A Cashless Society Enslaves You to the System

Less than a week after India's surprise move to scrap its highest demonstration cash notes, another war on cash has intensified in Australia. Yesterday, the banking giant UBS proposed that eliminating Australia's $150 bill would be good for the economy, eliminate black market money and strengthen banks so they only have to deal in digits, not actual money.

"You want to talk about true power? True power comes from everyone knowing exactly where you've spent your money, every penny, you not having the ability to make any transaction at all in cash. So somebody wants to stop you, all they have to do is freeze your funds. All they have to do is wipe out your bank account," Glenn said Thursday on his radio program.

Cash is one of the few remaining options for financial privacy that doesn't create a permanent record of every purchase or transaction you make. It's also an easy way to reduce your exposure to risk in the broader financial system. Without cash, you are an absolute slave to the system.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these valuable questions:

• What happens in the event of a catastrophic failure if everything is digitized?

• Will every transaction require approval, like selling a car or gun?

• Will purchasing with cash become illegal?

• Can banks use your money to pay off their debt?

• What would be the biggest heist in human history?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: This is absolutely incredible. Less than a week after India's surprise move to scrap its highest demonstration cash notes, another war on cash has intensified now in Australia. Yesterday, the banking giant UBS proposed that eliminating Australia's 150-dollar bills would be good for the economy and good for the banks.

Now, here in America, we've been hearing -- and nobody in the mainstream media is talking about this. And I'm telling you, there's going to come a time -- I promise you this: There's going to come a time that no one will be talking about this. And within two weeks, it will be the only thing that anyone is talking about: America going cashless.

Yesterday, they said that -- UBS said that it would be good for the economy and good for the banks. The reason why they say it will be good for the economy is because you'll stop any black market. You'll stop the, you know, drug trade, et cetera, et cetera. And good for the banks, because the banks won't have to handle all that money. It will all be digits.

This is the real reason -- I'm sorry. No. This is one of the real reasons why this is happening, is because it will save the banks a lot of money.

And, remember, the banks are the ones who are ruling the world. But you want to talk about true power -- true power comes from everyone knowing exactly where you've spent your money, every penny, you not having the ability to make any transaction at all in cash.

So somebody wants to stop you, all they have to do is freeze your funds. All they have to do is wipe out your bank account.

In a time where our Pentagon is being hacked by the Russians, the banks are saying, "Let's digitize everything."

You want to wipe out the debt? You want to wipe out the trillion dollars of debt? Digitize everything, and then have some catastrophic failure. Well, I guess we all have to start over again. Well, I guess everything's been equalized now.

In -- yes.

STU: Isn't that the plot from Mr. Robot?

GLENN: Yes, it is.

STU: Essentially.

(laughter)

GLENN: In September 2015, Australian bank Westpac published its free credit report -- its cash-free credit report, suggesting that the country would become cashless by 2022.

In July 2016, Australian payments from Tyro published an enormously self-serving blog touting the benefits of a cashless society, saying, quote, it's only a matter of time. The media and the political establishments have now chimed in as well.

Two days ago, Citibank -- yes, the Citibank that we have -- announced it was going cashless at its Australian branches.

In February of this year, Sydney Morning Herald released a series of articles, some of which were written by officials from Australia's Department of Treasury, suggesting that eliminating cash will save billions of dollars and moving to a cashless society is the next step -- is the next step for the Australian dollar.

The government, media, and banks and academia now have formed a single unified chorus to push the idea to consumers that cashless is good for everyone.

It's happening across the planet now: Australia, India, Europe, and in North America, partially right. Going cashless will save a lot of money. Paper currency is costly to transport in large quantities, due to the need of security. But it is also accurate to suggest that going cashless will be good for the banks.

As UBS pointed out yesterday, demonetizing Australia's 50 and 100-dollar bills would force anyone holding those notes to deposit them back into the banking system.

So bank deposits would rise as a result. So would bank profits. Now, let me think: If we're going to negative interest rates, which means that I would want to pull my money out of the bank because it's costing me money to put it in the bank. And that's the only way the bank survives, is by bleeding me dry, what could the bank possibly do?

Well, if I'm taking my money out because they're giving me a haircut -- they're just taking two -- one, two, three percent -- or if the government so deems it, 10 percent of whatever I have in my bank, I could either take my money out, or the banks could make it so I couldn't take my money out.

Now, they're already doing that by saying you can't make a big deposit -- or, a large withdrawal. They're already trying to make it impossible. But this traps the money because your money won't have any value on the street.

It's not like if you have the money, I can still go out and buy things. I take it out of the bank. No, no. They will outlaw all cash transactions. So no one will take cash, and cash will have zero meaning.

So it would be like trading in toilet paper. That way, I have to do business with the bank. They are able then to give all of us a haircut because all of us have to have our money in the bank.

PAT: And every transaction you ever make will be tracked. So if you ever wanted to be off the grid for whatever reason, you can't be. You just can't be.

GLENN: You can't.

If you want to let's say close the loophole on I want to sell my gun to my friend Steve for $200 -- that's totally legal to do. The gun show loophole. I'm just a private citizen, and I'm selling my private -- I'm selling like a chair. And I'm selling it to this guy. You don't have to worry about that gun show loophole anymore. Because I won't be able to sell even my car on the street with a sign that says, "For sale, call this number."

I can't say it's $800. Just give me $800, and I'll give you the title of the car and go drive away. He won't have the $800. I will have to go to a bank, who will then be paid to make that transaction for me.

Even policy wonk academics would have the rare opportunity to take their lousy theories and PHD dissertations for a test-drive. This means, your politicians have more control over your savings and fewer obstacles to impose capital controls and engage in civil asset forfeiture.

Remember what we were fighting against a year ago or so? Civil asset forfeiture, where already the government is just taking it?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And saying, "Well, we don't know where this money came from." Oh, well, you have been charged with a crime, so we're just going to take it from you.

And then you're guilty. They don't give it back. You have to go to court to get it back from them.

JEFFY: Prove that you're not a criminal.

GLENN: Prove that you're not a criminal. Prove that that money -- prove that that asset was yours. And we've been railing on this saying, "This is a really dangerous precedent." Well, what happens when somebody wants to stop you and nothing -- nothing is of value except a digital? You are an absolute slave to the system. Boy, you want to talk about bitcoin becoming through the roof and gold.

STU: It is up, by the way.

GLENN: Bitcoin is up?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Cash is one of the few remaining options for financial privacy that doesn't create a permanent record of every purchase or transaction you make. It's also an easy way to reduce your exposure to risk in the broader financial system.

Think about this: The banking system is full of institutions that never miss an opportunity to demonstrate they can't be trusted with our money.

Hardly a month goes by without some major baking scandal. They're caught colluding on exchange rates, manipulating interest rates, fraudulently establishing fraudulent accounts. It's disgraceful.

In many banking systems across the world, especially in Europe right now, banks have precariously low levels of capital and already suffering the effects of negative interest rates. In the United States, banks routinely employ very clever accounting tricks to conceal their true financial condition.

You won't have a say in the matter. Here's what could happen, and all of these things are contingent on a thousand different things. And it doesn't have to be this way. But what could happen is a major global financial disaster, where the markets all around the world are hit and hit hard. A global banking holiday, where everything has shifted so much, they've got to get a handle on the global markets because somebody hacked into the market. Somebody did something wrong. Somebody made a policy that was bad. A country collapsed. There was a terror strike. It doesn't matter what happened.

But there is a global impact on the markets. And we have a global depression. And a collapse of confidence in the banks, in the governments, and in currency.

And so the government says, "Banking holiday, okay. We're set. Two weeks later: Everybody bring all cash in. We're banning all cash. Bring it in. And we're resetting this as a global market. Global cash. It's all in digits. And, by the way, if you don't bring your cash in and you're caught trying to buy anything in cash, you're trying to buy anything without digits, you'll be thrown into jail."

It's pretty much what happened in the Great Depression. Don't think that it can't happen now. This is the kind of thing -- all you need is an excuse. What is -- you know, I just asked the financial adviser that we had on yesterday or day before. I said, "So is there another TARP?" Yeah, it's this.

What's going to save the banks? Because the minute you get scared, you're going to pull your money out, and then it all collapses. Well, they already have the right. Check your bank. Call your bank. Ask for the fine print. Almost all of the banks have changed their fine print to where a bail-in is now their right, that if the bank becomes insolvent, they can take the same percentage of everybody's account to pay off the debts that they have.

So you're the last line. You're the last creditor that they have to pay. You think that you're the first creditor. Because what you're doing is you are loaning your hard-earned money to the bank. The bank then takes that and makes more money on your money by lending that money out to somebody else.

But the bank also has made investments in the stock market, in -- in mutual funds, in treasuries, in all kinds of different things. So they've made investments.

They've also made loans to other people that they can't cover if everybody starts to default on their loans. So there's a hierarchy of who gets paid back. You are now the creditor of last resort. You are the last person the bank has to pay back. You lose your money. And that's all in the -- in writing now.

If they want to make sure the rich get richer -- if you want to see the biggest heist in human history, it's this: Force everyone to put their money into the bank, and then they'll pay off who they will. And then they'll divvy the rest out to you.

[break]

GLENN: You know, it's really amazing how this has just creeped up on the world. And what have we been doing? We have been arguing over --

PAT: Other things.

GLENN: -- nonsense.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: No, not even other -- we're not even talking -- we haven't been arguing for the last year and a half about anything important.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: We've been arguing about, you know, Miss Universe.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: We haven't been talking about anything important. And look at what happened: This week, in -- have we --

STU: Who is we?

GLENN: I know. I know. I'm saying the western world. Generally speaking, the western world. And especially North America has not been paying attention to what's happening.

STU: Yeah, that's fair.

GLENN: Really happening.

PAT: And people from Australia -- that this is happening at Citibank branches in Australia and think, "Eh, it's Australia."

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: I want to make sure it's clear. I want to clarify something. This is not all branches. I thought it was all branches.

PAT: Yeah, it's some branches.

GLENN: It's some branches. So they're just starting this now at Citibank.

PAT: But they say the government, media, banks, and even academia have formed this single unified chorus to push the idea to consumers --

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: -- cashless is good for everybody. And it's happening across the planet from Australia to India, Europe to North America.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: This isn't limited to Australia.

GLENN: Nobody is paying attention to what's happening in India. I mean, gold prices in India shot through the roof because they didn't go cashless. They just took everything over a 50-dollar bill. And it almost stopped the country. This week, they just did it. This cashless society is closer than any of us think, and if you think somebody is not going to -- they're going to let a crisis go to waste, you're mistaken.

Featured Image: Indian people wait in a queue to withdraw money from a mobile ATM machine in New Delhi on November 15, 2016. India is to use indelible ink to prevent people from exchanging old notes more than once, the government said, a week after the withdrawal of high-value banknotes from circulation in a crackdown on 'black money'. (Photo Credit: CHANDAN KHANNA/AFP/Getty Images)

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Could China OWN our National Parks?

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.