September 2, 2015 By Joseph P. Farrell

When William Staatholder came over from the Netherlands to England to become William III, the first thing he did (well, one of the first things), was to charter a central bank in 1694. It's actually much more complicated than that, but that will have to do for now. That bank was, of course, the Bank of England which, like the American Federal Reserve, was a private company with a monopoly on the nation's credit. Unlike the Federal Reserve, the Old Lady of Theadneedle was nationalized in 1946.

So what's the purpose of this all-too-brief history lesson on central Banksters? Well, it's this intriguing article shared by Mr. G.B., who spotted it on the Old Lady of Threadneedle's website. Yes, the Bank of England has a website, and the mind boggles: what would Montagu Norman think of that? Well, most likely, Norman, who just loved the secrecy of central banking (along with his bosom buddy, Hjalmar Schacht), would be spinning in his grave. Anyway, here's the article:

Building Real Markets for the Good of the People

What intrigues me here is that we may be looking at yet more of those signals from the British oligarchy - this time coming from its very pinnacle - that it is extraordinarily unhappy with the direction Washington has been leading things, particularly with respect to its finance capital laissez faire attitude. After all, the derivatives and housing bubble were largely products of that type of regulatory culture and a culture of a near total collapse of ethics and any genuine concern for a genuine product and creativity: it's all been paper-driven profits. The headline alone suggests that the Old Lady realizes that markets for derivatives and other paper profits are not, in the final analysis "real markets" for "real people."

In short, we have yet another possible signal of the growing disatisfaction within the echelons of British power with the direction things are taking across the pond in the former colonies.

But wait, there's more, as the opening sentences describing the Old Lady's Forum indicate:

In order for markets to regain their social license, it is vital that public authorities and private market participants work together to reverse the tide of ethical drift This cannot be a one-off exercise and needs continuous engagement so that market infrastructure keeps pace with market innovation.

Therefore the Bank will hold an Open Forum this autumn that will bring together all stakeholders in Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities (FICC) markets – policymakers, financial market participants and users, academics, media representatives and wider society. (Enphases added)

Obviously, the City has been at the forefront of "the tide of ethical drift" in finance capital, but not nearly to the extent that it has across the pond. And the opening statement is a frank admission that finance capital has lost the trust of the very middle class investors it once relied upon, and that finance capital has so gutted.

So what do we really have here?

It is either a movement of pretense, designed to look like the world of British finance capital is concerned with the current direction, when it really isn't, and plans to go on reaping profits from the current situation, or it isn't. And if it isn't, then I suggest in my high octane speculation of the day, that it's another strong signal from Great Britain that the "special relationship's" days with Washington and Wall Street are numbered; it's a strong signal that Britain needs real markets dealing in real goods and manufacture and infrastructure, and not the shuffling of paper derivatives and paper profits. Britain's decision to join China's Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank is an indicator, a strong one, that the latter view of the forum is the proper one.

And notably, the date of the formum, November 11, 11/11, has its own obvious resonance, for it was on that day, in that month, at the eleventh hour, that the guns of World War One fell silent in 1918.

See you on the flip side...