
President Donald Trump has vowed to make the WEF’s CBDC system illegal in America if he wins the election this November.
In a new speech at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville Trump made his stance on the WEF’s plans for a centralized digital currency clear: “There will never be a CBDC while I am president.”
Reclaimthenet.org reports: This statement echoes his previous comments on the matter, where he has consistently expressed strong opposition to the idea of a CBDC. He believes that such a currency would give the government too much control over people’s money and could potentially lead to financial tyranny.
Trump’s views on CBDCs seem to be part of a broader narrative that he’s building around protecting individual freedoms and liberties. It’s a message that resonates with many in the cryptocurrency community, who see digital currencies as a way to decentralize power and reduce government control.
Trump has previously called CBDCs a “dangerous threat to freedom.”
Trump’s firm stance underscores the escalating discussions surrounding CBDCs, a significant matter among global governmental bodies. To date, only a few countries have officially adopted such currencies. However, the digital currency landscape continues to evolve, with China advancing the implementation of its digital yuan, India progressing towards a digital rupee, and the European Central Bank initiating a preparatory phase for a potential digital euro.
CBDCs represent a significant evolution in the architecture of money. These digital forms of fiat currency, issued and regulated by a country’s central bank, promise enhanced efficiency in transactions and greater financial inclusion. However, they also pose potential risks to civil liberties that merit careful consideration. Here are some of the primary concerns:
1. Privacy
CBDCs could fundamentally alter the landscape of financial privacy. Traditional cash transactions allow for anonymity. With CBDCs, even small transactions might be traceable and recordable by the central bank. This could lead to a scenario where governments have access to detailed records of every individual’s financial life, raising significant privacy concerns unless robust safeguards are implemented.
2. Surveillance
The transition to a fully digital currency could potentially give governments unprecedented capabilities to monitor and surveil citizen behaviors. In regimes with weaker protections for civil liberties, this could be exploited to track political dissent or suppress opposition. The potential for surveillance not only impacts privacy but also freedom of expression and association.
3. Financial Censorship
With the centralization of currency issuance and transaction management, a CBDC could make it easier for governments to implement financial sanctions against individuals or groups without due process. Accounts could be frozen or transactions blocked more efficiently, which could be used as a tool for political repression or social control.
4. Exclusion
Despite the potential for greater financial inclusion, the reliance on digital infrastructure might marginalize those without access to technology or reliable internet, such as rural populations or the economically disadvantaged. This could exacerbate existing inequalities and restrict access to essential services for those on the fringes of the digital economy.
5. Cybersecurity Risks
The concentration of financial data in a central digital system increases the risk of systemic failures due to cyberattacks. A successful attack could compromise the integrity of a nation’s entire financial system. Moreover, the implications of such attacks extend beyond economic damage to potentially crippling impacts on individual financial security and privacy.
6. Centralization of Power
CBDCs concentrate monetary control significantly. This centralization of financial power could reduce the checks and balances provided by a more distributed banking system, increasing the potential for abuse by those in power, particularly in undemocratic regimes.
7. Legal and Ethical Implications
The implementation of CBDCs raises several legal and ethical questions, including the scope of government intervention in personal finances, the rights of individuals under a digital currency system, and the balance between national security and personal freedoms.
[…]
Via https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/trump-vows-to-ban-wef-rollout-of-cbdcs-they-are-a-threat-to-our-liberty/
Yes and in addition, there is at least one other critical issue:
With the “green” agenda, the electicity supply will be unreliable and worse. When the digital currency being the only legal tender, there is no way to buy anything, when power cuts occure. We have already seen this happen locally during short periods and no extreme disaster, as it has still been possible to buy stuff with regular bills and coins.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The “green agenda” is a sham, as you say. Our power gener!tion infrastructure is in a shambles, as shown recently with all rhe power outages from storms, floods, and temperature extremes. Americans haven’t learned to restrain themselves, financially or with respect to energy usage. We have deluded ourselves into believing the systems, like the money supply, will expand perpetually.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good points, Katherine.
LikeLike
The same apply to most people here on the east side of the Atlantic ocean, unfortunally …
LikeLike
Indeed. It’s an extremely dire scenario.
LikeLike
Good idea, but why doesn’t the US return to a gold or silver standard? Our currency is baseless as it is, and giving more power to the international bankers is folly.
LikeLike
Unfortunately it’s too late for the US to buy gold and silver, Katherine. The US presently owes more than $35 trillion in debt – more than $100,000 for every man, woman and child. It’s GDP is only $25 billion.
LikeLike
Except the US has confiscated gold reserves of Russia and possibly other places. Who knows where the gold is now? No wonder they formed BRICS.
LikeLike
That’s interesting concidering that both Russia and China has been “hording” both gold and silver for a number of years and kept it within their borders respectively. I suspect they realized what was going to happen in the greedy West …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. Both have begun issuing currency that is at least partially gold-backed. Not sure where I learned it, but I have been paying attention for several years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The gold from the Russian Empire ended up in New York and London after the Bolshevik revolution. The city of London central bank and Wall Street financed the Communist takeover. The Revolutionaries were still in debt after turning over the gold which created the Holodomor as all grain and other crops were sent to the West as further repayment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This corroborates what I’ve read in other sources. Somethi g about how Lenin and Trotsky were in the US and supplied with gold to smuggle to Russia for fostering the Revolution. The ruling family, the Romanovs, were slaughtered, and the Bolsheviks took over.
LikeLike
Not completly. Lots of it and money from Russiaan bank robberies ended up in the hands of the Swedish banker Olof Ashberg (Ash) in Stockholm. The grandson Robert is today still living on the profit made from it. Both was/is well known Bolsjeviks.
LikeLike
Pingback: Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Projects Foundering in Five-Eye Nations | Worldtruth
Pingback: The Stablecoin Trap: Back Door to Total Financial Control | Worldtruth