This week the Left was all abuzz about mail in ballots after President Donald “South Park Is Irrelevant” Trump announced he would “lead a movement” to ban the use of them for the 2026 midterm elections. As easy as it would be to whip out an occasionally funny, yet bitingly accurate blog post about it, I wanted to focus on an issue that hasn’t had a lot of play, but is more disturbing than a Jeffrey Epstein snuff film.
Too soon?
The issue is a little something the kids like to call debanking. It’s been a definite issue within conservative circles, but the Left has defended it, citing how dangerous those being debanked really are. So, is it an ideologically-based system of discrimination or is it the exercise of freedom of association, or lack thereof? Let’s find out!
debanking
What the Left thinks it means – banks deciding not to deal with problematic customers
What it really means – the Left using regulatory pressure to deny customers access to banking systems
Yes, I know this isn’t as sexy as mail in ballots, so I’ll try to keep things entertaining. And, yes, I will actually try this time.
Having worked in the mortgage industry for 15 years (15 long, grueling, thankless, and not mentally healthy years), I know about banking regulations. Probably a lot more than you would care to know. Contrary to popular Leftist belief, banks are heavily regulated with a multitude of government agencies that will fine you if you sneeze too loudly in their general vicinity. (Obviously, I’m exaggerating here, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the government didn’t have regulations for just such a purpose.)
Why do I bring this up? First, to pad out this piece a bit. But second, to give you a glimpse into the various factors that can drive a bank to do anything. You know, like giving out mortgage loans to people who couldn’t afford a cardboard box let alone a home because racism or something. And who cares if they’re a bigger credit risk than Charlie Sheen on a coke bender with a black American Express card? Get those people into homes and fuck fiscal responsibility!
We saw how well that turned out during the 2008 mortgage crisis.
That’s the pervasive power of the federal government at work. If any bank wants to stay in business, they’re pretty much stuck into having to do what the government says. That’s like letting a room full of monkeys write Shakespeare: you may get the desired result, but there will definitely be shit all over the walls.
This brings us to the Leftist perspective on government regulation. To them, regulation is the great equalizer for the injustice they see in their tiny little hivemind. If you can’t persuade someone to act the way the Left wants you to act, the force of law will do just fine. I wonder if there’s been a recent President who could weigh in on this…
And in this case, it’s not the one you’re thinking of, probably.
For this one, we need to go all the way back to 2013 with a little thing I’d like to call Operation Choke Point. Back in the days when “Hope” and “Change” were akin to brilliant political strategy, the Department of Justice started cracking down on banks for doing business with certain accounts that allegedly had high probability of fraud or money laundering. Some of these naughty vendors were ammunition sellers, firearms sellers, and “racist materials,” among other more likely fraudulent vendors.
Now, riddle me this, Batman! What do those three types of vendors in particular have in common, at least to the Left? They all lean to the right more than a runner trying to steal second base. By putting these groups into such a list, it punished them by forcing banks not to do business with them. Although Operation Choke Hold ended in 2017, the damage had already been done.
This is the end result of debanking: not just to punish wrongthink, but to make the targets suffer for their wrongthink. Granted, I won’t shed a tear for some of those people who were debanked like Nick Fuentes (who is a total piece of racist disingenuous shit), but I can still call out how wrong it was for the government to do that to him and so many others. As long as what they were doing was legal, the federal government had no business interfering in the business of others.
Of course, that never stops the federal government.
And what about President Brick Tamland? He was Vice President when this shit went down before, but surely he didn’t have a role in it this time…oh, wait, he did. This time, the Trump family were some of the ones being debanked. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that may be the reason why the President put out an Executive Order outlawing the practice. And that may be why the heads of major banks are snitching on the Obama and Tamblin Administrations saying they were forced into it due to political pressure.
Now, I’m not the first person to jump in front of a metaphorical bullet for the big banks, but in this case I’m inclined to believe them. Not that it lets them off the hook, mind you. Even if your business is threatened by government agencies, you do have the right to say “no.” Oh, and blab to whomever will listen about how the federal government is forcing you to do something against your will that would negatively impact law-abiding citizens.
“But don’t they have a social responsibility not to associate with bad people, you racist bastard” the Left might ask. To address that, let me point out the concept of freedom of association. In short, people are free to associate or not associate with whomever they want, and the same applies to groups. In the case of debanking, the freedom of association gets beat down by a perceived mob outside our doors.
People are social animals by nature. We have a need to belong to something, and those in power know that. So, when our sense of belonging gets threatened by, say, an 800 pound gorilla known as the federal government, our natural instinct is to comply, even if we know it’s not the right thing to do. And when the Left has cornered the market on calling anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders a Nazi, it’s easy to give in and save ourselves the headaches.
Of course, this comes with a catch. The Left will continue to monitor you and raise the red flag whenever they think you deviate from their version of the right thing to do. Social media platforms are full of keyboard warriors and harassment networks designed to keep things Leftist whenever possible. That kind of pressure can be hard to ignore, let alone overcome.
But, more and more people and companies are giving Leftist complainers the one finger salute, and sometimes even two if they’re feeling generous. And just between you and me, I tend to be very generous, if you know what I mean.
And if you do, could you let me know? Kthanks!
The power the Left has tends to be more imaginary than actual. They’re like wild animals who puff themselves up to look bigger to scare off predators, but all it takes is for one predator to say “fuck that shit” and the illusion goes away faster than Queen Kamala the Appointed’s chances of winning back the White House in my lifetime.
That’s the way to handle the Left’s mob mentality: pay it no mind. The Left hates it when you live your life without their meddling and it only makes them madder and shriller which ultimately makes you look better because you’re unfazed by their antics.
However, I understand where the banks are coming from. Even with a new President and new appointees in different roles, the rank and file don’t change and may dig in even more to hold onto what little power they actually have. That means the same assholes who participated in Operation Choke Hold are likely still in their positions and will continue to cause whatever pain they can to the big banks because reasons.
This is where debanking is at its most insidious. To end the practice, you must remove the practitioners. As long as there’s one asshole in a position to make debanking a thing, it will be a thing.
And to my Leftists readers out there, this is not a call to violence. The people who made debanking a thing need to be removed and prosecuted, civilly or criminally, for violating people’s and group’s rights to access services when engaged in lawful activities. Only when those activities get into the illegal category does the government have any business getting involved. That’s the way it’s worked for centuries in this country, and it worked pretty well until Leftists got involved.
We’ll see if President Trump’s Executive Order on debanking has any teeth in time, but I’m not popping the champagne yet. There are too many entrenched interests involved to make them stop the practice, and given the President’s first round of draining the swamp, I’m not confident debanking will be done away with anytime soon.
Not to worry, though. I’m still generous with my one finger salutes.
