by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:

If you’re following the development of pushback in the individual American states against the lunatic plans of Mr. Globalooney for central bank digital currencies, or for that matter, if you’ve been following the several American states initiating state bullion depositories and passing bullion-as-money laws, then you’ll want to pay very close attention to what just happened in my home state of South Dakota, and to what was just signed into law by its Governor, Mrs. Kristi Noem (this article courtesy of W.G.):


Now, as bills go, it is similar in nature to such bills we have seen working their way through other state legislatures.  There is, however, something in this bill that really caught my attention, and it’s a harbinger of “more to come”, and suggests something that I strongly suspect is also in the works, and being privately and very secretly coordinated between them:

Yesterday (Feb 23, 2024, Ed.), South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem signed two bills into law to reject a central bank digital currency (CBDC), removing it from the definition of money in the state and banning the state from accepting it as payment.

Rep. Mike Stevens and a bipartisan coalition of cosponsors introduced House Bill 1163 (HB1163) and House Bill 1161 (HB1161). HB1163 expressly excludes a CBDC from the definition of money in South Dakota, and HB1161 prohibits state agencies from accepting CBDC as a form of payment.


Under the South Dakota Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), “money” means “a medium of exchange currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries.”

HB1163 adds “The term is not intended and cannot be construed to create or adopt a central bank digital currency” to that definition.

The House previously approved the measure by a 44-21 vote. Last week, the Senate concurred with a vote of 27-6.

Similar legislation excluding CBDC from the definition of money has already been signed as law in Indiana and Florida. (Emphasis added

You’ll have guessed what really grabbed my attention because I have italicized it: The term “money” for the purposes of the South Dakota bill “includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries.” This is exactly the move I have been predicting would happen for some time if the bullion-depository and currency laws of various states were to have any teeth. Units of account are used by banks that deal in large amounts of discrete and different currencies on a regular basis. In short, it is a mechanism for convenient international financial clearing. For a state to make such units of account and to recognize them as legitimate money in the context of banning such recognition to a central bank digital currency means nothing less than that the way is now clear, for South Dakota, under its own law, to enter into such agreements on the value and definition of a unit of account with other states, like Texas.

In other words, South Dakota and its governor have taken a huge step, for such units of account can be used, for example, to settle accounts between those states for South Dakota’s sending of its national guard to Texas to assist Texas in management of the border crisis… and on and on we could go.

Read More @