This is how civil servants are indoctrinated into adopting globalist policies.

I was invited to a course in ostia, Italy called "Anti Money laundering,: Current trends, Prosecutions, and the challenges presented by Crypto Assets", hosted by the OECD.

This isn't isolated, there are a number of these courses on digital identity, misinformation, taxation, etc throughout the year and civil servants from governments around the world are invited to attend.

Now, what civil servant, on an average salary, would say no to an all expenses paid trip to Italy, in a nice hotel, with a healthy per diem allowance?

Well, me of course.

But I'm the exception.

That's how global policy organizations educate the people who actually decide policy around the world. When a civil servant goes to one of these things, they come back and are expected to deliver new policy ideas and suggestions in their departments.

Force governments to an honest monetary system and all these frivolous expenses evaporate.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Statist “education” program

They can do it because people do not object to taxation and money printing.

In your opinion, do AML laws do much to stop actual crime? If we didn't have them at all, would there be a big spike in crime?

I have some links to research into the topic in this piece.

> The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimated that only 0.2% of criminal proceeds are confiscated. Other estimates suggest a success rate from such anti-money laundering rules of 0.07% — a rounding error for organized crime.

nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqs35yguednn9f9equekad0ztklhmnujuvrzgzmtmc3axtcwcpkeyqq24jvz0fuuhy534wa5nve3nxqu9x526tpey2cec7ep

Thanks for the reference.

Sorry, I missed your comment. In the discussion, I talk about the effects these requirements may have on scaring people away from using banks and other financial institutions.

I give the example of a police car station in a corner in a neighborhood scaring away thieves. Even if the police doesn't catch anybody, the thieves will go in another neighborhood with their isn't a police car. So in that regard, it does serve a purpose.

I still don't think it's worth removing the liberties and freedoms and rights of every citizen in order to do that, however.

Thanks for answering. Makes sense. The juice is not worth the squeeze.