Gov. Reform Parliamentarism should give resistance to Revolution Spread

  • 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.

PurpulaPhoenixum53

General
54 Badges
Oct 8, 2016
1.777
2.965
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Imperator: Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Imperator: Rome - Magna Graecia
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
Title. Think I would make sense as the people would have legal way to show their displeasure at the government, rather than overthrowing it. It also gives the reform a bit more importance late game.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Upvote 0
Then technically the English monarchy should give near immunity to it.
(I have no idea how the Papacy fits in this, but maybe that too)

Agreed. At most 75% immunity to it.
 
To the best of my knowledge, England was one of relatively few countries that did spawn their own home-grown revolutionary movements in the French Revolution era, namely in Ireland (Wolfe Tone & that lot). A lot of more absolutist countries (Prussia, for example) did better than parliamentary England in that regard. So I don't see any historical justification for this idea.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
To the best of my knowledge, England was one of relatively few countries that did spawn their own home-grown revolutionary movements in the French Revolution era, namely in Ireland (Wolfe Tone & that lot). A lot of more absolutist countries (Prussia, for example) did better than parliamentary England in that regard. So I don't see any historical justification for this idea.

Ah yes, the Irish Rebellion! I wouldn't really consider this a "revolution" by the games defenition. It would be closer to a separatist revolt.

Edit: Grammar
 
Last edited:
To the best of my knowledge, England was one of relatively few countries that did spawn their own home-grown revolutionary movements in the French Revolution era, namely in Ireland (Wolfe Tone & that lot). A lot of more absolutist countries (Prussia, for example) did better than parliamentary England in that regard. So I don't see any historical justification for this idea.

Ireland and England are not the same country, but technicalities aside, the anti-British sentiment in Ireland exists since around the Norman era when Ireland became the weaker realm for the first time since the early Iron Age, and everything in between Cromwell's genocide of the Irish to the Troubles was more separatist and religious revolts and rebellions in nature than a proper revolution as the ones in America or France. One interesting example would be the Irish-born Duke of Wellington's famous quote: A man can be born in a stable and still not be an animal.
The Celtic revival of the late XIX century with Oscar Wilde and such gets closer to what one could call a revolution, but it does not take the depth needed for it, and it stayed as a cultural movement more than a political one.

The only things in British history that could have the word Revolution applied to it were rarely ever political in that sense, with the notable exception of the Glorious Revolution/English Civil War and the Jacobite Uprisings it caused. Other than that, you would have to go back to the Magna Carta and that type of thing.

And before anyone asks, excluding the Tudor era because religion is portrayed differently in game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Nah. I mean the English had a parliament and still cut the head off their own king more than a hundred years earlier than the French did. They even had a army general rise to absolute dictatorship in Cromwell mirroring Napoleon in many ways. I don't think there is any government invented by human minds that is immune to revolutions and such. As a matter of fact if England and France had traded socioeconomic conditions (ie enlightenment ideas spreading + financial bankruptcy + corrupt/incompetent leadership + angry peasants) I don't particularly see any governmental magic that would inherently have saved England any more than France.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Nah. I mean the English had a parliament and still cut the head off their own king more than a hundred years earlier than the French did. They even had a army general rise to absolute dictatorship in Cromwell mirroring Napoleon in many ways. I don't think there is any government invented by human minds that is immune to revolutions and such. As a matter of fact if England and France had traded socioeconomic conditions (ie enlightenment ideas spreading + financial bankruptcy + corrupt/incompetent leadership + angry peasants) I don't particularly see any governmental magic that would inherently have saved England any more than France.

Yes, but this is modeled in the English Civil War disaster. They also very different reasons for revolting. The English "revolted" because of the machinations of Charles I and sought to curtail his authority; while the French revolted because the monarchy had ignored the suffering of the people and denied any effort at reform (and even went as far to fire a popular minister who wanted the aristocracy to start paying taxes) amid a failing economy. I believe would have been more immune to a Revolution because much of English/British peasantry had, by the 17th and 18th century gotten used to way the they were ruled with the Magna Carta and House of Lords and House of Commons. Any type of "revolution" would have started there and spread outward, rather than the peasantry revolting taking over a Royal Prison and setting up their government against the wishes of the Monarch, would result in the monarch being coerced into being a constitutional monarch. The English System had already set up, via the Magna Carta, some degree of separation of power and the breakdown of that power resulted in the English Civil War. Thus anger at the elite would have been voiced through the elections for the House of Commons.

However, besides that I agree completely that no government is completely immune to revolution.
 
I agree that Wolfe Tone and Napper Tandy were basically sepratist rebels, but you have to admit that their particular rebellion had a revolutionary vibe in a way that previous Irish an Highlander rebellions didn't, even if just because they were living in a revolutionary time and getting support from the French. The main point for me though is that the English Parliament might have prevented a revolution in England, where people had a stake in government (and indeed you do seem to see that effect in later revolutionary waves in the 1800s); but it didn't stop the revolutionary itch in those parts of the Empire where people were disenfranchised, precisely because they didn't have any stake or ability to affect what was going on in Westminster.

Maybe a more granular way of doing it would be to have parliaments slow down the revolution in places with the right culture group, or something on similar lines. Or to make it slow down (or stop completely) in provinces with a non-rotten parliament seat.
 
I agree that Wolfe Tone and Napper Tandy were basically sepratist rebels, but you have to admit that their particular rebellion had a revolutionary vibe in a way that previous Irish an Highlander rebellions didn't, even if just because they were living in a revolutionary time and getting support from the French. The main point for me though is that the English Parliament might have prevented a revolution in England, where people had a stake in government (and indeed you do seem to see that effect in later revolutionary waves in the 1800s); but it didn't stop the revolutionary itch in those parts of the Empire where people were disenfranchised, precisely because they didn't have any stake or ability to affect what was going on in Westminster.

Maybe a more granular way of doing it would be to have parliaments slow down the revolution in places with the right culture group, or something on similar lines. Or to make it slow down (or stop completely) in provinces with a non-rotten parliament seat.


Perhaps the reform itself wouldn't give a resistance to the Revolution but, having a seat in Parliament in a state would give a state-wide bonus to resistance to revolution, along side a bonus to spread in unaccepted cultured provinces?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Perhaps the reform itself wouldn't give a resistance to the Revolution but, having a seat in Parliament in a state would give a state-wide bonus to resistance to revolution, along side a bonus to spread in unaccepted cultured provinces?

That sounds closer to it.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Nah. I mean the English had a parliament and still cut the head off their own king more than a hundred years earlier than the French did. They even had a army general rise to absolute dictatorship in Cromwell mirroring Napoleon in many ways. I don't think there is any government invented by human minds that is immune to revolutions and such. As a matter of fact if England and France had traded socioeconomic conditions (ie enlightenment ideas spreading + financial bankruptcy + corrupt/incompetent leadership + angry peasants) I don't particularly see any governmental magic that would inherently have saved England any more than France.

Yeah - in an alternate history the Westminster parliament could make some horrible policy decisions.
Oh wait, that's just happened. =P

Edit: Self-deprecating British citizen here.
 
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Yeah - in an alternate history the Westminster parliament could make some horrible policy decisions.
Oh wait, that's just happened. =P

Edit: Self-deprecating British citizen here.

Can not be worse than the Scottish one voting to make England their boss for the sake of taxes and John Knox... :eek: