-
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.
1866 Election Results (Cont.)
Universal Male Suffrage significantly expanded the electorate and with it forced an entirely new type of election. In earlier times, a candidate for a seat could rely on local political machines and appealing to the interests of the moneyed classes to carry him to the Estates-General. Now, an entirely new type of campaigning needed to exist to cater to the necessities of a far larger voting body. Though electoral science in the modern sense would take a while to become commonplace, there was a significant shift from vague ideals such as nationalism and democracy and tradition to the more tangible needs of the everyday subject. Though still powerful, nationalism was being openly questioned as to whether it alone would improve the everyday lot of the Anglo-French subjects.
This was felt most direly in Ireland. The lethargy of the Irish Independent Party had not pleased the Irish - they had gambled that Paris would reward their loyalty or, at the very least, ensure the status quo. The annexation, as they saw it, into the Kingdom of England infuriated many and the Irish Independent Party had not just allowed it but had actively taken part in it. Moreover, the Irish Independent Party had failed to address the real problems that had turned Ireland to nationalism in the first place - unfair rent from foreign landlords, a lack of real development from the government, and a general sense of being ignored. The Confederalists, backed with a hint of voter and candidate intimidation, punished the Irish Independents dearly and took almost every single one of their rural seats. The remainder of the IIP seats, in those seats where caution of the Confederalists was most powerful, were taken by Unionists. The Confederalists, though tempted to take the position of abstentionism, felt that the example of the Legitimistes was discouraging and that disrupting the system from within was far more effective.
In England itself, the election debate was an earnest discussion of the Kingdom's future. Would the Compromise be used to gradually separate from France? Was the Compromise too far, or not enough? Should the Compromise even be reversed? The Faction Anglois campaigned on a position of outright rejection, claiming the agreement was constitutionally illegal and, in some circles, wanted to secede from England and join France. But memories of pre-Revolutionary violence hung heavy on the English, and rather than turn to the extremes the Unionist Party excelled by appearing as a voice of reason. The Unionist leader, a Lord William Langford-Baisingstoke, was neither particularly popular as a politician nor exactly a figure whom inspired mass devotion, yet in the year 1866 he was put forth as a England's only hope to hold back the tide of extremism that the Compromise enabled. And it worked, the Unionists became the largest party in England, and drew a swath of support not only from the Anglois elite and middle class but from a good section of the English working class. The era of English radicalism was over.
France’s election was more straightforward. There was a war fought on their very own soil, and it was imperative to stand behind the government, Liberal or not. Though the Conservatives tried to nail Monteforte for entangling himself in costly European scraps, trade policy, and the radical Anglo-French compromise, Liberal ascendency in France was far too great to truly keep them from retaking plurality. Nonetheless, the status-quo was challenged in the outskirts of France – the Legitimistes, far too traditionalist and hardline, found themselves challenged in their traditional constituencies by an alliance of southern nationalists (the Euskal Liga and the Ligue Occitane). The League (as it was usually called) largely campaigned for the more everyday demands of their constituents, including official recognition of the Basque and Occitan languages. Monteforte returned to the French National Assembly with more seats, but not enough to really form a French Government without support from the League. The League, however, saw Monteforte as a natural ally and negotiated a deal involving legislative support in exchange for Liberal backing of minority issues.
Across the Dual-Monarchy, the results showed an apparent swing to the Unionist right. Monteforte lacked the ability to form a Dual-Premiership, but neither were the French Conservatives. The largest single party, the Unionist Party, had made a convincing case to the Dual-Monarchy that it was time that an English Lord Chancellor take the reins of government. Langford-Baisingstoke was invited to form a Unionist Government, with support from the French Conservatives, the Faction Anglois, and the near-irrelevant French Nationalists. He was the first English-born, English speaking Lord Chancellor in two centuries, yet was fully committed to the Dual Monarchy in Paris and had no love for radicalism. In truth, it was an even more fragile coalition than the one before it – the Anglois and the French Nationalists were too far apart for real co-operation, and it was feared the government was not strong enough to lead the Dual Monarchy in wartime. However, the Anglo-French Compromise meant that responsibilities could be delegated to the more united French and English legislative bodies, and that tenuous Estates-Generals did not necessarily mean a nation in jeopardy. In truth, Monteforte was secretly pleased with the result – no longer needing to balance the needs of a diverse coalition, he could govern France the way he wished for with the help of the ideologically similar Euskal Liga and Ligue Occitane. Similarly, Unionist supremacy in England meant that the Dual Monarchy was not going anywhere, Compromise or no.
But, there was still a war to win.
Quick constitutional question, how much power does the Estates-General still have? How much power does it have the devolved governments?
Legally the Estates General is all powerful, can override any law passed by the devolved governments, and can set the national budget. Functionally, with the likelihood that the E-G will continue to have weak and diverse coalitions, the more unified devolved governments do most of the work.
I would compare it to the power of the US Congress vs the States. When Federal congress is deadlocked, most legislation and governing comes from the states.
I would compare it to the power of the US Congress vs the States. When Federal congress is deadlocked, most legislation and governing comes from the states.
interesting to see how the Irish Independentist Party betrayed its very own existance
Ah, interesting! So it is still very powerful as long as it can function.
Hey friends, this isn’t dead yet. I’ve moved to Australia and I’m sorting stuff out, but my laptop with the LML saves is with me. Updates will be sporadic as always, but updates will come between me being a backpacker degenerate. Bare with me.
1866-71
Faced with a three-front war fought on home soil (against Burgundy, Scandinavia, and Spain respectively), the Unionist-led government had every reason to be cautious about upending the liberal status quo. The Burgundian Army was one of the most professional in Europe and, unlike the Dual Monarchy, did not suffer from the same regionalism which undercut every other European power. Scandinavia boasted one of the greatest navies in the world, and humiliated the Anglo-French navy whenever their ships left port – perhaps their Viking ancestors were beaming with pride from the afterlife. But the Anglois-German coalition had sheer numbers, and were not afraid to use them.
Baisingstoke-Langford, himself not a military man, delegated most of the wartime affairs to his Minister of War, Pierre Lemarque. Lemarque was called a ‘colourful character’ by his peers – he led troops for the Faction Anglois during the English Rebellion at the tender age of 24, and was widely suspected to be behind some of the more gruesome anti-English lynchings of the era. Like most former members of the Faction’s military wing, any alleged crimes on his part were included in the post-war amnesty and rendered him immune to prosecution. In the years following, Lemarque shifted towards the Unionist Party, yet remained on the very hardliner fringes – but had considerable support within the unionist movement and was personally responsible for securing the support of the parliamentary Faction Anglois for a Unionist coalition. He was controversial, but he was just the sort of man to whip the country into shape for a home conflict.
His first target was Dijon. The ‘soft underbelly’ of Burgundy was a natural invasion point, as although the city was heavily fortified the populace of the surrounding areas were largely French Catholics who, for the most part, were not admirers of Burgundy. Though the city had been finally taken (with huge losses), a sizeable Burgundian Army cut off from the north by the Danubian advance made a final attempt to contest Dijon. The closest Anglo-French Army had been peeled off to defend Paris, and the Burgundians re-occupied the city with ease. Lemarque decided to make an example of them. Though the city itself was largely Burgundian, the surrounding countryside was largely French Catholic and held little good will to the Burgundians. When the Anglo-French Army returned under the leadership of General Adolphe Franchet d’Esperey (alongside a large reserve made up of a Yugoslav Expeditionary Froce), they manoeuvred around the city, cutting off all escape routes, and bombarded the Burgundians until surrender using newly developed artillery – with considerable damage to the historic city itself. The full battle lasted from the 21st of September to the 1st of November, and bystanders would call the scenes inside the city as ‘the closest thing to hell itself’. The Siege of Dijon was met with outcry from the European Powers, and even from Henry X himself, for violating the unspoken gentlemanly conduct of war. It was, however, effective – after November, Burgundian resistance in the south had ceased to exist.
The war in the north was a much more slow paced affair. With a significant portion of the Burgundian Army capitulated, and the rest tied up keeping the Danubians on their side of the Rhine, the Anglo-French Army plodded forward cautiously. Though a major battle was fought outside Namur, the advance into the Lowlands lacked the drama of the opening phases of the War. In Scotland, the last Scandinavian resistance squatted out in the highlands, cold and undersupplied – and already Scottish Nationalists drafted a petition for independence under a Anglo-French Treaty. In the far south, in Spain, neither the Dual Monarchy nor the Spanish were particularly inclined to commit to an attack. After the Spanish Navy was given a lashing at the Straits of Gibraltar by a Venetian-led fleet, Spain sued for peace. When a particularly harsh winter fell over Europe in 1866, both alliances informally stopped their advances and held onto their advances. Once winter had thawed, Lemarque rushed the Anglo-French armies into the Netherlands, with the objective of cutting off Burgundy from its precious trade ports and forcing them to capitulate, beginning the campaign in late February.
The Anglo-French Army had gone as far as Maastricht when the Burgundian Parliament offered terms of surrender – with Scandinavia bowing out shortly after. Baisingstoke-Langford called for a conference at Anvers to work out the full terms of the truce which, he hoped, would ensure a permanent end to the wartime horrors of the last two decades. Scotland was conceded by Scandinavia, and a local branch of the Stuart family was given the crown – though British Pan-Nationalists wished to see Scotland united with their brethren in England and Ireland, this was a very small minority. The German-speaking Palatinate was annexed into the Danubian Federation, which was a principle goal of the war – and was celebrated by German Nationalists across Central Europe. And, as a final insult, Burgundy was forced to surrender their Indian colony to Hyderabad. Lemarque wanted more – Dijon and the Pas de Calais had to be conceded – but the Lord Chancellor was already tired of him after his antics in the south of Burgundy. When Lemarque threatened to resign, the Lord Chancellor simply sacked him.
This was by no means the only conflict the Dual Monarchy was involved in, however. In the New Zealand colony, an alliance of Maori rose up in significant numbers against the settler government. While French settlement in the south quickly turned into a white majority, the north remained stubbornly opposed to settlement by Paheka. The tiny garrison was quickly overwhelmed, and troops stationed in Australia needed to be peeled off to quell the rebellion. The uprising would last until 1869 and would continue as low level guerrilla fighting for decades. In South East Asia, the holdout of the Vietnamese Empire were conquered by the Colonial Defence Army, and established the Dual Monarchy as the main European power in the South China Sea.
Similarly, the Indian Subcontinent came under the Anglo-French gaze. Of the three main Kingdoms in India, two (Bengal and Vijayanagar) were directly aligned with the Dual Monarchy. The only obstacle to total Anglo-French domination of India was the Mughal Empire. In secret, the Kings of Bengal and Vijayanagar agreed to partition the majority of the Empire, but both were unwilling to risk what would be a drawn out and bloody affair. But, the Dual Monarchy pushed for war, having already tasted Mughal blood and anticipating the profits of Anglo-French business spanning across India. On the cessation of the Burgundian War, the former Burgundian colonies on the Deccan Peninsula were given to Hyderabad, an ally of the Mughals, with a fine print allowing continued unlimited trade for Europeans. Hyderabad, either unknowingly or spitefully, closed European trade into the former colonies in 1870, provoking the ire of the Dual Monarchy. This was pretext for war, and the Anglo-French garrison in Orissa marched into Hyderabad – the Mughals reacted angrily, declaring war and vowing to push the Europeans into the sea. Vijayanagar and Bengal, seeing their chance, struck at the Mughals simultaneously, beginning the Great Indian War.
Though the instigators of the war, Anglo-French colonial forces did little fighting themselves, preferring to sit in reserve and letting the locals do the dirty work. The Great Indian War, short but massive in scale, was an odd mix of the modern and archaic. Modern Anglo-French rifles and Gatling guns were used side-by-side with elephants and swordsmen – though the local Kings were hardly backwards as many tried to emulate European tactics or received tuition from European veterans. The Mughals put up a good fight, but by 1871 they were exhausted and retreated to Delhi, surrendering before their rivals had a chance to sack the city. The north was partitioned between Vijayanagar and Bengal, while Hyderabad was annexed into the Orissa Colony – the Empire was reduced to a rump state. Though nominally a victory for the two local Kingdoms, the Dual Monarchy had expanded its influence with minimal losses.
But, with the war in Europe concluded, the Unionist Government turned their eyes to more mundane affairs. Though the Liberals had good intentions for constitutional affairs, years of effectively one-party dominance had lead to a corruptive rot in the administration of the Dual-Monarchy. Successful tax reforms – narrowly passed in the Estates-General - significantly increased the revenue for the Crown, whilst a wave of government investment into industry saw growth rise to dizzying heights.
It would seem that all had returned to normal in the Dual-Monarchy. The nationalists had been vanquished, peace had finally been found in Europe, and constitutional meddling had been replaced by solemn respect for the King’s prerogative. But, under the surface, society was changing. The Dual-Monarchy’s first organised left-wing party – the French Labour Party – began organising in the circles traditionally occupied by the nationalists. In Poitou, a Liberal councillor was defeated in a local election by a socialist in early 1869 and established the city as France’s first socialist stronghold. A strike in Liverpool, protesting against a 75-day work week, was quickly squashed by the Gendarme, but began the trade union movement in the Isles on a larger scale – a sister party to the French Labour Party was formed. Though both would face intimidation by the established parties, they would compete in the next election.
One which was called in 1871.
((No pictures due to trash Australian internet, will add later))
"A strike in Liverpool, protesting against a 75-day work week"
Wow, 19th century was super tough!
Wow, 19th century was super tough!
It lives!!! The Unionists did decent. The Left is rising! Also, is the King ever going to die? 
Election of 1871
Parties in the Kingdom of England
270 Seats for Election
The Unionist Party
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Unionist
The Independent Liberal Party
Economic Position: Liberal
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Reformism
The Irish Independent Party
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Irish Nationalism-Reformism
The Irish Confederalists
Economic Position: Centre-Left
Political Position: Liberal-Socialist Leaning
National Position: Irish Seperatism
Faction Anglois
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Reactionary
National Position: Hardline Unionist
The English Labour Party
Economic Position: Socialist
Political Position: Socialist
National Position: English Seperatism
Parties in the Kingdom of France
381 Seats for Election
Parti Liberale
Economic Position: Liberal
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Reformist Unionist
Parti Conservateur
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Unionist
Parti Nationaliste
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: French Nationalism
Légitimistes
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Occitan Nationalism
Euskal Liga
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Basque Nationalism
Parti Travailliste Français
Economic Position: Socialist
Political Position: Socialist
National Position: French Seperatism
Ballot:
You may vote in both regions.
English Vote:
French Vote:
Begin voting! Voting ends on the 25th.
National Parliaments will be based on the General Election results.
Parties in the Kingdom of England
270 Seats for Election
The Unionist Party
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Unionist
The Independent Liberal Party
Economic Position: Liberal
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Reformism
The Irish Independent Party
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Irish Nationalism-Reformism
The Irish Confederalists
Economic Position: Centre-Left
Political Position: Liberal-Socialist Leaning
National Position: Irish Seperatism
Faction Anglois
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Reactionary
National Position: Hardline Unionist
The English Labour Party
Economic Position: Socialist
Political Position: Socialist
National Position: English Seperatism
Parties in the Kingdom of France
381 Seats for Election
Parti Liberale
Economic Position: Liberal
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Reformist Unionist
Parti Conservateur
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Unionist
Parti Nationaliste
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: French Nationalism
Légitimistes
Economic Position: Conservative
Political Position: Conservative
National Position: Occitan Nationalism
Euskal Liga
Economic Position: Centrist
Political Position: Liberal
National Position: Basque Nationalism
Parti Travailliste Français
Economic Position: Socialist
Political Position: Socialist
National Position: French Seperatism
Ballot:
You may vote in both regions.
English Vote:
French Vote:
Begin voting! Voting ends on the 25th.
National Parliaments will be based on the General Election results.
English Vote: The Independent Liberal Party
French Vote: Parti Liberale
A generally liberal platform which doesn't seek the dissolution of the Dual Monarchy, and instead seeks further reform to its structure in order to stabilize it.
French Vote: Parti Liberale
A generally liberal platform which doesn't seek the dissolution of the Dual Monarchy, and instead seeks further reform to its structure in order to stabilize it.
