Action Against Banks

Global Civil Disobedience Campaign Against the Banks

The vast and various ills and evils of our current financial institutes do not need an introduction from me. Instead, I will begin by stating that these vast and various ills and evils demand from us the strongest, most direct and effective action possible. As such, I am proposing a global campaign of civil disobedience of the highest ambition designed to end forever our current financial institutions. Quite simply, our current economic is unnecessary. Humanity has the means, the resources, and the will to live in material security. Together we can create a financial system that is fair, transparent, and that serves the best interests of all of humanity. If you like the sound of this and feel that you can contribute to this campaign in some form then, please, read on.

Why civil disobedience?

The primary function of the civil disobedience campaign is to get the attention and support of the global public and to create a platform where we can:

1. Increase the publics awareness and understanding of the current financial systems.
2. Stimulate a global discussion about the future of the current financial systems culminating in a global referendum.
3. Develop a new financial system that is fair, transparent, and that serves the best interests of all of humanity.

The civil disobedience campaign will also function to:

1. Empower the global public by demonstrating that effective action against the financial institutions is possible.
2. Disempower the banks by demonstrating that we can and will take action, that we are not afraid to take action, and that we have the means and the will to continue to take action until our objectives are achieved.

The success of this campaign rests upon numbers. We must build as large an audience of supporters as possible. This means millions. This is made possible through social media. If we are to change the financial systems then we need to put significant pressure on our governments to take the action that the public demands… this means big numbers.

What will the act of civil disobedience be?

For an act of civil disobedience to achieve maximum effect it must be a simple and repeatable act that is performed in front of a large audience of supporters. The power of civil disobedience is not in the act itself, but in the potential for the act to be repeated en masse. Therefore, as long as the act is performed in front of a large audience of supporters then it need only be performed by myself to begin with. If my act alone does not advance our campaign to our satisfaction then it would be appropriate for the act to be repeated en masse.

The act of civil disobedience that I am proposing to do is this:

I will go overdrawn in my bank account by the minimum amount required to incur a bank charge. I will then refuse to pay the charge and stop funding my bank account so that the charges continue and accumulate.

This is a simple act that can be repeated - with variations - by most people around the world. If this were an isolated act performed in private then it would be insignificant, but as it will be done publicly in front of a large audience of supporters the bank will be compelled to take the strongest possible action against me to discourage others from repeating the act, which will in turn draw more attention and sympathy towards the campaign. If the banks take strong action against me then I will push for a prison sentence. I will refuse to pay fines or do community service. This is important as it publicly strips the banks of their power. It shows that we will happily take the severest punishment possible for the cause which will leave the banks without any threat. As such, even if they did take the strongest action possible, supporters would still feel encouraged to repeat the act, which would leave them with the problem of prosecuting thousands and thousands of people. If then the bank chose not to take the strongest possible against the act then it would simply encourage supporters to repeat the act. In other words, the bank will be in a no win situation and will have been publicly shown to be utterly weak and powerless. This is how we will obtain the leverage to achieve our aims and objectives.

Next Steps

This campaign can only be effective with the support of others. We are fortunate in that we have incredible resources available to us to promote this campaign. We have powerful social media platforms, numerous alternative media sources with large audiences, and a world population that is already sick and tired of the banks. I even think that we might find some support in the mainstream media… but we won't count on that! We also have many, many people who are working tirelessly on this subject already. This campaign is for them.

How can you help?

* First and foremost, please share this with anyone that you think will be interested.
* We need people who can promote this campaign in various ways and help us to build as large a global audience as is possible… we want millions. If you have the will and the means to promote this campaign, whether online or real-world, then you are needed.
* We need a website and social media platforms. I technically can do this, but i'm not an expert at all, so if anyone is then their help would make the campaign much more effective.
* We need people who are willing to repeat the initial act of civil disobedience. The ideal would be that that is never needed. However, if it is needed then having people on standby ready and willing to act will help us to gain momentum and encourage others to follow. Don't leave me hanging!
* We need ideas. The more inspired, creative thoughts the better. Ask yourself, 'How can I make this campaign better?' Then tell me!
* We need global representatives. We need people to translate this campaign into other languages and be a campaign leader in that country / region.
* How can you help? What am I forgetting? What other help do I need… tell me!
* Finally... be positive, have faith, make an effort, this is very ambitious, but it can work and it will work, but only if we do the work. We must not defeat ourselves. We are humanity, we are capable of anything, and we can do this with ease. Bless yourselves.

Contact Me

My name is Richard. I live in the UK. You can email me on [email protected]. I have also set up a Facebook page where we can meet up and trade ideas. The address is:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Action-against-banks-discussion-group/224892977688465

Or search for 'Action against banks discussion group'.

Thank you. Peace be with you all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: trebor8
Upvote 0
Enough of talking, time for action!

Facebook link?

Afraid its not going to happen ,Britain has a long history of subservience to its lords ana masters.

Good god man who would have thought in the 21st century people would be paying homage to a bunch of guys dressed in skirts and wigs.;)
 
Upvote 0
I raise these concerns and point out the deep flaws in your plans as I would warn someone who's about to march into machine gun fire that their actions are wasted.

Please do not mistake my comments for vitriol, I have a hatred for teh banks that goes far, far deeper than many here - having been directly affected in ways you could not imagine - but I also appreciate the very real day-to-day benifits they provide.

The greatest threat to our way of life at this time is the creeping stranglehold the government are taking over the very freedoms we think are sacred and untouchable. Their weapon is apathy which I am glad to see has not worked on you - but it is awareness that we need.

The unreported news needs to be highlighted, the true machinations of government, the true players pulling the strings and for what purpose - we need information.

Rather than saddle yourself with a county court judgement and lose the ability to get a mortgage / loan / credit for the next 6 years, why not put that effort into spreading knowledge - through social media, we can strive to educate and inform.

There is a battle to be fought - will you run headlong at the guns screaming, or head to the war room and plan a stategy?

Before we continue this discussion I think you should read my updated plans, as posted above.

I do not feel that I am running headlong at the guns screaming, in fact, I think I have just about as good a plan as is possible to take on the banks and effect meaningful changes. I feel I have a valid target (for reasons already outlined) and that my strategy is sound. It is true that I need significant numbers of support to be effective, but I think the numbers are there, and so long as the action is reasonable that most people will support my intentions and my actions.

I'm not going to argue my case for the banks anymore. I've made it clear why they are my target. I think you might be underestimating their influence, but your targets are legitimate, and there are many people working hard to expose the evils of corporations and the mainstream media, and if I can help in any meaningful way then I will. But I need to be clear, i'm not in this to raise a little bit of awareness, i'm not in this to wave banners outside of Coca-Cola... i'm in this to change the world, and all my efforts will go towards campaigns that are capable of maximum impact.
 
Upvote 0
Anyone who seriously gives little regard to how informed they are is openly declaring themselves as a fool. And who wants to follow a fool?

How very very dare you.:|

Britain has a long and noble history of following fools.

Mind you the current crop takes some beating.;)
 
Upvote 0
Just my thoughts:

Your actions will fizzle out very quickly because:

1. People like to be entertained. A sit in at McDonalds, climbing the Cenotaph, egging politicians get their attention. Your campaign will involve a flurry of computer-generated letters with the climax of a CCJ - hardly captivating drama!

2. The people are wholly complicit with the banks - whether they admit it or not. The main dissatisfaction at the moment is that banks have stopped lending irresponsibly. You are enjoying an overdraft facility - surely if you are anti bank your stance should be not to borrow?

Open the floodgates for dodgy mortgage applications and all will be forgotten.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sirearl
Upvote 0
Just my thoughts:

Your actions will fizzle out very quickly because:

1. People like to be entertained. A sit in at McDonalds, climbing the Cenotaph, egging politicians get their attention. Your campaign will involve a flurry of computer-generated letters with the climax of a CCJ - hardly captivating drama!

2. The people are wholly complicit with the banks - whether they admit it or not. The main dissatisfaction at the moment is that banks have stopped lending irresponsibly. You are enjoying an overdraft facility - surely if you are anti bank your stance should be not to borrow?

Open the floodgates for dodgy mortgage applications and all will be forgotten.

I'm not anti-bank, i'm anti-suffering. If the banks served humanities best interests then i'd support them, but they don't, they are a genuinely destructive force, in ways that most people are not aware of. Your point about people needing to be entertained is a very good, though. The campaign will certainly need to develop beyond an online thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sirearl
Upvote 0
I'm not anti-bank, i'm anti-suffering. If the banks served humanities best interests then i'd support them, but they don't, they are a genuinely destructive force, in ways that most people are not aware of.

This is where we stray into that odd area where the lines become blurred.

banks are not humanitarian organisation or charities - they are money making industries who's sole reason for existence is to generate profit.

This is fine - my main aim in business is to generate profit. I also like to provide an excellent service and make very real improvements to peoples lives, but if the profit were no there I wouldn't (couldn't) do it.

Similar to the energy companies - they only exist to generate profit. But when a companies service / product becomes essential for modern life eg. electricity, gas, bank accounts etc, then you get this odd dichotomy where the money making enterprise has social responsibility thrust upon it - and is expected to put that responsibility before it's primary aim.

This is counter-intuitive to the business owners or shareholders, but has become a very real demand made upon certain industries.

There is the sense of the general public wanting to have their cake and eat it - in politics we see various new initiatives and schemes rolled out with the view to resolving a problem or making things better - but when it becomes clear that an idea will not work in practice the particular party cannot simply halt the new initiative for fear of being accused of performing a U-turn which is seen as a sign of weakness.

So they have to defend the new unworkable, damaging policy - because saving face has been made the order of the day rather than listening to the public and acting accordingly.

So with the banks - one the one hand they only exist to make money, but are expected to satisfy certain social obligations put upon their particular industry - obligations that sit at odds to their main aim.

Herein is the crunch. we force upon a business a schizophrenic business model that is at odds with itself yet expect that business to keep everyone happy all of the time.

We need to review what we, the general public, really expect a business to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nuno
Upvote 0
This is where we stray into that odd area where the lines become blurred.

banks are not humanitarian organisation or charities - they are money making industries who's sole reason for existence is to generate profit.

This is fine - my main aim in business is to generate profit. I also like to provide an excellent service and make very real improvements to peoples lives, but if the profit were no there I wouldn't (couldn't) do it.

Similar to the energy companies - they only exist to generate profit. But when a companies service / product becomes essential for modern life eg. electricity, gas, bank accounts etc, then you get this odd dichotomy where the money making enterprise has social responsibility thrust upon it - and is expected to put that responsibility before it's primary aim.

This is counter-intuitive to the business owners or shareholders, but has become a very real demand made upon certain industries.

There is the sense of the general public wanting to have their cake and eat it - in politics we see various new initiatives and schemes rolled out with the view to resolving a problem or making things better - but when it becomes clear that an idea will not work in practice the particular party cannot simply halt the new initiative for fear of being accused of performing a U-turn which is seen as a sign of weakness.

So they have to defend the new unworkable, damaging policy - because saving face has been made the order of the day rather than listening to the public and acting accordingly.

So with the banks - one the one hand they only exist to make money, but are expected to satisfy certain social obligations put upon their particular industry - obligations that sit at odds to their main aim.

Herein is the crunch. we force upon a business a schizophrenic business model that is at odds with itself yet expect that business to keep everyone happy all of the time.

We need to review what we, the general public, really expect a business to do.

I'm just against the whole concept of anything existing to just make money. That idea has raped and exploited humanity and the environment for all it is worth. My discontent runs very deep. This is not a shallow campaign for me. I want to rip humanity up by the roots and plant us afresh with some sane seeds, cos whatever the hell is going on at the moment is just outright psychotic. I think I must have alien eyes, or most other are blind, but I don't know how anyone accepts this ****. It's nuts.
 
Upvote 0
Hmmm.
So you are posting on a business forum, populated by (mostly) business owners, looking for support for a view that hates anything that exists to generate profit?

So you are rallying against capitalism?

What alternaive system would you have in place?

Are you hoping for some kind of free society where everyone works for the common good and has an equal share? If so, I suggest you read up on your history.

You are right - the present system we have is not only psychotic - but is self-destructive, hateful, oppressive and insidious.

why? Because we have created a society where we ignore the very basis of our existence. We are tribal creatures who fare best in small communities or tribes. Evolutionarily it is only seconds since we were hunter/gatherers but we have forced upon ourselves a totally false, manufactured way of life that dictates that we must suppress and ignore the very fabric of our existence.

We are forced to suppress our instincts, natural reactions and behaviours in favour of this veneer of society (and believe me, it is only a veneer)

These unnatural conditions give rise to unnatural behaviours.
the aforementioned contradictory conditions forced upon business give rise to contradictory business practices..........................

This rabbit hole goes deep.
 
Upvote 0
This is where we stray into that odd area where the lines become blurred.

banks are not humanitarian organisation or charities - they are money making industries who's sole reason for existence is to generate profit.

This is fine - my main aim in business is to generate profit. I also like to provide an excellent service and make very real improvements to peoples lives, but if the profit were no there I wouldn't (couldn't) do it.

Similar to the energy companies - they only exist to generate profit. But when a companies service / product becomes essential for modern life eg. electricity, gas, bank accounts etc, then you get this odd dichotomy where the money making enterprise has social responsibility thrust upon it - and is expected to put that responsibility before it's primary aim.

This is counter-intuitive to the business owners or shareholders, but has become a very real demand made upon certain industries.

There is the sense of the general public wanting to have their cake and eat it - in politics we see various new initiatives and schemes rolled out with the view to resolving a problem or making things better - but when it becomes clear that an idea will not work in practice the particular party cannot simply halt the new initiative for fear of being accused of performing a U-turn which is seen as a sign of weakness.

So they have to defend the new unworkable, damaging policy - because saving face has been made the order of the day rather than listening to the public and acting accordingly.

So with the banks - one the one hand they only exist to make money, but are expected to satisfy certain social obligations put upon their particular industry - obligations that sit at odds to their main aim.

Herein is the crunch. we force upon a business a schizophrenic business model that is at odds with itself yet expect that business to keep everyone happy all of the time.

We need to review what we, the general public, really expect a business to do.

Very nice except I grew up when the most of the essentials of life were under the states control ,profit was not involved .Most of these essential industries were sold off the excuse being that they were loosing money and had to be subsidised.( How can that be possible ):|

Now that most essential industries are privately owned the subsidies given to them are many time those given under nationalisation not to mention the tax evasion condoned by various governments.:eek:

Now someone please explain what the benefits of this situation are to the public.:):):):):)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You have obviously never watched Dowton Abbey.;)

Well at least you got that right.
Are you going to answer Mike's question?

The wiki isn't an answer. The Min of Ag and subsequently MAFF encourage and promote food production. They don't now nor ever have, controlled it.
It's responsibilities did not extend to control.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Well at least you got that right.
Are you going to answer Mike's question?

The wiki isn't an answer. The Min of Ag and subsequently MAFF encourage and promote food production. They don't now nor ever have, controlled it.
It's responsibilities did not extend to control.

They most certainly did during times of war.
 
Upvote 0
Not according to the link you provided.

War was declared on 3 September 1939. The UK entered the war well prepared for the maintenance of supplies of food but with less than 40% of the country's needs produced at home. The Ministry of Food was formed on 8 September and William Morrison appointed Minister. The Ministry of Food became the sole buyer and importer of food and regulated prices, guaranteeing farmers prices and markets for their produce. The Marketing Boards, except for milk and hops, were suspended.
Recruiting began for the Women's Land Army and in 1940, food rationing was introduced. Lord Woolton succeeded William Morrison as Minister for Food. In 1941, the US Land-Lease act was passed under which food, agricultural machinery and equipment was sent from the US to the UK.
 
Upvote 0
Well at least you got that right.
Are you going to answer Mike's question?

The wiki isn't an answer. The Min of Ag and subsequently MAFF encourage and promote food production. They don't now nor ever have, controlled it.
It's responsibilities did not extend to control.

I don't wish to be negative, but you are aware that you are wasting your time, aren't you?

you are aware that he will simply change his argument and link to irrelevant articles until you simply lose the will to live?
 
Upvote 0
I don't wish to be negative, but you are aware that you are wasting your time, aren't you?

You could have said that about the OP.

I see myself up there with Ghandi and Martin Luther King. It's a difficult road, but one that has to be taken.

I have a dream that one day Earl will admit he was wrong, and apologise. I HAVE A DREAM!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nuno
Upvote 0
You could have said that about the OP.

I see myself up there with Ghandi and Martin Luther King. It's a difficult road, but one that has to be taken.

I have a dream that one day Earl will admit he was wrong, and apologise. I HAVE A DREAM!

You know you have the option to ignore certain members don't you?
 
Upvote 0
Hmmm.
So you are posting on a business forum, populated by (mostly) business owners, looking for support for a view that hates anything that exists to generate profit?

Know your enemy! Haha. Not that I think of you all as my enemy, but it's useful for me to be here, to understand attitudes and differences, to find out what we connect over, how I can relate my ideas in a way that is relevant and desired by those here in this world, y'know?

So you are rallying against capitalism?

No, that is still too superficial. I think at core there are two predominant attitudes. There are those who live to serve themselves, and those who live to serve others. For me, a happy, peaceful humanity is impossible through a service-to-self attitude (the prevailing attitude in business). We can only achieve peace and happiness through compassion and kindness to others - to want them to be happy as much as we want ourselves to be happy. So, if anything i'm railing against the service-to-self attitude, which happens to manifest in things like the monetary system, corporate greed etc. etc.

What alternaive system would you have in place?

I'm not sure that a complete alternative system exists at the moment. But i'm not even sure a system as such would be necessary on a service-to-others planet. My experience of living a compassionate, kind life is that these qualities act almost like a lubricant... things just work, things fall into place, things happen, it's all very, very easy. Think about it... when you live your life to benefit others, think about how much support and love there is for you, and think about how much easier life is when people want to help you and make your life easier and more enjoyable. It's beautiful. It's easy.

Are you hoping for some kind of free society where everyone works for the common good and has an equal share? If so, I suggest you read up on your history.

I really don't know how it will work out. But I know we have 7 billions minds on this planet, and i'm sure between us all we can find a way that works.


This rabbit hole goes deep.

It does and it doesn't. If self-interest, i.e. service to self, motivates you then you will always be looking at how others are harming you and stopping you and getting in your way, but when you live to serve others you just become part of the eco-system, and it's all very simple, you just function as naturally as a tree does. Nature is interconnected. Each part serves countless other parts. Nature is selfless. And our true nature is self-less.
 
Upvote 0
Done it again.

First the gratuitous insult and then a wiki link you either haven't read or didn't understand.

From your link, (very first sentence):

influence the cost and supply of such commodities

"influence" not control. And nothing, nada, about the UK.

Well done Earl. Moved it away from a brave Buddhist on a white charger about to slay the dragon of money to a wikifest about agricultural subsidy eveywhere in the world except here..
 
Upvote 0
Well done Earl. Moved it away from a brave Buddhist on a white charger about to slay the dragon of money to a wikifest about agricultural subsidy eveywhere in the world except here..

Yeah Earl, stop stepping on my toes, i'm trying to be brilliant here.
 
Upvote 0
That's a subsidy, paid to private enterprise. Exactly what you said had replaced state control.

Just apologise for being wrong, then I can go back to taking the p*** out of the hippy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vvaannmmaann
Upvote 0
I don't think he thinks he can ever be wrong, even when he contradicts himself.
Bit like Baghdad Bob it's "if I say it, it must be true".

(I'm sure Baghdad Bob would have used smilies like an incontinent toddler too.)
 
Upvote 0
It's not about the £1500, it's about the £1500 x 100,000 +.

That's £150,000,000 (£150 million)
Bank profits last year: £16,500,000,000 (£16,500 million).

Less than 1% of profit after allowing for PPI. (£2,300 million).

"Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair" ain't going to work for you really.
 
Upvote 0
That's £150,000,000 (£150 million)
Bank profits last year: £16,500,000,000 (£16,500 million).

Less than 1% of profit after allowing for PPI. (£2,300 million).

"Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair" ain't going to work for you really.

Owe the bank £1, that's your problem.
Owe the bank £150million, that's their problem.
 
Upvote 0

Latest Articles