The Dictatorship of the banks : Total Government Capitulation.

So, the excuse for a rigorous reassessment of the practices of the major virtually state owned banks results in no significant change whatsoever. It amounts to complete capitulation by the coalition and proves conclusively that the city, whatever that chimera is, amounts to a form of dictatorship by an unelected and extremely wealthy banking fraternity who are treated as a special interest group with power and influence way beyond any other. It is also clear that this power is not remotely connected to the interests of the people of this country and that it is being allowed to prevail over the government whose job is supposed be to serve the people of this country, not a self-selected elite of financial manipulators.

Why is this government acting in the interests of the banks and not the people ? Speaking of the pitiful results of the consultations with the banks ( why were they involved in consultations at all ? What other group would get such consultation and collaboration prior to measures supposed to curb their behaviour ? ) the chancellor spoke of ' no more retribution ' : what retribution was that ? After a couple of years of slightly less profit after a financial crisis brought about directly because of their amoral and reckless behaviour for which no one has been held to account, other than a few embarrassing moments in front of a select committee, they are back to business as usual. Bonuses to just one of the big largely state owned banks, RBS, total £950 million for the last financial year. Compare this with the capital raised for the so-called Big Society bank : £200 million. No one has forfeited any of their massive individual nor corporate gains.

It is sadly hardly suprising. One of The Supreme Court's first decisions since occupying its new HQ was to overturn the previous two judgements by the High Court that the level of bank charges were unfair practice. This decision was made against a backdrop of the immediate post financial crisis caused by, guess who, the banks and various financial operators that had left many in dire straights. Nevertheless these unelected Law Lords, the same that used to sit in closed sessions in the Lords back rooms, came down in favour of the bank's position that they can effectively charge what they like no matter how excessive or unfair. This clearly indicated that there is no willingness in the Westminster elite to challenge or fundamentally alter the effective stranglehold that the banks have on the economy and there ability to dictate their own terms to individuals and businesses without any public accountability or any requirement to include a social dimension in their arcane money making practices.

The degree to which any dissent from the freewheeling entirely profit driven, unaccountable and deliberately complex banking and financial manipulations that are currently running rings around the regulators and the tax system has been re-marginalised can be seen in such as a recent ' debate ' ( sponsored by the dreadful excuse for a daily London paper the Evening Standard ) under the title 'the financial crisis only proves the strength of Capitalism. ' I also recently read, admittedly in a right wing journal, the Quarterly Review, an article attacking the conclusions of a book, The Spirit Level, that was widely applauded as a necessary analysis of the current situation in developed western countries regarding social financial inequality and its consequences. they were that societies with the worst distribution of resources are the most fractured and least content. Not a particularly extreme view and cogently argued and backed up with facts and information. However this view is ridiculed by the piece.

In the borough where I live the Mayor recently proudly opened a soup kitchen. Meanwhile Ferraris and Land Rovers litter some streets while new basement extensions are being added to the houses. This is in London in 2011 not 1911.

Those that continue to believe in an unfettered free market often claim to be also free of ideology : this is a lie. It may be an incoherent ideology that only explains things its own narrow terms, but it is definitely an ideology. In some respects it closed to a religious belief in that remains a matter of faith rather than anything that can be proven in reality.

In some ways it seems that we are now entering a period where the false Gods of paper profit and a fundamentalist belief in the Capitalist market economy which is increasingly being run bu organisations which are outside of effective government control are being tested to destruction.

Or rather the societies they produce are being tested to destruction. Clearly this does not appear to worry those that continue to gain from the prevailing orthodoxy. But if government fails to intervene other than to temporarily shore up this system and continues to allow the weak to go the wall while the most highly rewarded continue to reek havoc by acting outside the framework of any justifiable social purpose then there will eventually be real retribution.

The actions that took place over the last weekend in branches of Barclays were fairly playful and light-hearted. The indicate that not everyone has accepted this new ' settlement' in complete silence. At some point in the not to distant future, unless there is root and branch change and the mute acceptance of the overt self-interest and scandalous influence of the 'city' : the Corporation of London and its umbilicaly linked residents : the banks and financial institutions, in public policy making is overturned, there will almost certainly be much more serious disorder. Moneylenders and temples come to mind ...

A handful of quotes :

' The City is the home of the devilry of modern finance.'

Herbert Morrison 1917

'Those that control money can pursue a policy at home and abroad contrary to that which has been decided by the people.'

Clement Atlee 1937

' I hope this Egypt thing does not give people in other countries the idea to overthrow governments.'

Alan Sugar ( for it is he )2011