UK judges: Gov't must hand over Charles' letters … The British government must hand over confidential letters to ministers from Prince Charles, judges ruled Tuesday – a decision that could shed light on the opinionated heir to the throne's attempts to lobby politicians. – Fremont Tribune

Dominant Social Theme: The British are a free people and nothing more needs to be said.

Free-Market Analysis: So perhaps the British are about to learn more regarding their ruling class than they've learned in the recent past. This is important because in some ways the British – the English especially – have evolved into a quite un-free people.

The Parliamentary system, the Magna Carta, the tradition of British classical liberalism, even the industrial revolution itself all helped consolidate the rights of the British freeman.

But Britain still remains a class-riven society and the later 20th century and 21st century have not done much to loosen the stifling elements of tradition and class – the twin reins that the British elites use to guide their countrymen in certain directions.

Much of what Britain is today little resembles a free society. It is a country where you can go to prison for defending your own home or even putting trash in the wrong bin. And it is a country that has more public cameras per capita than any other in the world … and where a prominent judge feels free to refer to burglars as "courageous."

From the BBC, 10 September 2012: "A judge in the north east of England is facing an investigation after telling a burglar that his crime took a huge amount of courage. The judge's comments have led to widespread criticism …"

This sort of thing is not accidental. The British ruling classes have embarked on a fairly obvious effort to keep the larger British population dumbed down via ineffective public schools and impoverished via high taxes and destructive regulation.

As a result, society itself has turned dysfunctional and its appendages, like justice, are eventually rendered dysfunctional as well. This is seen prominently in money, where British elites control the financial "City" as well as England's Central Bank.

It is through financial power that British elites obtain most of their control. The Crown itself is said to be worth trillions in putative land ownership in Canada and elsewhere throughout the Commonwealth.

But none of this is referred to in polite society. The ruling class maneuvers secretly, via memos and secret meetings. Here's some more from the article:

Three judges on a freedom of information tribunal decided that it is in the public interest "for there to be transparency as to how and when Prince Charles seeks to influence government."

The ruling comes in response to requests by The Guardian newspaper, which has been asking for seven years for the letters to be released.

Several government departments had refused to divulge them, arguing it might breach unwritten constitutional rules on the relationship between the monarchy and the government, and that it would discourage the prince from speaking frankly.

In Britain's constitutional monarchy, the monarch has no political power, but meets regularly with prime ministers and other senior politicians to talk about events of the day. The heir to the throne is entitled to be kept informed of government activities as part of his or her preparations for the throne.

The idea that the British monarchy has no real power is constantly reported. But of course it has power. One of its main functions is as a distraction from the further Money Power exercised in the City and by the Bank of England.

It is British Money Power – the old families and ancient money of the City – that empowers the Crown, sustains the central bank and rigidly supports the stratified and dysfunctional larger society.

It is England, basically, that birthed the world's modern finance – 150 central banks all printing money from nothing. The world's insolvency is the bitter fruit of the spreading of British finance.

Here's to big revelations from the release of Charles's memos. Anything that reduces the straightjacket of the British hierarchy is to be desired. The British themselves have suffered from this state of affairs and so too has the larger West.