In the IT world DoS stands for Denial of Service, an attack on a website made by bombarding it with so many inputs that it can’t perform its normal functions for the people who use it.

Compared to software hacks it’s as crude as hell but it can be effective for a short time.

And compared to what Nigel Farage is experiencing a traditional DoS is nothing. The British politician, former Euro MP and famous Brexit promoter has had all his accounts cancelled by the bank he’s used since 1980, and no other bank will take him:

“…We are living through the politicisation of our corporate sector. Woe betide you if you do not conform with its worldview,” writes Farage. “This was brought home to me when I was recently told by my bank [since 1980] 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.”

He gives examples of other politicians who have got the same treatment – and they’re all right-wingers.

The fig leaf excuse is that Farage has been accused of being on Putin’s payroll. This has been a long-standing angle of attack on the Brexit folk (readers here may recall the same sort attacks on me here at No Minister by an unhinged Brexit supporter), but it’s notable that the attacks on Farage were made in Parliament where they are protected from defamation:

“I am mystified at why some people are still missing from the [imposed sanctions] 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.” – 2022, Chris Bryant, Labour MP and chair of the Committees on Standards and Privileges

This claim has no evidence behind it and Bryant offered none, which is why neither he nor anyone else has repeated it in public. Yet it has not been withdrawn in Parliament.

But for all the valid criticism that can be aimed at the banks about this, here’s the truly important thing: they could not do this without public support, and it’s clear that a growing proportion of Western populations fully support destroying their political and ideological enemies by any means necessary and especially if it can be done without violence; the complete “de-platforming” of a person across all avenues of life.

I don’t see how Western civil society can survive this if it spreads. This is less fascism than a form of Mafia intimidation: “Nice life you have there. Be a real shame if something bad happened to it because you spoke up”. Farage is the required example, a counter Admiral Byng moment, where the execution is performed – paraphrasing Voltaire – in order to discourage the others.

Was it coordinated? Did the British government have something to do with this directly? Or is it just the “Civil” Service whispering in the ears of their friends in The City?

Across the pond, a smaller example of this has been breaking out in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision on the 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis case, where they ruled that a Christian designer of marriage web sites could not be forced by her customers to put pro-gay marriage messages on the sites. Naturally this has the Left as much up in arms as they are about the loss of the Harvard Affirmative Action case on the same day.

But in this case the silly, petty reaction has been to deliberately misunderstand the case and the ruling and start declaring that Trump supporters shall be denied service.

There are more examples at the link but the reactions are spot on:

I accept these terms. It’s better than unknowingly filling the pockets of business owners who are closeted leftists. The transparency is appreciated.

Which is exactly one of the responses that had been suggested by the Right all along to those gay activists who relentlessly waged lawfare on that Colorado cake baker and others like him who refused to produce pro-gay marriage messages on their products; “Why would you go to a business that hates you when others will do as you ask?”

Well of course the answer always was that it wasn’t about gay activists gettting what they wanted in a normal business transaction but about forcing people to say what they wanted them to say – and using the coercive power of the state to achieve that end.

Still, there’s a big difference between small businesses telling GOP/Trump supporters that their money is not wanted, and having every large bank telling you that. It will be interesting to see what Farage does, or even what he can do in a nation without a Bill of Rights or a Constitution, and with a substantial chunk of his fellow Brits being perfectly okay with this.