In a recent article published by The Guardian, it is claimed that over 1,000 bank accounts are forcefully closed by banks every day. Most of this is claimed to be because of commercial or financial reasons, such as fraud.

However, since Nigel Farage, former UKIP leader and founder of Reform UK, had been subject to bank closure due to his political opinions, there has been an explosion over mainstream media on this coverage.

However, let's first examine the possibilities of the potential outcomes.

Assuming that the reports are true, the thousands subject to bank account closure will likely be forced to use alternative means to store their money. When these options become so limited, that even traditional banks would refuse to be held to account, where does the money eventually get stored?

As of the 7th of February 2023, the Bank of England published a consultation into the likelihood of a digital pound, backed by a proprietary blockchain. As more people resort to using mobile apps to store their money, it becomes increasingly easier to control money by a users' mobile phone.

If the only access to money is on a phone with no other avenue to access money when required, it becomes disastrous for everyday consumers. Moreover, the recent bank closures will likely lead to creating mistrust among the public to traditional banks, making them more likely to switch to a purely digital form of banking.

The coverage in mainstream media about bank account closures is likely a precursor to something more sinister, as is normally the case when something explodes out of nowhere.

In all likelihood, the manufactured distrust with traditional banks among the public will provide justification to bring in the digital currency, and thus, a CBDC, or Central Bank Digital Currency. Not creating the distrust with traditional banks will not give this digital currency idea much merit, since to replace the old fiat system with a new digital one requires a lot of effort.

But why wouldn't the banks just come out and say something instead of trying to hide their intentions by attacking people who have had their "political opinions exposed". Free speech aside, the desire for transparency is not on the cards. Banks, like the military industrial complex and multinational corporations in general, have never really been interested in transparency, not least due to there being personal interests on the part of the individual's high enough in the subject companies they wish to protect, or even for that matter, a desire to control a population because of blatant psychopathy.

Chaos is their weapon, not order. "Ordo ab chao", or "order out of chaos", has always been the motto of the world system today, yesterday, and hundreds, if not thousands, of years hence. The system does not enjoy sombre attention in peaceful times, it enjoys making everyone's lives extremely difficult, on purpose, and with an intent to deceive and control.

The banks attacking random people and forcing them to store their money elsewhere will be the pretext to a more centralised control of financial power. Each step will lead to a one-world digital currency, controlled by a one-world government and regarded, in all likelihood, as Klaus Schwab's "Great Reset".

Don't say we didn't warn you. And the World Economic Forum is pretty adamant in bringing this type of world about.