• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if the Liberal split will efect the in fourm elections. It probaly would considering now theres two Liberal groups now.

Yeah, but I reckon the splitters'll get hammered. Course, i thought that about Labour too although, from the support they got i n pre-election debates, not unjustifiably so.
 
I hope you all like economic stats. :eek:o

I decided that the old raw industrial points graph I used to use (in the past couple of updates its been in) was kinda rubbish as it was essentially showing exponential growth. Sooo .... I made a new graph that shows anual % growth in the industrial score. A bit more interesting, and spikey.

Then, I made a small table with each PM and marked out the average annual industrial growth under each PM. It was quite impressive how good Earl Grey was in this - his average growth was 24.7% each year of his 3 year spell in office, thats more than twice the average growth of the next best PM. Admittedly though, this was largely due to the low starting industrial score (in the first year my industry grew by 42%). The worst PM had an average growth figure of 2.5%, that was Lord Spencer - still the only PM to see industry contract in size over the course of a year, overall his 8 year time in office saw pretty severe economic stagnation.

I just thought this was interesting :p, I imagine few other people share my interest in statistics like this. :eek:o
 
I just thought this was interesting :p, I imagine few other people share my interest in statistics like this. :eek:o

Are you kidding!? I LOVE STATS! ESPECIALLY ECONOMIC ONES! I LOVE 'EM TO DEATH! :D
 
Sounds good, have you tried doing GDP (amount of money coming in on 100% effective tax for all?
 
Huh, well that was an interesting turn of events. Can't wait to see how it all pans out.
 
Man what a turn of events. Can't wait to see what happens under this coalition both domestically and abroad.
 
There goes Liberal unity, again. Also +1 on the economic stats, a bunch of charts showing how things went since '36 would make a nice summary; if you're feeling like doing it, of course.
 
If exposure to Labour softens the coalition liberals on social reform and causes them to form their own Social Democrat style party, I'll be insanely happily.
 
If exposure to Labour softens the coalition liberals on social reform and causes them to form their own Social Democrat style party, I'll be insanely happily.

Wouldn't that split the liberals and give the conservatives a greater relative share of power?

Of course, you could argue that the split has already happened...hmm.
 
If exposure to Labour softens the coalition liberals on social reform and causes them to form their own Social Democrat style party, I'll be insanely happily.

What a delightful idea!
 
update, update, update...
 
I hope you all like economic stats. :eek:o

I decided that the old raw industrial points graph I used to use (in the past couple of updates its been in) was kinda rubbish as it was essentially showing exponential growth. Sooo .... I made a new graph that shows anual % growth in the industrial score. A bit more interesting, and spikey.

Then, I made a small table with each PM and marked out the average annual industrial growth under each PM. It was quite impressive how good Earl Grey was in this - his average growth was 24.7% each year of his 3 year spell in office, thats more than twice the average growth of the next best PM. Admittedly though, this was largely due to the low starting industrial score (in the first year my industry grew by 42%). The worst PM had an average growth figure of 2.5%, that was Lord Spencer - still the only PM to see industry contract in size over the course of a year, overall his 8 year time in office saw pretty severe economic stagnation.

I just thought this was interesting :p, I imagine few other people share my interest in statistics like this. :eek:o

Sounds interesting, but because of the widely different starting sizes, you should include absolute growth as well as proportional growth to allow for a better comparison.

EDIT: Oh, and I just spent a couple of hours catching up with the AAR instead of writing an exam paper. So I guess well done with the AAR and shame on me. Looking forward to the update!
 
The Fifth Parliament – 1858-1864

When 41 year old George Julian Harney became the first ever Labour Prime Minister, following successful negotiations with the IPP and rebel Liberal MPs, there seemed to be a greater level of anticipation across the country than there had ever been for a new PM. Some seemed to think he could move mountains and totally transform the country for the better in a few short years whilst others feared that he might lead it to oblivion within months. Whilst some were frustrated at the watered down program for reform and others saw the changing social structure in the country as a threat Harney’s Premiership is generally looked upon as a prosperous and positive period in the history of the British Republic.

Beattie202-2-220tank20circa1860.jpg


During the Labour Coalition’s time in government the British economy flourished. Despite not insignificant tax cuts for the poorest and the abolition of tariffs the Treasury was left with a strong surplus – by 1861 the war debts left over from Disraeli’s war with the Turks had been paid and state coffers started to build up. This excess money was invested, to a much greater degree than many Liberals would have liked, in Britain’s industry – offsetting any declines in private investment. Whilst factories rapidly grew up across the country and the old unemployment problems in Ireland were finally dealt with (although only after the mass investment of government funds) the British rail network was entirely modernised.

indgrowth.jpg


Average Annual Growth Rate
Earl Grey 24.7%
Lord Spencer 2.5%
Earl Russell 6.92%
Disraeli 7.8%
Harney 10.1%


Harney’s Premiership actually saw the highest rates of British industrial growth since Earl Grey’s tenure. Whilst past Prime Ministers had seen sudden spikes in growth at the starts of their times in office due to general exuberance and confidence amongst investors in the new government the Labour government benefited from the support of the state to keep growth high – reducing reliance on private investors. The mixture of state intervention and the free market seemed to be an idle combination for powering the British economy forward.

V2_61.gif


Perhaps the single most important part of the Labour manifesto had been the party’s promise of social reforms to improve the lives of the working class. In this field Harney did seem to greatly frustrate his supporters. Whilst improved subsidies for healthcare and the institution of a pension for widows and those injured in warfare were greeted with approval the legislation on a 14 hour day was seen as a betrayal. Especially since the Commune the 8 hour day had become intrinsically linked to the labour movement as a whole and was regarded as the party’s most important promise by many thousands of workers who slaved away in factories for most of their waking hours. The sacrifice of the 8 hour day for Liberal support seemed to be a grave error, only promises that the 8 hour day would be at the centre of the Labour manifesto for the next election prevented frustration turning into outright anger against the Labour leadership.

In international affairs both Labour and their Liberal rebel allies seemed to agree on the importance of isolation from European conflicts. This policy would be put to the test by the Memel War of 1859-1861.

bavarian_troops_of_the_prussian_army_storming_bicetre_franco_prussian_war_1870_1230624.jpg


In 1859, following a skirmish near the Prussian city of Memel, the Russian Empire declared war on the Prussian led North German Confederation. Within days the Netherlands, Spain and Sardinia Piedmont had joined Russia in declaring war on the Prussians. The rise of Prussia as a major player in central Europe and the growing threat that a weak Austria would not be able to prevent the Prussians from gaining dominance over all Germany had helped galvanise anti-Prussian sentiment in Europe. This meant that when war broke out with Russia Europe’s league of second rate powers pounced on the opportunity to improve their standing in the continent and please their more powerful backers.

The Prussians seemed to be in an impossible position with large Russian armies invading both East Prussia and Silesia, Dutch forces entering Western Hannover and a mixed Spanish-Piedmontese assault on Holstein whilst all its major ports faced blockade. The Prussians were badly outnumbered, without allies and faced assaults from 4 directions. Defeat seemed certain.

Lignedefeu16August.jpg


But it is under conditions such as these that the great can truly flourish. The Prussian armies were much better organised and equipped whilst they had high moral from the sense that they were defending their homeland. The same could not be said of the armies that were sent to face them. But perhaps the most important advantage the Prussians had was their impressive leadership under a great array of Generals who outmatched the opposing commanders in almost every respect. One by one the enemy armies were utterly crushed before Prussian forces actually began to invade both Poland and the Netherlands.

V2_65.gif


Fearing that a Prussian offensive in the Spring of 1861 might capture Warsaw the Russians managed to bring Prussia to the negotiating table and secured peace in exchange for the Prussian annexation of around 1/3 of the Netherlands’ continental territory. In the months following the victory the South German states abandoned Austria and instead looked to Prussia for leadership. Germany might have united under the victorious Prussian King had France not rattled its sabre at the prospect. Now France seemed to be the only roadblock to a German unification – it was around this time that Britain started to look to alter its relationship to the continent.

V2_63.gif


At the same time several worrying changes occurred on the Indian sub-continent. Portuguese military expeditions established a large colonial Empire in Western India – dividing the British colony in Gujarat from the areas under British influence in the South. In Delhi the French secured the support of the Mughal Emperor – giving them total dominance over the Ganges Valley. The British Imperialist lobby was incensed at the failure of the British government to do anything in response to this weakening of British power in the country it once called its own.

446px-John_C_Breckinridge-04775-restored.jpg


Meanwhile changes in American politics threatened the old certainties of the BADF policy. Following the Manhattan Commune of 1857 American politics took a major shift to the right. Democrat President Buchanan began a program of repression of Trade Unions and any sign of socialist activity in the hopes of preventing something like the Commune from ever happening again. As the issue of slavery died away and the issue of anti-socialism came to the prominence the highly conservative Democrat John C Beckinridge was elected by a landslide in 1860 – destroying his opponent Abraham Lincoln at the polls (Lincoln standing on an abolitionist and rather liberal ticket). Whilst things had been icy between the Labour government and the previous American administration, Beckinridge went so far as to openly provoke the British and frequently condemned supposed ‘’dictatorial tendencies of the violent and socialist Prime Minister in London’’.

With Prussia rising as a threat in Europe and friendship with America on ice the BADF Doctrine was dead. Perhaps the greatest failing of the Labour government was its inability to come up with an alternative.

marx.gif


Feeling secure from physical threat after the Labour electoral victory in October 1858 communists from across Europe (with the largest foreign delegations coming from France and Germany) gathered in London to found the International Workingmen’s Association (often called the First International). Whilst in early meetings Karl Marx, who had a not insubstantial following in Britain, and Engels proved to be the most dominant figures and looked like they might be able to assert their influence over the entire organisation from 1860 the IWA already seemed to be on the road to division. On one hand the Marxists and on the other hand the Anarchists (led by Bakunin) seemed divided on a multitude of issues. Whilst the Proudhonists (Mutualist Anarchists), Owenites (a largely British based brand of Utopianism) and Blanquists (a French group that believed revolution should come through a sort of military coup and cared little for building popular support) lowly weakened as the International met each year the Collectivist Anarchists and the Marxists only brought larger numbers to each meeting every year and only grew more opposed. The International had a significant impact on Britain; it was through its meetings that Anarchist ideas first started to make an impact in Britain whilst as many as 19 Labour MPs would take part in International meetings between 1858 and 1863. These revolutionary communist ideologies were continuing to grow in strength and popularity back in Britain – intensifying the internal conflict within the Labour Party.

However, it was not just the Left wing of British politics that started to radicalise during the Labour Coalition’s time in power. In the aftermath of electoral failure Benjamin Disraeli abandoned the hard-line anti-socialist policies that the Conservative Party had fought the 1858 election with and moved towards a more moderate position in the hopes of renewing the party’s electability. This move would alienate a large number of ‘High Tories’ and other strongly anti-socialist elements within the party whilst it would also contribute towards a growing counter-culture movement within the working class.

Whilst one might not believe it from Labour’s total domination of in elections of working class areas and the image it put out of itself as the Party for the entire class there was in fact a substantial number of British workers who were opposed to the Labour Party and to the ideas of socialism. These men felt alienated from the new society that seemed to be emerging from the combination of socialist ideas and industrialisation, they were frustrated at what was perceived as a dovish foreign policy and a weakening of the beloved Empire (the creation of the Irish Assembly in 1858 was very unpopular in many parts of Britain), they were angry at supposed neglect for the armed forces and they believed that respect for the old certainties of family, Church and nationhood were fading away.

jarrow.jpg


In late 1859 almost 1,000 working class Britons attended a rally in East London where the British National Union was proclaimed. Whilst in the early days the BNU seemed to be little more than a front for thugs looking to beat up Jews, Irish workers and Communists it started to become very popular with retired soldiers who felt dishevelled upon their return to civilian life. These more respectable figures started to transform the group into a more organised political party, by 1860 some officers had started to associate with the group and it seemed to be on the road to respectability. Indeed, later that year a number of the more extreme Tory MPs in Parliament gave public support for the BNU and by 1861 it seemed the group was on its way to becoming a working class pressure group within the Conservative Party. However, in 1862 everything would change.

Alexandermilne.jpg


In March 1862 Admiral Alexander Milne declared his support for the group and within a few short months effectively took it over. Milne was one of the highest ranking members of the British Admiralty and being in his 50s was far younger than most of his peers (by this stage most high ranking British Admirals were over 70 with the most senior being in their 80s and 90s). Having fought in the Civil War and numerous colonial conflicts by the outbreak of the War with the Turks Milne had become rather well known amongst the British public. His command of the British Fleet in the Dardanelles Campaign hurtled him to celebrity status amongst the British public. His support for the BNU seemed to change everything; suddenly the group’s popularity started to soar and through his ambitious leadership and a substantial amount of his own funds the group made a concerted effort to expand beyond London. Following public criticism from Disraeli, Milne decided to openly declare the BNU’s independence. In 1863 12 Tory MPs left the Conservative Party and became the Parliamentary presence of the BNU. Milne and the Union also devised a statement of founding principles:
• The opposition to socialism in all its forms wherever it might appear
• The protection of the British Empire and of Britain’s Glory
• Support for the British armed forces and all who have served for their country
• The creation of an 8 hour day for the workers of Britain and the protection of their rights
• The protection of British sovereignty in Ireland
• The protection of the Protestant faith and of Protestant values
• The restoration of the British Monarchy

The BNU seemed to be totally different to anything that had been seen in British politics in the past.

V2_69.gif


Whilst for most of Labour’s tenure the armed forces were neglected with wages remaining stagnant, in some cases even falling, and nothing being invested into military expansion the government did support the construction of a new fleet of some 30 ironclad warships –the most modern naval force on earth. This went some way in satisfying the growing voices of uncertainty over the increasing strength of Britain’s rivals.

chinawest.jpg


During the early 1860s China went through a radical wave of changes. In 1857 the Empress Dowager Cixi was murdered and China fell into the hands of the reformers. Over the course of the next few years they would wholeheartedly embrace Westernisation as China rapidly started to transform. Nowhere was the Westernisation more thorough than in the Chinese army and administration. The modernisation of this Imperial behemoth totally altered the balance of power in Asia – Britain’s trading interests in Southern and Eastern Asia now appeared to be under threat.

V2_67.gif


In late 1863 an ironic victory was won for British Imperialism as the least Imperialistic British government for decades secured one of the greatest prizes of the New British Empire as competing European interests were finally defeated and Egypt came under British dominance. There was already talk in some quarters of the construction of a Canal to link the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, but technology had not quite caught up with the ambitions of Britain’s imperial entrepreneurs.

cardwell.jpg


The 6 years of Coalition government was a quite peculiar time for the divided Liberal Party. Whilst Russell had crossed the flour and joined Labour in government neither he nor his rebels ever officially left the Liberal Party and the main part of the Party decided not to force the issue – not wanting the alienate those who might want to rejoin them. When Palmerston died in 1862 the ‘Independent Liberals’ (those out of government) had a real chance to reunite the Party. Gladstone, a man who appealed to both the Right and Left of the Party, attempted to push his way into the leadership and might have managed to heal the rift. However, it would be the rather uninspiring but strongly rightwing Viscount Cardwell who took charge of the Independent Liberals. This effectively guaranteed that the Independent Liberals and Coalition Liberals would go into the next election as two separate groups.

The Harney administration sometimes divides opinion. The Labour Coalition is criticised for its fumblings on the issue of the 8 hour day, for a somewhat lacklustre foreign policy and for a failure to react to the emergence of the BNU. On the other hand the Harney administration won Egypt, built the world’s first fleet of ironclad warships, secured a broad range of social reforms and ensured the highest rates of industrial growth for 20 years.
 
MONSTER UPDATE!

That filled up suprisingly fast so I didn't get a chance to talk about as much internal politics and especially Ireland as I would have liked to. :/

I hope you guys are interested in the new British National Union, I think it could become an intruiging player in British politics. Thanks to oberstbrooksy for his advice in making it. ;)

I initially planned to have Gladstone come in and sort out the Liberal mess. However, I decided that it might be a bit more interesting to have the Independent and Coalition Liberals stand seperately in the next election - to make it more interesting and to see how Liberal supporters really lean in relation to whether the Liberals should look Left or Right for coalition allies (because it seems almost inevitable that they will have the balance of power in coalitions :p).

Let me know what you think of these couple of things. :)

ps 2 governments in a row lasting the full 6 years :eek:!?! Britain seems to be becoming stable. :eek:
 
Hmm, some kind of pseudo-fascists? Scary. Shame on the slow pace of reform by labour, I'm hoping for a strong left within the party to keep the course towards socialism. The revolution ousted the old political dictatorship of the monarchy, now we need to defeat the economic dictatorship of capitalism! The Commune should be a symbol and a goal for all workers.

I'm guessing though that more radical socialist ideas will have to wait, since there wasn't much pressure from the workers within this update, or is that just because you didn't have room for it, ATTACK77?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.