City of London and Ireland

Karloff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
6,952
The City of London is about 600 acres in the centre of London. It elects it's own Mayor (London has two Mayors) and has asserted astonishing priveleges and independence throughout it's millenia long history, even over the Queen in which she has to perform some rituals before being allowed to enter, suggesting a semi sovereign statelet inside Britain, William the Conqueror granted it's citizens special rights above serfdom unlike everywhere else.
It contains the concentration of the imperialistic and capitalist wealth of Britain, all the financial elite are there as is the UK media (fleet street) but it's power is not some new thing resulting from British industrialisation but comes from long history as the Financial Times explains....

The City of London is known for its invisible earnings, as a hub of financial services such as insurance, commodities trading and investment. What is less well known is that the City of London Corporation is the oldest continuous democratic commune in the world. Two thousand years of self-government is quite an achievement. For no one to really notice is perhaps the greatest achievement of all. Invisible earnings, invisible power.


While laying waste to the rest of the country, William the Conqueror “came friendly” to London, recognised the liberties of its citizens, pledged to defend their freedoms and fortified the City against barbarian attack. London’s special status within the constitution was upheld by a stream of charters and privileges that protected the City of London from external interference.

In Magna Carta, the 1215 charter of rights between King John and the barons, not only are the rights of the “whole body” of citizens respected but the mayor of London was designated as one of two guarantors charged with ensuring that the Crown kept its side of the bargain.

The Corporation of London, which announced itself as a “commune” in 1191, was recognised as one of the great institutions of the Ancient Constitution, with a place only one step below the sovereign. The combination of wealth, functioning democratic and legal institutions and an effective system of civic militias meant the Crown could never subordinate the City of London to its rule. London taxed itself, judged itself and governed itself.
The City of London resembles a State within a State with power to rival the Monarchs or even overthrow them (if history is a guide). But the most astonishing thing is how much of a concentrated enemy to Ireland this tiny place was (and i would expect to all the colonised populations).

In 1632 the crown asked the Corporation to extend its privileges and institutions to the new areas of London, but the Corporation refused. Instead of expanding and extending its democratic practices and legal protections to the new inhabitants living without civic status in the suburbs of Westminster, Clerkenwell, Whitechapel and Southwark, the City of London turned its back on London as a city. The “great refusal” of 1637 defined the modern history of London. Instead of seeking to integrate the new arrivals, the Corporation put large resources into transferring its unwanted excess population to the Ulster Plantation and the Corporation of Londonderry, which were established for that purpose. The bowler hats and umbrellas of the Orange Orders derive from their sponsorship by the Corporation of London.

The Stuarts made two serious attempts at London reform. One led to the execution of the king, the other – an attempt by Charles II to establish that the monarchy was the source of the Corporation’s authority – led to the Stuarts’ replacement by William and Mary, whose Second Charter in 1690 leaves no doubt as to who were the greatest beneficiaries of the Glorious Revolution.
All the calamitous changes in Ireland that subjugated a once free country to a brutalised colony appear to have been dreamed up here from the coups of William and Cromwell to the Ulster Plantation. The British indifference to the famine probably has it's roots there too. In Ireland we tend to assign blame to Britain as if it was a normal country where power was centralised to one king/queen or parliament but was that a really fair assessment? Clement Atlee said "over and over again we have seen that there is in this country another power than that which has its seat at Westminster." And Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli said "The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." It would seem this the heart of British financial power and privelege is the best place to go to look for those persons. How different might Irish and British history be if the latter had been a normal country without this separate concentration of hidden power and privelege, this... tumor (metaphor fits because a tumor feeds itself at the expense of productive tissue)? How different might the modern age itself be, the article accuses the City of being behind the transfer of wealth from the rest of the economy to the financial sector as a result of the 2008 crash. I think given this long history and expression of power that Brexit or no Brexit, this thing is moving nowhere.

I find it fascinating that so little attention is focused on this square mile - instead attention is diverted to the entity called 'Britain'.
 


rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
I find it fascinating that so little attention is focused on this square mile - instead attention is diverted to the entity called 'Britain'.
Your whole premise falls down because the City is not a state within a state. It is an area of the capital. It is governed by Parliament and the laws of the land like anywhere else in the country.

If you commit a crime against someone in the square mile you will soon discover it is the British court system that would try you and British law that you would be convicted under.

You're just over thinking stuff.
 

ainm_eile

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2016
Messages
611
Your whole premise falls down because the City is not a state within a state. It is an area of the capital. It is governed by Parliament and the laws of the land like anywhere else in the country.

If you commit a crime against someone in the square mile you will soon discover it is the British court system that would try you and British law that you would be convicted under.

You're just over thinking stuff.
"State within a state" is a phrase the OP used instead of the more correct, but clinical sounding "fiefdom within a state".

He then discusses "white collar" crimes of which the LIBOR scandal would be a modern example, and you sagely refute him by discussing what happens if you hit someone slap. And ignore his implicit argument that the law of the land can be used as a vehicle for facilitating lawlessness.
 

stopdoingstuff

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
22,399
Your whole premise falls down because the City is not a state within a state. It is an area of the capital. It is governed by Parliament and the laws of the land like anywhere else in the country.

If you commit a crime against someone in the square mile you will soon discover it is the British court system that would try you and British law that you would be convicted under.

You're just over thinking stuff.
Unless the crime is tax evasion. Otherwise I agree.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
"State within a state" is a phrase the OP used instead of the more correct, but clinical sounding "fiefdom within a state".
It's good that you are able to speak so confidently on what he really meant.

It does not matter what terminology you choose to employ - the City is subject to the law as laid down by the British Parliament. That those laws may have been broken does not alter that fact.

It does not make it's own laws & is nor is it exempt from the law of the land - therefore the premise of the OP is a false one to begin with.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
Unless the crime is tax evasion. Otherwise I agree.
It is still subject to British tax law though - the fact they are broken is really a matter Parliament should & could deal with if it wished - thus kind of proving my point in a roundabout way.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
All the calamitous changes in Ireland that subjugated a once free country to a brutalised colony appear to have been dreamed up here from the coups of William and Cromwell to the Ulster Plantation. The British indifference to the famine probably has it's roots there too...
So it was do with the City and nothing to do with the British parliament then? Any support for that? Any examples of what you mean?

I mean to be honest the language you use is very vague and wishy washy - 'appears they...', 'Probably has it's roots here...', 'It would seem this...'

Anything concrete before you & the usual suspects launch into full on conspiracy mode?

as is the UK media (fleet street)
The vast majority of the press moved out of Fleet street a long time ago, btw. Unless you count the Metro, Jewish Chronicle & the Beano as being major players in our media then it's a media ghost town.
 
Last edited:

ainm_eile

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2016
Messages
611
It's good that you are able to speak so confidently on what he really meant.

It does not matter what terminology you choose to employ - the City is subject to the law as laid down by the British Parliament. That those laws may have been broken does not alter that fact.

It does not make it's own laws & is nor is it exempt from the law of the land - therefore the premise of the OP is a false one to begin with.
If a legal system consistently upholds lawlessness, then it correspondingly loses legitimacy.
 

gerhard dengler

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
46,739
All the calamitous changes in Ireland that subjugated a once free country to a brutalised colony appear to have been dreamed up here from the coups of William and Cromwell to the Ulster Plantation
This might be of interest to you

In 1632 the crown asked the Corporation to extend its privileges and institutions to the new areas of London, but the Corporation refused. Instead of expanding and extending its democratic practices and legal protections to the new inhabitants living without civic status in the suburbs of Westminster, Clerkenwell, Whitechapel and Southwark, the City of London turned its back on London as a city. The “great refusal” of 1637 defined the modern history of London. Instead of seeking to integrate the new arrivals, the Corporation put large resources into transferring its unwanted excess population to the Ulster Plantation and the Corporation of Derry, which were established for that purpose. The bowler hats and umbrellas of the Orange Orders derive from their sponsorship by the Corporation of London.
 

ant

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
748
...sham tour guides telling their little flock 'Temple Bar was named after William Temple...:lol:'
 

ant

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
748
The Phoenix Park - what goes on within those walls we'll never know...
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,619
Have you heard of the City Remembrancer?
Indeed, from your own article:

The Corporation in general, and the Remembrancer in particular, have no power to overrule Parliament, which has the right to make legislation affecting the City. For example, the Corporation needed to request a private Act of Parliament in 2002 to modernise its system of local elections;
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,966
Controversial claim by George Monbiot

the Corporation exists outside many of the laws and democratic controls which govern the rest of the United Kingdom. The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority.
In one respect at least the Corporation acts as the superior body: it imposes on the House of Commons a figure called the remembrancer: an official lobbyist who sits behind the Speaker's chair and ensures that, whatever our elected representatives might think, the City's rights and privileges are protected.
The City of London will remain outside the authority of parliament. Domestic and foreign banks will be permitted to vote as if they were human beings, and their votes will outnumber those cast by real people. Its elected officials will be chosen from people deemed acceptable by a group of medieval guilds …
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
Lovely thread where the residents of an island which based its economy on being an off shore tax haven get arsey about a country which is a lynch pin of the international financial system.

Now good old socialists like me are genuinely wary about the City of London.

Most of the crap on here sounds like envy.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top