live through Socrates’ forecasts [...] The euro has broken last year’s low and is still trading below it. We have a very serious Panic Cycle for Europe next year [2026], and they are pushing to cancel the currency’s move to digital as soon as possible. All they look at is capital controls, which will prevent bank runs and stop capital fleeing. They are trying to control their risk of the collapse of the EU. [...] Lagarde runs the ECB, pushing for the cancellation of the currency and moving to digital [by October 2025]. This is about taxes all over again.
 
» We are witnessing capital contracting in both the United States and Europe. «

[...] I have been warning that we are approaching World War III as a distraction from the collapse of sovereign debt in Japan and Europe. The total outstanding government and corporate bonds globally have now exceeded $100 trillion in 2024, as reported by the OECD. As I have also been warning, the central banks have been neutered. They can no longer fight inflation by raising interest rates because government debt just explodes. Governments have NO INTENTION of ever paying off their debt. They think there is no end to this game.

 » We are approaching World War III as a distraction from the collapse of sovereign debt in Japan and Europe.
Germany is heading into a very serious debt crisis for 2026. PANIC Cycles in 2026 around the globe. 
Major recession globally into 2028. EU prepares for war as a distraction from their inevitable collapse by 2029. «

[...] While central banks are cutting interest rates, borrowing costs remain much higher than before 2022’s rate hikes because the ECM, in particular, went to negative interest rates in 2014, which only encouraged governments to issue more debt. This all comes at a time when the EU wants to fund an army and prepare for war as a distraction from their inevitable collapse by 2029.

will wipe out Britain entirely. The Computer Has NEVER been Wrong. Europe Will Lose!!! «
 
[...] Germany is heading into a very serious debt crisis for 2026, and this does not bode well for Europe or the Euro. Nearly HALF of ALL outstanding government debt among OECD countries and emerging markets and around ONE THIRD of corporate debt will mature by 2027. Our computer is showing PANIC Cycles in 2026 around the globe. The defaults come when you cannot sell the NEW debt to pay off the old. [...] Everything is coming to the point of a major Sovereign Debt default that the government will not survive. [...] Add the trade wars and what our model shows a major recession globally into 2028; it is hard to see how many countries can even make it to 2029.

Tuesday, March 11, 2025

The ECB's Dystopian Digital Euro Dictatorship Set to Launch in October 2025

The European Central Bank (ECB), under Christine Lagarde, is pushing for a digital euro at full speed: “The deadline for us will be October 2025, and we are preparing for this date,” Lagarde explained. The implementation depends on the approval of the Commission, the Council, and Parliament must complete the legislative process.

Every payment tracked in real time, with the ECB able to block payments, deduct taxes,
prevent withdrawals (no bank run), impose expiration dates on money, and enable censorship.

The digital euro is to come in two versions: a retail version for citizens and a wholesale version for financial institutions. What central bankers praise as innovation could turn out to be a Trojan horse for civil liberties. Despite the ECB’s assurances of “high privacy standards,” the fundamental fact remains: a digital central bank currency creates the technical prerequisites for seamless financial transparency.

Unlike cash, every transaction with the digital euro leaves a data trail. The assurance that the ECB will not track transactions is not convincing, given the increasing trends of state surveillance. Technically, it would be possible at any time to lift this self-imposed restriction – for example, in the name of "counterterrorism" or "tax justice."

 
Especially concerning is the possibility of freezing or confiscating balances at the push of a button. What is currently dismissed as a theoretical scenario could become bitter reality tomorrow. The experiences with account freezes of politically unpopular individuals and media in Western democracies show that this danger is by no means unfounded. A digital euro would dramatically increase this concentration of power. Imagine: A government critic suddenly finds their digital balance frozen – without a court order, without legal recourse, and without a cash alternative.

The "programmability" of the digital euro, hailed as an advantage by its supporters, reveals its true threat: The state could determine what you are allowed to spend your money on (for example, linked to a CO2 budget). Spending limits for certain products, time restrictions, or intended purposes could be directly programmed into the currency. This control could also be abused to enforce political goals. Climate policy through limiting meat purchases or air travel? Health policy by limiting "unhealthy" foods? The technical possibilities would be nearly unlimited.

 » A digital euro would be a digital form of cash. «
This is a blunt lie and exactly what the digital euro is not.

While the ECB presents the digital euro as a necessary response to China’s digital yuan and US stablecoins, it conceals the true essence of this race: It is about control, not innovation. China's CBDC project already shows how digital currencies can be used for social control. The ECB's Ethereum blockchain tests may be technically impressive but divert attention from the fundamental shift in power that a digital euro would represent: away from the citizen, towards the state and its institutions.

 » The key difference with the CBDC is that central banks will have absolute control on 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. Those two issues are extremely important and that makes a huge difference with respect to what cash is. «
Agustín Carstens, General Manager, Bank for International Settlements.

The digital euro is not a neutral means of payment but a tool for undermining civil liberties. The promised benefits – faster transactions, offline functionality, competitiveness – do not outweigh the risks. While Lagarde and the ECB are pushing forward with technical preparations, citizens and parliamentarians should ask the fundamental question: Do we want a society where every financial transaction can potentially be monitored, controlled, and sanctioned? The answer to this question will have consequences far beyond 2025 or 2028.
 
See also:
 
了解你的敌人
Know your Enemies.

Friday, September 1, 2023

Crush Europe and Strengthen the US | RAND Corporation

January 25, 2022.
Confidential.
Distribution:
WHCS, ANSA, Dept. of State, CIA, NSA, DNC 
 
Executive Summary
[...] The current German economic model is based on two pillars. These are unlimited access to cheap Russian energy resources and to cheap French electric power, thanks to the operation of nuclear power plants. The importance of the first factor is considerably higher. Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. The French energy sector could also soon begin to experience heavy problems. The predictable stop of Russian-controlled nuclear fuel supplies, combined with the unstable situation in the Sahel region, would make French energy sector critically dependent on Australian and Canadian fuel.
 
"A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies -
would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry." - RAND Corporation, Jan 25, 2022.
 
[...] The only feasible way to guarantee Germany's rejection of Russian energy supplies is to involve both sides in the military conflict in Ukraine. Our further actions in this country will inevitably lead to a military response from Russia. Russians will obviously not be able to leave unanswered the massive Ukrainian army pressure on the unrecognized Donbas republics. That would make possible to declare Russia an aggressor and apply to it the entire package of sanctions prepared beforehand. Putin may in turn decide to impose limited counter-sanctions - primarily on Russian energy supplies to Europe. Thus, the damage to the EU countries will be quite comparable to the one to the Russians, and in some countries - primarily in Germany - it will be higher.
 
The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of green parties and ideology in Europe. The German Greens are a strongly dogmatic, if not zealous, movement, which makes it quite easy to make them ignore economic arguments. In this respect, the German Greens somewhat exceed their counterparts in the rest of Europe. Personal features and the lack of professionalism of their leaders - primarily Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck - permit to presume that it is next to impossible for them to admit their own mistakes in a timely manner.
 
Thus, it will be enough to quickly form the media image of Putin’s aggressive war to turn the Greens into ardent and hardline supporters of sanctions, a ‘party of war’. It will enable the sanctions regime to be introduced without any obstacles. The lack of professionalism of the current leaders will not allow a setback in the future, even when the negative impact of the chosen policy becomes obvious enough [...] This will ensure a sufficiently long gap in cooperation between Germany and Russia, which will make large German economic operators uncompetitive.

"The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of the German Greens."

[...] A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies - would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry. The need to divert significant amounts of Russian gas for winter heating of residential and public facilities will further exacerbate the shortages [...] A complete standstill at the largest in the chemical, metallurgical, and machine-building, plants is likely, while they have virtually no spare capacity to reduce energy consumption. It could lead to the shutting down of continuous-cycle enterprises, which would mean their destruction.

The cumulative losses of the German economy can be estimated only approximately. Even if the restriction of Russian supplies is limited to 2022, its consequences will last for several years, and the total losses could reach 200-300 billion euros. Not only will it deliver a devastating blow to the German economy, but the entire EU economy will inevitably collapse. We are talking not about a decline in economy growth pace, but about a sustained recession and a decline in GDP only in material production by 3-4% per year for the next 5-6 years. Such a fall will inevitably cause panic in the financial markets and may bring them to a collapse.


The euro will inevitably, and most likely irreversibly, fall below the dollar. A sharp fall of the euro will consequently cause its global sale. It will become a toxic currency, and all countries in the world will rapidly reduce its share in their forex reserves. This gap will be primarily filled with dollar and yuan.
 
"NATO's purpose is "keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down",
as Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, put it.

Another inevitable consequence of a prolonged economic recession will be a sharp drop in living standards and rising unemployment (up to 200,000-400,000 in Germany alone), which will entail the exodus of skilled labour and well-educated young people. There are literally no other destinations for such migration other than the United States today. A somewhat smaller, but also quite significant flow of migrants can be expected from other EU countries.
 
Since 1871 the prime U.S. geopolitical foreign policy doctrine for Europe is:
"Keep Germany and Russia separate and in conflict."
Or as Victoria Nuland put it in 2014: "Fuck the EU!"

The scenario under consideration will thus serve to strengthen the national financial condition both indirectly and most directly. In the short term, it will reverse the trend of the looming, economic recession and, in addition, consolidate American society by distracting it from immediate economic concerns. This, in turn, will reduce electoral risks.

In the medium term (4-5 years), the cumulative benefits of capital flight, re-oriented logistical flows and reduced competition in major industries may amount to USD 7-9 trillion. Unfortunately, China is also expected to benefit over the medium term from this emerging scenario. At the same time, Europe's deep political dependence on the U.S. allows us to effectively neutralise possible attempts by individual European states to draw closer to China [...]



See also:

Saturday, August 29, 2015

Financial Fascism - The Elimination of Physical Currency

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of
state and corporate power.” ― Benito Mussolini, 1932
Paul Joseph Watson (Aug 28, 2015) - The Financial Times has published an anonymous article which calls for the abolition of cash in order to give central banks and governments more power. Entitled "The case for retiring another ‘barbarous relic’", the article laments the fact that people are stockpiling cash in anticipation of another economic collapse, a factor which is causing, “a lot of distortion to the economic system.”

“The existence of cash — a bearer instrument with a zero interest rate — limits central banks’ ability to stimulate a depressed economy. The worry is that people will change their deposits for cash if a central bank moves rates into negative territory,” states the article. Complaining that cash cannot be tracked and traced, the writer argues that its abolition would, “make life easier for a government set on squeezing the informal economy out of existence.” Abolishing cash would also give governments more power to lift taxes directly from people’s bank accounts, the author argues, noting how “Value added tax, for example, could be automatically levied — and reimbursed — in real time on transactions between liable bank accounts.”


Totalitarianism of the European Financial Oligarchy - Votes change nothing!
The writer also calls for punishing people who use cash by making users “pay for the privilege of anonymity” so they will, “remain affected by monetary policy.” Dated bank notes would lose their value over time, while people would also be charged by banks for swapping electronic reserves for physical cash and vice versa. The article echoes an argument made by Kenneth Rogoff, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, who has called for high denomination banks notes such as the €100 and €500 notes to be phased out of existence. Rogoff attended a meeting in London earlier this year where he met representatives from the Federal Reserve, the ECB as well as participants from the Swiss and Danish central banks. The issue of banning cash was at the forefront of the agenda. Last year, Rogoff also called for “abolishing physical currency” in order to stop “tax evasion and illegal activity” as well as preventing people from withdrawing money when interest rates are close to zero. 

The agenda to ban cash was also discussed at this year’s secretive Bilderberg Group meeting, which was attended by the Financial Times’ chief economics commentator Martin Wolf. Former Bank of England economist Jim Leaviss penned an article for the London Telegraph earlier this year in which he said a cashless society would only be achieved by “forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank,” which would be, “monitored, or even directly controlled by the government.” In the UK, banks are treating the withdrawal of cash in amounts as low as £5,000 as a suspicious activity, while in France, citizens will be banned from making cash payments over €1,000 euros from Tuesday onwards. The withdrawal and deposit of cash over the amount of €1,000 euros will also be subject to ID verification. “There is no more egregious anti-liberty economic policy imaginable than banning cash,” writes Michael Krieger. “Of course, if cash were involuntarily “ended,” there would be a surge in demand for physical gold and silver, which would then necessitate a ban on those items. Then the cycle of economic and financial tyranny would be complete, and crawling our way out of it, nearly impossible.”