Bitcoin Forum

For those of you who don't know, Nigel Farage is a significant political figure in the UK and the EU. He is a wealthy banker/ investment manager, and is famous for his Brexit activities. Recently his bank closed his personal and business accounts, and six alternative banks declined to open accounts for him. I understand that he may be considering moving out of the UK to preserve his businesses, and to continue to work for the completion of the Brexit process in the UK.  With the decline and problems of the European Union, it looks as if the oligarchs are working to replace it and expand its sphere under the WEF. This is likely to include the US and the UK in the future. I suspect that the sanctions on Nigel Farage's banking are intended to weaken his political power. However, we know from the experience of the US, that the imposition of sanctions tends to weaken the sanctioner, and to strengthen the sanctioned. One obvious path for Nigel Farage to take is to increase his support for Bitcoin. He has stated publicly that Bitcoin has a great future, and his experiences would tend to emphasise this.

Who knows where this is headed.

Its extremely troubling that you can be effectively excluded from society by a bank. this has serious implications for all of us.

We know that they are pushing toward CBDC, this is a communists wet dream since they'll be able to dictate to you what you earn, your total worth, what you can spend it on and how much you can accumulate.

They would basically have total control over every aspect of your life, if you said or done the wrong thing or something they didnt like or even didnt understand; boom no more money at the push of a button. We've already seen other examples of this with the trucker's in Canada and Paypal blocking useage etc etc.

As for Bitcoin, while it is a decentralised network, it is not an independent network.

It still relies on the presence of ISP's and network providers who lets face it will primarily listen to government legistlation rather than an individual or group of individuals.

If governments decide, they could pull the plug on Bitcoin overnight rendering it useless.

We are heading to a time of communist dictatorship at a frightening rate and worst of all people seem to be oblivious to it.

Its going to come as a hell of a shock for some.

As to what to do about it, only time has that answer.

Like Nigel Farage said:
That is how a censorship and permissioned system works, they are surely trying to force Farage out of the U.K. by unbanking him, he is even accused of receiving money from Russia, but Farage has denied that. BTC cannot help him in this situation, even if he increases his support for BTC, being a big businessman he can't just move all his funds into BTC, he needs to operate using a bank account and clearly he can't do that in the U.K. for now, he will probably leave the U.K for somewhere else. Though this proves that a censorship resistant and permissionless system like BTC is the only way to escape government control.
I don't know how the government can possibly do that when they do not control BTC, the price of BTC will take a hit temporarily if it is banned by a major world power, but it cannot make BTC useless, nothing can stop BTC from being used for the purpose it was created, borderless payments without a central authority.

What was the "official" reason for closing his accounts and all that?

Does it have to do with Brexit somehow? He is the guy behind the Brexit process in the UK.
The failed process as he admits.
Lot of good things on paper, but they lied to the citizens. I don't think people there see it as a right thing to brexit the EU.
Don't get it wrong, citizens are lucky to move out the EU but how things have been done, it's not right.

Reading again, and seeing

it's trully a cheap method  :D


According to statistics, sanctions are only useful and effective in 5% of cases.
And countries continue to do so while their citizens are generally more affected than the sanctioned country.


For his own pocket yeah sure but I'm not sure if he cares about others. I'm not from UK so that's perhaps why.
He will open bank accounts in Europe or somewhere else. He won't be banned from everywhere in the world.
No matter if the account is in £, €, $, he doesn't care

As for affecting Bitcoin: I doubt that

Not really sure about Nigel Farage's bio and business but from a layman's perspective, if someone is forced out of the banking system, Bitcoin is the currency for him to adopt. That's the true beauty of Bitcoin. And hopefully with his political connections, he will be able to convert his bitcoins to fiat if needed.

I feel good because a politician will be forced to test the power of Bitcoin and may become a powerful voice amongst the policymakers to support its growth.

For them its easy, they legislate that all ISP's and network providers are to block or limit the flow of BTC data on their networks, resulting in the collapse of BTC.

Unless BTC ends up using a totally independent network infrastructure then it is subject to the same controls as everything else. Who will ISP's listen to you, me or the governments?

I know very little about that guy because I don't live in UK and that's why I'm not aware of his political career. But, after reading your post, and doing some research about Nigel Farage, I found out that he was badly attacked by the government as they closed all his personal and business accounts, and I believe that anyone who talks about something that's against the rules of a government, and central banks faces such kind of treatment. Although, I'm still suspicious that if the guy was favoring Brexit process then why they are treating him this way?

I'm pretty sure that he has learned his lesson that even doing everything for banks and governments you will still have to face hard times. I'm also very sure that the guy will give up on the banking system because he didn't received the rewards for his sacrifices, but was punished for the sins that he hasn't done. I'm very sure that Nigel Farage will move to Bitcoin and he will give up on those traditional banking systems for good, and he will be a very helpful figure for the growth of Bitcoin. Let's see what the future holds for us and how many of Nigel Farage like bank account holders will be kicked by the banking system if they believe in the freedom of speech. Only and only Bitcoin is the savior of such people, and I'm pretty sure that one day almost everyone will use Bitcoin.

With how far bitcoin has gone today I don't think any institution or private organizations can make any form of alternative alterations to the bitcoin network just as at where we are today, bitcoin is not what we can commonly assume to be conquerred or influenced like that when it has it own protocols that guides the network, this makes me remember the little more about that period when bitcoin has the little Challenges of Inscribed ordinals before it got down completely now and as you can all see it's no more a topic of serious discussion anymore, should we now accept an external fluctuate from an ordinary businessman's decision to affect the bitcoin network or it's market price, no.

If and until the banks respond as to why the accounts were closed it's just his word on what happened.

Was he laundering money? Did he not pay taxes? Did Andy Cecere (CEO of UBS) find out he was sleeping with his wife? Did he lie on some forms?

It's amazing how many times people scream they were targeted and then we find out, no there were many and good legitimate reasons for what happened.

Not saying it's right that things like this happen, but with only 1 side of the story it's not noteworthy. Even here in the US there have been a lot of people that have been 'unbanked' for reasons that I would think are BS but were costing the banks money so they got booted out. And then since we have places like chexsystems here, no other bank would take them.

-Dave

Nigel Farage is a corrupt sleazebag, much like most current UK politicians.  I don't think the wider world quite grasp how vile some of our politicians are.  It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he was engaged in some form of criminal activity.

I don't anticipate much impact on Bitcoin.  He might make a lot of noise, but his audience largely consists of low-intellect, easily-manipulated, gullible idiots.  I doubt the average Farage voter could even comprehend crypto, let alone use it.

Nigel Farage's dilemma shows the importance of Bitcoin. It is a clear case of financial persecution because of a person's personal views. The government wants everybody to behave like puppets while they become puppet masters. Nigel even claimed that the government has also extended this bank account closure to his family members. Nigel has been accused before of receiving funds from Russian backed media firm to the tune £550,000 without evidence. And he has claimed that received less than £5000. Very soon people will be with different political views will not survive in the present world.

Where will he move to? Maybe El Salvador. The entire banks in Europe and the US have the same ideology so I wonder which bank will accept him. Leaving Britain might not be the best option because he might still face the same fate in other nations. Turning to bitcoin will be a good option because it can help him keep his funds safe in a decentralized form. Nigel sees Bitcoin as a means to ultimate freedom and has been a supporter of Bitcoin. He might not be a billionaire but he has influence and followership (about1.7 millionn), so he can attract more people to Bitcoin.

I've been following Farage for some time and it was only a matter of time before the "regime" found him too credible of a threat and would retaliate against him.

Wouldn't surprise me if all the banks are colluding amongst one another at the directions of the British government to ensure he's left financially isolated. The Canadian truckers had similar experiences during their COVID protests against Trudeau when their accounts were frozen.

Nothing short of narrative control and weaponizing the financial institutions for the government's gain. Will likely have the opposite of the intended effect.

I think that this action may be more of a problem for CBDCs. It seems that Nigel Farage's video received over 90 million views in about 24 hours. Richard Tice discusses the action in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-eRFZ8Lvmk

Sure he will become stronger like Bitcoin is stronger and stronger since 2009 after about 500 "Bitcoin is dead".
https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/
https://buybitcoinworldwide.com/bitcoin-is-dead/

Nigel Farage will be like other oligarchs and institutional investors who join this market. They are only parts of market and effects from them can be big or small, but mostly big in short term. We must view their participations in a long term, it will increase capital in this market, increase its adoption and more. Massive effects after a few years, decades.

With Nigel, his networth is about $4M, not too big. I am doubtful about this information and I guess it is bigger than that.

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-politicians/nigel-farage-net-worth/

We can imagine effects from Nigel capital by comparing his net worth with other Bitcoin institutional investors. He will not invest all his money to Bitcoin so guess with his 10%, 25% net worth.
https://bitcointreasuries.net/

Maybe he will create more effects from capital to political, not only with capital.

It depends on what you mean by "affect". It could be an advertisement for bitcoin but with teeny tiny effects considering that nobody outside England really knows this dude or cares about him and what he does or says.
This is such a domestic and political matter that is limited to England where politicians who failed in their plan (ie. Brexit) that was "seriously" set in motion ever since 2014 are facing the consequences of their failure, from Johnson who was kicked out of office with humiliation to this dude here.

I did not know about him too.

Political effects are best he can do if the weath figure about him is correct. With only $4M, he will not make any big effect on Bitcoin price if he uses all $4M to invest. He will not use all his money for it so less effect.

With $4M, many Bitcoin whales are richer than Nigel. With >140 bitcoins, a Bitcoin holder is richer than Nigel.
https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.html
11,106 addresses have more than 140 bitcoins but less than 11,106 people who are richer than Nigel because one person can own many addresses.
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/addresses?q=balance(14000000000..)

What threat is he now, though?  His UKIP party is completely irrelevant.  Brexit is all done with now.  There's seemingly not much Farage is trying to accomplish, politically, at the moment.  He's now busy concentrating on securing his own future in Europe and reaping the benefits of that, now that he's finished depriving others of the same opportunities.

While Brexit seriously impacted the political standing of the UK, thus should not affect the stance of the banks toward a politician, unless his finances come from illegal sources or something. I haven't heard of such things happening to anyone before, and I do think it's strange if several banks denied his requests to open bank accounts... However, he does mention a potential reason being a claim that he received funding from Russia Today (RT), but if it's just a claim with no evidence, then banks shouldn't act on that.
The op is right that this guy is pro-Bitcoin already, and yeah, I agree that it's very reasonable to expect him to move his funds into Bitcoin and become a stronger supporter of Bitcoin. However, I think it's also likely that he'll still try to find a bank for some of his funds because there are simply too many places and areas where you can't use Bitcoin directly.

Nigel Farage does not fit in any of this category, if he is going to buy BTC he'll be doing so individually like every other retail investor, but that is just 'if'. I don't live in the U.K., but with the little i've read about this politician i don't think he is pro BTC or anything like that, he may use BTC being censorship resistant as an example to point fingers at the government and accuse them of censorship, but it's not like he is in support of the network, needless to say that you shouldn't even trust what most politicians say. Right now he'll just look for how to solve his problems with the bank or move somewhere else that banks will accept his money.

I am not so familiar with this UK personality named Nigel Farage but I remember years ago reading something from an online magazine of his role in Brexit. I am amazed that the banking industry is turning its back on him...and definitely it would be so difficult for someone to conduct business without the use of banks most especially that even crypto-based firms are still connected to banks. Yes, he might as well be supporting Bitcoin but that come also with a price as he can be a more target of banks and those in the government not so friendly with the cryptocurrency movement. Anyway, good luck to him and I am suggesting that he move to El Salvador.

I watched his heart breaking video on YouTube where he broke the news that the about his political persecution. I don't know if it is about bitcoin but it may seem that he has stepped on some very power political toes who want to kick him out. Well, I say it is a good thing. They can stop him from opening an account but they can't stop him from moving his money to bitcoin and keeping it safely in a  cold wallet. This is the freedom that bitcoin gives that the government doesn't want. He can move to anywhere in the world with his wealth in his pocket and not a single care about the government in the world. I want Nigel to be safe and if his safety means moving out of the UK, then I totally support it.
About bitcoin, nothing will happen. I see him being a strong proponent if he eventually moves out.

Unfortunately Brexit hasn't really strarted. We didn't vote to go in, and after we joined the destined-to-fail European Union by stealth, we voted to leave. Unfortunately the Eton/Oxford bankers managed to fudge and stall, and we are still opnly partially separated. There is a move to try to suck us and America back in before the EU collapses, and is rescued by a new WEF superstate. Farage and other can see this, and are trying to block it.

Not just centralized currencies controlled by governments, we do know that closed source software produced by companies such as Microsoft, Meta and Google have been proven to be potentially dangerous and can act as a spy in favor of governments. This is likely the reason, the famous whistle blower Edward Snowden always prefer using open source software free from government spying and intervention. Well, obviously this news has very little to do with Bitcoin since Farage is more related to UK and isn't really popular throughout the world unlike other entrepreneurs.

But, after such incidences of de-banking protocols undertaken by UK the popularity of Bitcoin would increase in the UK and thereby slowly spread over to the rest of EU. Farage may have a better life by moving over to countries such as El Salvador and usage of open source software additionally might strengthen his position in the game against the banks.

Throughout the history, the primary purpose of Bitcoin was to Bank the unbanked and only after multiple rallies in the prices during various bull runs they have been treated as Digital Gold instead of a decentralized digital currency being operated individually without the control of banks.

I think these UK banks underestimated the consequences of their actions. The UK government has received a lot of backlash from the restriction placed on Nigel Farage. Now the UK government is criticizing these banks and has decided to investigate the issue. The government is claiming not to be aware of the closure of bank accounts due to political views. These banks are connected to some politicians that will want to use them to silence opposition. They want to gradually turn the UK to China or Iran. These banks are indirectly or unconsciously directing people to bitcoin.

This is basically true, banks control all your monetary interactions with the rest of the world because you can only buy stuff and make payments through them and the services they provide for that such as credit cards, wire transfers, fintech apps such as Zelle and so on so forth.

Paypal is basically the worst money institution though. It makes you deal with their antics in addition to your banks at... what benefit exactly? For receiving money, skip them (unless you regularly deal with scammers and other slime buckets).


Exchanges can be shut down, but the network can never be blocked, even if ISPs ban Bitcoin ports just like Bittorrent ports, you can still listen on a different port and they'd basically have to use deep packet inspection to discover bitcoin packets (even that breaks by using Tor or I2P as connection methods).


Yeah a lot of people just don't have the stomach for hearing this.

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"  Thomas Jefferson.

We are really not so far from that point..... and most than freedom or a good appeal feels like a scary one. Its a oxymoron or a paradox, but still being really powerfull and real.

For me the only chance to not fall into that communist "state" with a lot of prosecution its to not make any global power to have all the power. We need the power split between some and in that balance we can jump or avoid the total control at least for some more time.

About the no apperture of the accounts, i dont know how its in the UK, but he can not make a judgment for discrimination? So they are gonna be forced to open one.

I haven't delved too deep into this story, but it's possible that the reasons behind denying Nigel Farage services were not necessarily political. If that was the case, they'd probably do it openly to virtue signal and to scare away people with "incorrect" opinions. But as reported by The Financial Times (https://www.ft.com/content/bed60941-bd7c-4f26-a482-05d84c7650e7) they offered him a basic NatWest account instead (Coutts is part of the NatWest group). As much of a downgrade as it is, it shows they don't necessarily mind to keep him as a customer.

Anyhow, stories like that will definitely work in his favour in terms of getting public sympathy. People are more likely to root for underdogs and nobody likes banks.

Since when are oligarchs the underdog?  He's a career politician who's only in it for the money.  No one in their right mind should feel sorry for this parasitic leech.

Farage is an opportunist who can kick up a stink over literally nothing.  If Farage turned down a personal account, clearly he hasn't been "debanked".  It's the business accounts they're refusing to offer him.  Likely because his so-called businesses are shady as fuck.  I sincerely hope he does leave the UK and some other place can put up with his bullshit.

In what way is he an oligarch? I think you're using this word way too loosely. Not to mention that he stepped down from UKIP a few years ago and is not a member of any party (as far as I know).
You might not like the guy, but there's no denying he has way less actual power than any of the major banking groups.

And it's not as much about people feeling sorry for him, but more about people getting pissed at the fact that one's account can be closed for their political beliefs/affiliations (whether that story is true or not).

And as for "shady" businesses, the logical course of action would be to report such to relevant authorities rather than denying him a service and make him move his shady business elsewhere.

I think he was refering to a normal behavior the human being have, and that its always take part for the poor or more weak in a discussion. In this case like you said (i dont really know him) is a "powerfull" person but its clearly more "weak" than banks.

And yes both of you can have reason in one thing i know this kind of people who only make big statements or say/made clown things with the only purpose to be in the news or make money, and they dont have any moral, or good intetions.

If he no longer meets the criteria to qualify as an oligarch, then at the very least he's a puppet and mouthpiece for the true oligarchs.  His level of political influence probably has reduced now (as has his level of wealth, which seems to be why the rather prestigious bank, Coutts, have dropped him).  Perhaps his level of political "usefulness" is diminished now that the people bankrolling him have got what they wanted (tax avoidance, the sole true goal of Brexit).  But it's undeniable that someone in a position of power is definitely pulling strings to give him far more media attention over the years than would be considered normal.  He is on TV a disproportionate amount for the size of his numerous political parties.  Larger political parties don't get the level of coverage he receives.  Neutrality went out the window the moment money started talking.  The millionaires set the agenda and control the narrative.  He is part of that.

People talking about communism and totalitarianism in here while the fact is that this specific private bank that Nigel was using can choose their customers
And Nigel didn't have enough funds in his account to fit as their customer. Of course Nigel is crying to his fan base as that sells. And he obviously lied about this too as he often does.

https://news.sky.com/story/nigel-farages-bank-accounts-whats-it-all-about-and-whats-the-coutts-threshold-12915155

I know it fits a narrative for some people in here to blame goverment and banks but this has nothing to do with government and what happened is an opposite of communism.

I don't buy the story that the only reason for dropping NF as a client was him going below their threshold. They wouldn't cut him off because of that just like that without prior warnings. The Coutts are not even saying that was the reason (they refused to comment) so it's just a speculation. But if NF was blatantly lying, he would expose himself to a potential lawsuit for reputational damages and I think he knows better than that.
To clarify the situation, he could just publish that letter (if he hasn't already) to show whether or not they stated thresholds as the reason.

That being said, NF's claim that they did this to "take revenge" for the Brexit, doesn't make much sense to me neither.

It is assumed that what happens at the financial level with fiat currencies does not affect bitcoin itself, despite the fact that this person is a famous politician in the United Kingdom and the EU, it is not for the rest of the world if everything that do people with power will affect bitcoin it would not make sense as such that they consider it decentralized so i do not think that what is happening to Nigel Farage will influence this currency and i mean in a negative way, because if this politician decides to consider bitcoin as its new financial resource and reinforces its movements so that more people can see its potential is already a different story, it is good news for this Cryptoactive

As for the restrictions being placed on Nigel Firage it's a terrible thing to do that to a person just to denigrate his political power but in that world of power playing dirty is not strange, If emigration is one of  plans, should do it as soon as possible, stabilizing where  are cornered in this  way will end up completely destroying. so if he wants to finish what he started it would be good if he acted fast.

A single case like this indeed won't have much (or any) effect on Bitcoin's price. But if we keep hearing stories like this one, or just have regular people getting their bank accounts closed without any clear reason, it'll all add to the distrust that people have towards banks and the financial system as a whole. And when they'll be looking for alternatives, that's when Bitcoin will be gaining. It'll likely be a slow process rather than a sharp rise.

A little follow-up on the story of Nigel Farage being barred by Coutts bank.
Apparently the feud between Farage and the Natwest group (owner of the Coutts) caused Natwest CEO (Alison Rose) to resign.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/26/world/europe/natwest-nigel-farage-coutts-bank.html

The reason was not unfairly denying him a service though, but rather the fact that the CEO improperly discussed his bank account details with the media (BBC).
The article linked also suggests that the previous claims that the reason for closing his account was insufficient balance was not true.