Featured Image
Nigel FarageAlexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

(LifeSiteNews) — In a June 29 Twitter post, Nigel Farage claimed the UK establishment is trying to force him to leave the country.

Following this outrage, he took to the Daily Telegraph the following day to announce his fear that “Britain is lost.”

When moving around London this week, it’s been impossible not to notice a symbol adorning the premises of many of our corporations, including the banks: the multicolored Pride [sic] flag.

We are living through the politicization of our corporate sector. Woe betide you if you do not conform with its worldview.

This was brought home to me when I was recently told by my bank that it is closing all my accounts without explanation.

It is impossible to function without a bank account.

It should alarm everybody that a bank has the power to punish those it considers to have erred or strayed.

Brexit revenge?

Farage campaigned tirelessly for a Brexit vote which finally happened on June 23, 2016. Despite the mainstream media claiming they were 10 points behind in the polls, the UK voted to leave the European Union (EU).

Matt Gallagher spoke for many that day.

It was a victory for Farage, and for millions of British people who hoped to see a return of their sovereignty and borders. The vote, which was seen as heavily influenced by unprecedented waves of immigration, has never been forgiven by the hardcore “Remainers.”

This metropolitan, Liberal elite – which includes most Members of Parliament – has sought to block the implementation of Brexit and many politicians have vowed to rejoin the EU despite losing the referendum.

This latest measure appears to be fueled by an appetite for vengeance on the one man in British politics who gave the common people a say. The political and media establishment have fought to discredit and frustrate the process of leaving the European Union ever since.

Bipartisan consensus

Both major parties loathe Nigel Farage, with the left considering him an extremist for his extremely popular views on mass immigration. 

He is a free market conservative with little to distinguish him from a 1980s Thatcherite. To some, this is sufficient to Hitlerize him.

Yet it is to the so-called “Conservative Party” that Farage presents a serious threat. His initial UK Independence Party (UKIP) squeezed the Conservative vote, bringing a populist and socially conservative pressure on this right-Liberal party.

With his later Brexit party, he dominated the 2019 European Parliament elections, taking 29 seats to the Conservatives’ 4.

Whilst Farage has retired from politics, a comeback has been mooted – as Britain’s plight continues under establishment politicians largely sympathetic to the EU and its celebration of open borders.

The UK Conservative Party recently announced that it had permitted a record 700,000 people to legally immigrate in 2022, in addition to housing and financing an unknown and rising number of illegal immigrants.

The issue is extremely charged due to the fact that no mainstream party appears capable of or willing to remedy what is widely perceived as a crisis which is out of control. 

Added to this, Farage won the Television and Radio Industries Club’s (TRIC) “News Presenter of the Year” award on Tuesday, June 27. He presents a nightly show on recent startup GB News.

Having first been kicked out of the reception drinks area at the ceremony, he then watched as TRIC deleted his win from their Twitter feed.

Under Russian influence

As we now know, anyone who speaks in the interest of the common people must be a traitor – and in the pay of the Russians.

Farage has suggested that the baseless claims made against him in this line may explain his treatment.  

EU-supporting MP Chris Bryant read out a statement in Parliament in March 2019, complaining that Farage’s name was absent from a list of people in the pay of the Russians:

I am mystified at why some people are still missing from the list, including some of the broadcasters … I simply point out that Nigel Farage received £548,573 from Russia Today in 2018 alone – this is from the Russian state.

As The Spectator pointed out, this smear is both permitted under parliamentary privilege, which protects MPs from libel laws. It is also untrue, noting that “the sum total Farage received from Russia Today was much more likely to be four figures than six.”

That this lie has been repeated on the far-left Channel 4 News and never retracted is unsurprising. It is a factor in a hate campaign which has grown from defamation to debanking.

Rights-based justice

There is no legal right to a bank account in the UK. This means your accounts can be closed and you have no leverage to open another. As has been shown, the banks do not supply a reason.

Yet the pattern is obvious. It is not a problem for parties or persons who support the Liberal consensus which is ruining the West. It is one which afflicts people who do not applaud the EU, and its policies of unlimited immigration and sexual extremism.

Brexit Party MEP Christina Jordan was debanked in 2019 following her election to the European Parliament.

This fate also befell Brexit MEP Henrik Nielsen.

It is a practice which has affected a prominent Scottish commentator whose politics differ greatly from those of the Brexit Party members above.

The author of the pro-Scottish independence blog Wings over Scotland described on June 26 how his bank – First Direct – canceled his personal account with no warning or explanation.

The man behind the blog, Stuart Campbell, wondered whether this measure was taken in revenge for his publicly stated opposition to “gender” self-identification.

He refers to an earlier case – this time with international web payments system PayPal – which refused to handle payments of the British-based Free Speech Union. PayPal said on canceling the account, together with two others affiliated to it:

Achieving the balance between protecting the ideals of tolerance, diversity and respect for people of all backgrounds and upholding the values of free expression and open dialogue can be difficult, but we do our best to achieve it.

Free Speech Union founder Toby Young framed the matter as one of an ideological campaign to silence dissent on matters of “gender” and the environmental doom cult:

But Mr Young accused it of ‘whisking the rug out from under’ private businesses. ‘This is completely outrageous, but I am far from the only person to be deplatformed in this way,’ he said.

‘The withdrawal of financial services from people who challenge the prevailing orthodoxy, whether it’s about teaching primary school children there are 27 different genders or Net Zero, is the new battlefront in the ongoing war against free speech.

The FSU account was later reinstated – following an outcry from UK members of Parliament. No such clamor has arisen to denounce the debanking of a political movement – from left and right – which could replace them.

Britain is now a place where any meaningful political alternatives can be undermined and even canceled by the legal expedient of “debanking.” It has a culture which is dominated by a liberal notion of progress, which sees its Army dismiss experienced combat officers for stating basic facts about reality.

What was the crime of this commanding officer who had completed two tours in Afghanistan?

He made a private post on Facebook, sharing a quote about women’s rights.

The ideological battleground is moving beyond the media spectacle of “culture wars” and is reaching for new authoritarian measures. These are signs that the parties of the liberal consensus are desperate. Aided by ever more extreme measures, they are compelled to defend their grip on power from a population which no longer believes in them.

How long can they continue to insulate themselves from the consequences of their own disastrous policies? These developments make of the common people an enemy of the state, unworthy of rights, and expose the sane and rational to a kind of internal exile.

This escalation of cancel culture indicates the true aim of a process which has never admitted its stated goal. It is presumed to have no end, and is taken to be something which will continue forever. Yet its end is indicated in the results it produces. Cancel culture seeks to cancel our culture.

All of it.