Intelligencia upset that I'm supporting them...?

[Xionor]

Intelligentsia along with Industrailists and Trade Unions demand I enact Landed Voting.
I start enacting landed voting.

Get event Maharaja Intervenes in Politics: +20% enactment chance.
Intelligencia disapproved with -3 pentaly, even tho it's the issue they want enacted!

How does this make sense?

 

[shoebird]

They have principles, I guess.

 

[Stelaria]

No, this one makes a certain amount of sense. It's basically a case of, even though they're getting their way, as republicans, they lose face by achieving it in this specific way. I feel like if a republican IG is the beneficiary of the law that triggers this specific event, they should probably lose a little support rather than just approval, though.

 

[Xionor]

So, they're just being spiteful little shits?

 

[Eruth]

So, they're just being spiteful little shits?

No, they’re standing up for all of their principles rather than just the one you’re happening to enact at the moment.

 

[DukeLeto42]

The whole point of the law change is to create a more representative society, and your monarch comes along and autocratically demands its passage. This runs counter to the higher goals of the Intelligensia and is a bad precedent, lowering their opinion even if - in the long term - they are happy to see the law passed.

 

[Sute]{h]

The whole point of the law change is to create a more representative society, and your monarch comes along and autocratically demands its passage. This runs counter to the higher goals of the Intelligensia and is a bad precedent, lowering their opinion even if - in the long term - they are happy to see the law passed.

Sure you can rationalize it that way, but do we have any historical example of this kind of ultra idealistic behavior? When the king of Denmark came out in support of a more democratic system of government, most of the supporters of democracy was pretty glad. It allowed for a peaceful transition rather than an outright revolution.

 

[DukeLeto42]

Sure you can rationalize it that way, but do we have any historical example of this kind of ultra idealistic behavior? When the king of Denmark came out in support of a more democratic system of government, most of the supporters of democracy was pretty glad. It allowed for a peaceful transition rather than an outright revolution.

I suspect many examples off the top of my head would verge on the "recent politics" taboo. However, your example isn't a great counter - Denmark's king being publicly willing to cede power is quite different from a monarch actively intervening in the lawmaking process.

 

[Butter For Less]

I think the fact that the intelligentsia are always anti-monarchy just weird in itself, this event is built around that assumption so the fact the king is doing something upsets them. Interest groups really feel like stereotypes of social classes rather than an organic grouping of pops that can adapt and make their own decisions.

 

[Andrzej2]

Interest groups really feel like stereotypes of social classes rather than an organic grouping of pops that can adapt and make their own decisions.

You are right. I wish we had more dynamic interest groups. For example if their desires are not met and if they are not in the government they should radicalise becouse they have no hope of gaining power through legal means.

But if they are in the government they should lose radicalism. It's a common thing. Somehow british liberal and leftist parties didn't abolish monarchy, facist movement in Italy started as a republican and anticlerical but after they were appointed to power by the king and made agreement with the Church their policy changed. Interest groups should be more opportunistic and for example if monarchy is liberal then most of intelligentsia should support constitutional monarchy.

Currently in the game there is this event when you have Trade Unions in power. You get a message that Trade Unions grew in influence or something and from now on they will get vanguardist and communist leaders... It should be other way around! They should get radical, revolutionary leaders mainly if kept outside of government.

I remember I got this event after many years of passing social reforms and having trade unions government in my constitutional monarchy. Pretty immersion breaking.

 

[Zander]

To use a somewhat cruder example:
"You say you want lower taxes, but you complain when I start executing all the people who voted for higher taxes! Why are you so inconsistent?"

There's nothing unreasonable about someone supporting a law but not wanting you to take certain actions to help it pass.

 

[Xionor]

I think the fact that the intelligentsia are always anti-monarchy just weird in itself, this event is built around that assumption so the fact the king is doing something upsets them. Interest groups really feel like stereotypes of social classes rather than an organic grouping of pops that can adapt and make their own decisions.

Yea, it's basically just a scripted event i guess.
Monarch support = bad, regardless of what the thing being supported is.

 

[shoebird]

I don’t think that event means that the monarch just supports something, but that the monarch uses the royal prerogative to have his will done. That’s what the intelligentsia seem to have a problem with.

 

[Samolub]

Intelligentsia along with Industrailists and Trade Unions demand I enact Landed Voting.
I start enacting landed voting.

Get event Maharaja Intervenes in Politics: +20% enactment chance.
Intelligencia disapproved with -3 pentaly, even tho it's the issue they want enacted!

How does this make sense?

I don't see anything pointless here

You increase the chance of passing the law and at the same time you decrease the satisfaction of the intelligence, which will get a bigger boost after passing the law anyway, so from the point of view of the playability it makes sense. From a political/ideological point of view, it also looks/could looks sensible

 

[Me_]

It has no justification. All the comments otherwise are just fanfiction. The reason is the fact that the event does not check for whether they support the law or not. File a bug report.

 

[Sarmatian]

Well, first of all. Inteligentsia is not a monolithic block. There are sub-factions, and sub-factions of those sub-factions. A small part of the intelligentsia, die hard anti monarchists, got angrier, which is what those -3 approval represents.

It's not -20 or -30, which you could argue is majority of intelligentsia throwing a hissy fit.

If you watch Spielberg's Lincoln, you could see that he had to moderate some parts of the anti slavery law and faced pressure from the die hard abolitionists within his own party, which lead to the great scene with Tommy Lee Jones. It's not that uncommon. There's a plethora of examples around the world.

 

[Sagrifizius]

I find it quite consistent for the Intelligentsia to care more about processes than results.

 

[Goblin-Cookie]

The principled staance make sense EXCEPT when it is the monarch supporting something that makes society more democratic.

 

[MylesSCP]

The principled staance make sense EXCEPT when it is the monarch supporting something that makes society more democratic.

It still makes sense because it's being done in an authoritarian way. There's been plenty of times I've been disappointed when something I wanted happened because I didn't like the way it happened.

 

[Goblin-Cookie]

It still makes sense because it's being done in an authoritarian way. There's been plenty of times I've been disappointed when something I wanted happened because I didn't like the way it happened.

That is the general issue, however it is different when Authoritarians are undermining their authority. In the case of a sufficiently absolute state, there is no Democratic way for Democracy to come about.