Parliament has historically acted as?

Asked Dec 11, 2012
A meeting house for two clubs. One club being men sent by the provincial caucuses to see that, initially the "king", and subsequently Whitehall, was aware of what the provincial caucuses required of central government. The other club being the principal officers of the Church of England, plus various heirs of estates acquired by the captains of the industries of the 18th and 19th centuries, and various heirs of estates awarded by some "king" in recognition of services received or expected.

In 1066 "Tenants-in-chief" received stolen property [Incl. land] in consideration for their use of armed thugs to pacify and control an enslaved population which never managed to eject hated interlopers and squatters. Ceorls [=cheorls] became noted for being "churlish", i. e. resentful and disrespectful of malicious parasites who murdered and mutilated at will; particularly if a serf failed to produce tax money [extortion] on demand, or objected too much when a daughter or wife was being raped, or livestock or grain was being seized for the local lord's private use.

England has not yet recovered from this disaster; however, until the 20th century, Parliament was instrumental in alleviating most of the problems associated with the socio-political structures which evolved out of an army of occupation which "went native" and pretended to be part of the local scene.

However, in the 18th and 19th centuries, relations between the landed classes and the ordinary population were generally more courteous.
Answered Dec 15, 2012
Edited Dec 16, 2012

TIP: If it's not your answer to this question, please click "Leave a Comment" button under the question to communicate with the question owner.