On Friday, British Prime Minister Theresa May will become the first world leader to meet with Donald Trump since he was sworn in as U.S. President. The meeting breathes new life into the long-standing “special relationship” between the United States and Britain, with Mr. Trump already calling her “his Maggie,” drawing comparisons to the political bond forged between Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. -The Globe and Mail
President Trump and Ms. May had a press conference to discuss some of their conversations and seemed to indicate it had gone well on a number of levels.
But really it doesn’t matter so much because the real special relationship is not so much between Trump and May as it between Washington and London’s City.
It is The City of London that has decided, at least partially, that Britain and America have a special relationship. That special relationship involves to some extent London’s city telling America what to do and even how to do it.
Despite the many political differences between Ms. May and Mr. Trump – at first glance significantly larger than those between Mr. Reagan and Ms. Thatcher – both leaders would welcome a constructive partnership that builds on the traditional ties between the two countries, ties founded on demographics, religion, culture, law, politics and economics.
For Ms. May, the rekindling of this special relationship, in a post-Brexit context, would potentially add some credence to her aspirations for a new “global Britain,” while Mr. Trump’s as-yet untested credentials as a leader on the world stage would be burnished.
We can see from this that the special relationship is potentially good for both leaders. But if neither leader wanted a special relationship, the relationship would still exist. The leaders would be gone.
That’s right. One way or another, the people at the top would be encouraged to leave if they didn’t believe in the special relationship. The special relationship is that important.
It is a relationship based on the influence of top bankers in The City of London over the American financial system. It is not necessarily clear who these bankers are. They may be the Rothschilds or they may be other less well known families.
But it is a relationship based on the power that the City has around the world.
The City’s power goes back thousands of years. It may have begun in Sumer or Babylon. Then the neolithic culture that spawned it was found in Egypt and then Rome. After Rome, it was heavily integrated with the Holy Roman Empire and then with Venice.
After Venice, the City migrated to England and the square mile in London that comprised the Roman part of the City of London.
The City was primarily financial in nature and comprised primarily of banking. Its banking nature was reinforced in the 15th century when it became involved with central banking. It offered the King the ability to make war and forgave his debts in return for printing official bills.
Since then the City has only deepened its relationship with central banking and the counties that have central banks. The relationship is rarely spoken about. But it apparently runs around the world.
In Afghanistan, once the Americans came to power, they started a central bank though it doesn’t do much of anything. There is even a central bank of Libya, though the country itself is in a state of collapse.
Often as we can see it is America that helps create the foreign central bank. But ultimately central banking is run out of London’s City to a greater or lesser degree. This gives London’s City enormous, often unspoken, power.
Again, London’s City is not the same as London itself. It is a square mile within London that operates with its own rules. There are at least two other regions that are similar. One is Washington DC, and the other is the Vatican.
A fourth region may be added to these three. That would be Jerusalem.
But the City of London is where it all originates from what we can tell. And each central bank has a monopoly orientation. Thus the monopoly orientation of central banking is also encouraged by the City.
Conclusion: The City of London is at least partially behind the special relationship between England and America. The City is also behind monopoly central banking around the world. The special relationship is not necessarily objectionable but monopoly central banking most certainly is.