4 ms·

It’s all classed as “Crown Land” - “The Crown” being a nebulous occulted entity that ostensibly belongs to the British Royal family, but in reality is a dark an

It’s all classed as “Crown Land” - “The Crown” being a nebulous occulted entity that ostensibly belongs to the British Royal family, but in reality is a dark and esoteric form of trust run as a private company from the City of London - not part of the UK proper, and a law unto itself within the original Roman square mile of London not conquered by William the Conqueror…ie The King/Queen has to ask for the permission of the Lord Mayor of The City (not Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London) to enter it. It’s like a bit of a cabal that uses smoke and mirrors to hide the nature of its ownership of whole swathes of the Earth, while pretending to act in the name and interests of the British/Soverign. King Charles in reality/personally only owns a few estates like Sandringham in Norfolk and Balmoral in Scotland, as well as the Dutchy of Cornwall now recently passed to Prince William. Hence it’s a little mistaken to label the huge top block listed as belonging to King Charles, it doesn’t at all in actuality, he’s just the front man. The Crown also likely hold ultimate title to all the land listed under the names of all the Australian “landowners” too, when Aboriginal sovereignty was never ceded and is still basically unresolved, because it was taken with extreme force and contract placed on it when it clearly and obviously belonged to the non-contracting people who had been on that land for some 50,000 years.

_yb2s 3y ago
In cases where they technically own this land in foreign countries- if they tried to exercise any property rights at all the "ownership" would immediately be revoked.
- gizajob 3y ago
  Nevertheless they don’t, because they simply don’t have to. You’d be dealing with a power of such age and with such overwhelmingly strong and sticky ideological tentacles that it can’t be undone. But yeah if parts of it, such as islands in the Caribbean, want to become independent and republics they play along, but deals are still done and control still wielded.
  - _yb2s 3y ago
    Do they have any power, and if so how? Just because they are complicated and ancient, doesn't mean they wield any power in modern times. I don't really know much about the crown but in my impression the only "power" they've had for a long time was that of well loved celebrities, and even that seems to have evaporated in recent times. It somewhat seems to me that at some point the power and wealth of the Crown was transferred to various private companies, some of which are still quite wealthy but no longer associated with the Crown.
    - gizajob 3y ago
      Control of the judiciary and their training is a big one. How do you overturn the ideology of justice and power itself? It can’t really be done, because everyone in the system has sworn allegiance not to do so, and they apply cognitive dissonance to the very idea that the root of their authority can be undone. What I’m getting at is that it’s a power so old and embedded in the very fabric of the land it controls that it almost controls thought itself, controls the language and the meaning of language (legalese), prints the money and legitimises its use, allows concepts to become statutes or not. It’s like a web of embedded ideas concerning power and control in the areas where it operates - that’s what The Crown is, essentially, and it uses confusion and divide & rule tactics to hide in plain sight. What I’m saying sounds almost absurd but it’s kind of how it is. You’re dealing with the very idea that a whole territory can be “owned” by writing on dead paper, and everyone embedded in the system agreeing that’s how things are. In the case of Australia, these rules on dead paper were enforced over the living, non-contracting people already there. But the dead paper is backed with guns and extreme force, and makes for a neater world once it’s running. Brit-ish means “men of the covenant/contract” in Hebrew - the covenant with God to go and conquer the world in His name and enforce it with the same kind of dead-paper laws as found in His book. This trumps living people just “on” the land. And as for the sea…
      - _yb2s 3y ago
        For example, if you think the Crown still wields real power in Australia, could they today go to some remote Aboriginal community they supposedly "own," and tell those people to clear out so they can build a big resort, and pocket the profits? If they tried that there would be massive outrage, and immediate action to leave the Commonwealth. Yet relatively small construction firms pull this sort of thing successfully everyday, all around the world. It would seem to me, those ordinary construction firms each have more real power than the Crown. Neom in Saudi Arabia is also an example where this was actually done in modern times, showing that The House of Saud wields massive power. Your assertion seems to be that the Crown is so powerful that they don't need to actually do anything? That sounds like insisting I'm the strongest man in the world, and am so strong I don't need to lift anything. Power is fleeting, and rapidly evaporates when it isn't wielded.
jareklupinski 3y ago
> It’s like a bit of a cabal that uses smoke and mirrors to hide the nature of its ownership of whole swathes of the Earth, while pretending to act in the name and interests of the British/Soverign. I want to read a Dan Brown-style thriller about them
- gizajob 3y ago
  “The Business” by Iain Banks kind of runs with a similar line even though it’s not The Crown per se, more like an old European money power/family, but it would be the thriller you’re looking for.
ttepasse 3y ago
The Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster are not really land ownership. The Prince of Wales and the Monarch respectively receive the income, which is not nothing, but the land and commercial estates are held in trust, afair.
- gizajob 3y ago
  Yeah but kind of the same thing innit, although the Crown is probably several steps removed higher up the chain. Those Duchys the controller of the trust is certainly the beneficial owner ie The Prince of Wales. God only knows who runs and controls the trusts behind the crown, they’re as good as invisible.
feoren 3y ago
> The Crown also likely hold ultimate title ... Some Americans think they don't have to pay income tax because the 16th Amendment (1913) was never properly ratified. Some people think they own a star because they have a certificate that says so. You'll see this kind of analysis in all sort of "secret knowledge" conspiracy-theory-eqsue posts like this. It turns out these hundred-year-old (or much more) technicalities pretty much always handily lose to the modern reality of whatever the people alive today want. Nobody gives a shit if Pope Pius V signed a proclamation in 1571 that gives half of Finland to the Knights Templar, and a group today still claims to be the same Knights Templar, or whatever weird shadow cabals always creep into these discussions. If these "Knights Templar" went to claim Helsinki with that justification, they'd be told to get fucked, and they could do nothing about it. If "The Crown" decided to exercise their rights to this "ultimate title" they hold over all of Australia or whatever, they'd be told to get fucked just the same.
- gizajob 3y ago
  Get the Aussies to tell them to get fucked thinking they own it then. Funny how this doesn’t ever happen.
  - kalupa 3y ago
    If they have no need to why would they?
    - gizajob 3y ago
      What I’m kind of getting at is that they have no need, because the only people who could tell them to get fucked act in the name of The Crown. If Australia becomes a republic and its own place then maybe, but I can’t see it happening.
- _yb2s 3y ago
  Great comment, I think this illustrates a deeper issue- about people misunderstanding what power is and how it works. Power is a dynamic social thing that involves your ability to influence others behavior. Organizations, laws, governments, titles, positions, even money have no inherent power associated with them, and often reflect vestigial/historical power structures rather than the actual power structures at the present moment.
lolinder 3y ago
It's somewhat baffling to me that this comment is still here and hasn't been flagged to death. Does someone have a citation for the claims made here, or are they as tinfoil hat as they sound? I can't find anything like this except for on Conspiracy Wiki, which is... not a great source. Every legitimate source I can find describes "crown land" in the non-UK Commonwealth as effectively just being the Commonwealth version of federal land in the US. (Edit: to clarify, they've mixed in some legitimate truths about some quirky historical artifacts to do with the City of London. I'm objecting to the whole shadowy conspiracy allegations—unless there are some solid citations it doesn't feel appropriate for HN.)
- gizajob 3y ago
  Because it’s not a conspiracy, it’s done in plain sight you’ve just never looked it up. Not everything that is deeply hidden ideologically involves tinfoil-hattery.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    I've been looking for the last 20 minutes and have found no evidence outside of Conspiracy Wiki. You have some legitimate truths about the City of London mixed in with a bunch of things that I can find no sources for. I'm not going to engage further with you without sources, I just wanted to flag this (both literally and figuratively) to try to restore some sanity to this discussion.
    - gizajob 3y ago
      https://youtube.com/shorts/ngmw4HHdWm0?feature=share https://youtube.com/shorts/ngmw4HHdWm0?feature=share Here’s a meme-level bit of it. You might not be looking in the right places.
      - lolinder 3y ago
        That falls in the category of "legitimate truths about the City of London" which you've mingled with blatant conspiracy theories. I want a source for the conspiracy, not for the quirky, vestigial rituals.
euroderf 3y ago
The Guardian (UK) has published excellent articles about the square mile.

_yb2s 3y ago

In cases where they technically own this land in foreign countries- if they tried to exercise any property rights at all the "ownership" would immediately be revoked.

gizajob 3y ago
Nevertheless they don’t, because they simply don’t have to. You’d be dealing with a power of such age and with such overwhelmingly strong and sticky ideological tentacles that it can’t be undone. But yeah if parts of it, such as islands in the Caribbean, want to become independent and republics they play along, but deals are still done and control still wielded.
- _yb2s 3y ago
  Do they have any power, and if so how? Just because they are complicated and ancient, doesn't mean they wield any power in modern times. I don't really know much about the crown but in my impression the only "power" they've had for a long time was that of well loved celebrities, and even that seems to have evaporated in recent times. It somewhat seems to me that at some point the power and wealth of the Crown was transferred to various private companies, some of which are still quite wealthy but no longer associated with the Crown.
  - gizajob 3y ago
    Control of the judiciary and their training is a big one. How do you overturn the ideology of justice and power itself? It can’t really be done, because everyone in the system has sworn allegiance not to do so, and they apply cognitive dissonance to the very idea that the root of their authority can be undone. What I’m getting at is that it’s a power so old and embedded in the very fabric of the land it controls that it almost controls thought itself, controls the language and the meaning of language (legalese), prints the money and legitimises its use, allows concepts to become statutes or not. It’s like a web of embedded ideas concerning power and control in the areas where it operates - that’s what The Crown is, essentially, and it uses confusion and divide & rule tactics to hide in plain sight. What I’m saying sounds almost absurd but it’s kind of how it is. You’re dealing with the very idea that a whole territory can be “owned” by writing on dead paper, and everyone embedded in the system agreeing that’s how things are. In the case of Australia, these rules on dead paper were enforced over the living, non-contracting people already there. But the dead paper is backed with guns and extreme force, and makes for a neater world once it’s running. Brit-ish means “men of the covenant/contract” in Hebrew - the covenant with God to go and conquer the world in His name and enforce it with the same kind of dead-paper laws as found in His book. This trumps living people just “on” the land. And as for the sea…
    - _yb2s 3y ago
      For example, if you think the Crown still wields real power in Australia, could they today go to some remote Aboriginal community they supposedly "own," and tell those people to clear out so they can build a big resort, and pocket the profits? If they tried that there would be massive outrage, and immediate action to leave the Commonwealth. Yet relatively small construction firms pull this sort of thing successfully everyday, all around the world. It would seem to me, those ordinary construction firms each have more real power than the Crown. Neom in Saudi Arabia is also an example where this was actually done in modern times, showing that The House of Saud wields massive power. Your assertion seems to be that the Crown is so powerful that they don't need to actually do anything? That sounds like insisting I'm the strongest man in the world, and am so strong I don't need to lift anything. Power is fleeting, and rapidly evaporates when it isn't wielded.

jareklupinski 3y ago

> It’s like a bit of a cabal that uses smoke and mirrors to hide the nature of its ownership of whole swathes of the Earth, while pretending to act in the name and interests of the British/Soverign. I want to read a Dan Brown-style thriller about them

gizajob 3y ago
“The Business” by Iain Banks kind of runs with a similar line even though it’s not The Crown per se, more like an old European money power/family, but it would be the thriller you’re looking for.

ttepasse 3y ago

The Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster are not really land ownership. The Prince of Wales and the Monarch respectively receive the income, which is not nothing, but the land and commercial estates are held in trust, afair.

gizajob 3y ago
Yeah but kind of the same thing innit, although the Crown is probably several steps removed higher up the chain. Those Duchys the controller of the trust is certainly the beneficial owner ie The Prince of Wales. God only knows who runs and controls the trusts behind the crown, they’re as good as invisible.

feoren 3y ago

> The Crown also likely hold ultimate title ... Some Americans think they don't have to pay income tax because the 16th Amendment (1913) was never properly ratified. Some people think they own a star because they have a certificate that says so. You'll see this kind of analysis in all sort of "secret knowledge" conspiracy-theory-eqsue posts like this. It turns out these hundred-year-old (or much more) technicalities pretty much always handily lose to the modern reality of whatever the people alive today want. Nobody gives a shit if Pope Pius V signed a proclamation in 1571 that gives half of Finland to the Knights Templar, and a group today still claims to be the same Knights Templar, or whatever weird shadow cabals always creep into these discussions. If these "Knights Templar" went to claim Helsinki with that justification, they'd be told to get fucked, and they could do nothing about it. If "The Crown" decided to exercise their rights to this "ultimate title" they hold over all of Australia or whatever, they'd be told to get fucked just the same.

gizajob 3y ago
Get the Aussies to tell them to get fucked thinking they own it then. Funny how this doesn’t ever happen.
- kalupa 3y ago
  If they have no need to why would they?
  - gizajob 3y ago
    What I’m kind of getting at is that they have no need, because the only people who could tell them to get fucked act in the name of The Crown. If Australia becomes a republic and its own place then maybe, but I can’t see it happening.
_yb2s 3y ago
Great comment, I think this illustrates a deeper issue- about people misunderstanding what power is and how it works. Power is a dynamic social thing that involves your ability to influence others behavior. Organizations, laws, governments, titles, positions, even money have no inherent power associated with them, and often reflect vestigial/historical power structures rather than the actual power structures at the present moment.

lolinder 3y ago

It's somewhat baffling to me that this comment is still here and hasn't been flagged to death. Does someone have a citation for the claims made here, or are they as tinfoil hat as they sound? I can't find anything like this except for on Conspiracy Wiki, which is... not a great source. Every legitimate source I can find describes "crown land" in the non-UK Commonwealth as effectively just being the Commonwealth version of federal land in the US. (Edit: to clarify, they've mixed in some legitimate truths about some quirky historical artifacts to do with the City of London. I'm objecting to the whole shadowy conspiracy allegations—unless there are some solid citations it doesn't feel appropriate for HN.)

gizajob 3y ago
Because it’s not a conspiracy, it’s done in plain sight you’ve just never looked it up. Not everything that is deeply hidden ideologically involves tinfoil-hattery.
- lolinder 3y ago
  I've been looking for the last 20 minutes and have found no evidence outside of Conspiracy Wiki. You have some legitimate truths about the City of London mixed in with a bunch of things that I can find no sources for. I'm not going to engage further with you without sources, I just wanted to flag this (both literally and figuratively) to try to restore some sanity to this discussion.
  - gizajob 3y ago
    https://youtube.com/shorts/ngmw4HHdWm0?feature=share https://youtube.com/shorts/ngmw4HHdWm0?feature=share Here’s a meme-level bit of it. You might not be looking in the right places.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      That falls in the category of "legitimate truths about the City of London" which you've mingled with blatant conspiracy theories. I want a source for the conspiracy, not for the quirky, vestigial rituals.

euroderf 3y ago

The Guardian (UK) has published excellent articles about the square mile.