Argue pointlessly with Al about history and so on
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:59:15 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Argue pointlessly with Al about history and so on
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Argue pointlessly with Al about history and so on  (Read 15828 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2014, 03:25:08 PM »

Historically which voting block has had more political clout in Wales, miners or sheep?

Up until 1922 sheep, after then miners.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2014, 08:50:29 PM »

How frequent were Medieval peasant uprisings?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2014, 09:27:55 PM »
« Edited: July 16, 2014, 09:41:07 PM by The Mikado »

How frequent were Medieval peasant uprisings?

Totally depends on the part of the Medieval period you're looking at.  You want massive, frequent, important peasant uprisings?  Look at the 14th century.

I'll let Al weigh in, of course, as this is his thread, but the 14th century is a fascinating period of near-apocalyptic upheaval from famine, revolt, war, and, of course, the Black Death that conspired to rip the social order of the Late Middle Ages to shreds.

EDIT: a few of the more famous ones:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasant_revolt_in_Flanders_1323%E2%80%9328

Covered nearly all of Flanders (northern half of modern Belgium) between 1323-1328, forced the Count of Flanders to flee into exile, and had to be put down years later in a full military campaign.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepherds%27_Crusade_(1320)

Mob intended to form a crusade against Iberian Muslims, when Philip the Fair (Philippe IV) refused to pay them they went on a rampage and burned down much of Aquitaine before they crossed the border into Aragon and were crushed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt

The great English Peasant Revolt of 1381, an incredibly famous event in English history.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2014, 01:25:45 PM »

How frequent were Medieval peasant uprisings?

Pretty rare - though not unknown - before the Great Famine (1315-17), extremely common afterwards, right up until the end of the period (the German Peasants War - the greatest uprising  of them all - was as late as the 1520s), though most of the best known revolts occurred in the latter half of the 14th century. As Mik has already pointed out, the entire ghastly 14th century was a time of social catastrophe in Europe (and like many social catastrophes followed a period of comparative calm and comparative prosperity), and social revolt was very clearly a direct response to this, or, rather, to the attempts of the authorities to manage social catastrophe. Revolts were often triggered by punitive taxation or policies aimed at maintaining social order via blatant economically repression (c.f. the notorious Statute of Labourers). One of the bloodiest revolts was the Jacquerie, which immediately followed the period of peak Black Death mortality and also happened during the middle of the Hundred Years War, and which probably wouldn't have happened had taxation policy in France not been so laughably crude and had not public works not depended on the corvée (yes, feudalism was indeed a direct cause of this particular revolt). They were never just 'peasants revolts' though; other social groups were always involved, and were sometimes (as in England in 1381, where craftsmen were at the forefront of events) more militant. Towards the end of the period, the earlier causes of revolts were - at least in Central Europe - often combined with religious fervour inspired by the early Reformers. The most extreme example this were the Taborites, who set about trying to impose a sort of chiliastic Christian communism across southern Bohemia via war wagons.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 17, 2014, 07:19:41 PM »

I get the impression that popular uprisings against the aristocracy were rarely, if ever, successful. Yet, the landed elite did eventually lose power. What was the cause of this?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 17, 2014, 07:35:39 PM »

The twin developments of capitalism and the modern state. An exceedingly lengthy parallel process, the 'completion' of which remains within living memory, at least in some parts of Europe. One classic argument is that you can see the birth of both in the great crisis of the late middle ages that began with the Great Famine.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 17, 2014, 09:23:54 PM »

Why did the ruling elite in Britain allow democracy to prevail?


You skipped this one. Its very broad and (delliberately) a bit naively phrased, but its good for internet bickering, so why not have a go at it?
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2014, 10:54:29 PM »

Why did the ruling elite in Britain allow democracy to prevail?


You skipped this one. Its very broad and (delliberately) a bit naively phrased, but its good for internet bickering, so why not have a go at it?

By the time what Al considers democracy prevailed, Britain had just exited a catastrophic World War and was facing a full-fledged rebellion in Ireland and the elites were in no position to "disallow" anything.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2014, 11:05:00 PM »

Why did the ruling elite in Britain allow democracy to prevail?


You skipped this one. Its very broad and (delliberately) a bit naively phrased, but its good for internet bickering, so why not have a go at it?

By the time what Al considers democracy prevailed, Britain had just exited a catastrophic World War and was facing a full-fledged rebellion in Ireland and the elites were in no position to "disallow" anything.


Its a long proces from 1832 onwards which could potentially be halted several times along the way and you also have the House of Lords reform in 1911 as an important element.


 

Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: July 18, 2014, 11:17:09 AM »

Wasn't an intentional skip; sorry.

Anyway, the short answer is that they weren't quite as stupid as their cousins on the continent and so tried to drag their feet on the issue rather than outright oppose it (i.e. the partial enfranchisement of male workers in urban areas happened under a Tory administration). But drag their feet they most certainly did, which is why universal male suffrage - which as you know even Germany had - did not happen until as late as 1918 (for which see Mik's post). And special electoral rights for the upper and upper middle classes - the business vote and the university constituencies, both of which were egregious breaches of basic democratic principles - continued to exist until abolished by the Attlee government. Britain is an interesting case because of the deep attachment of its traditional elites to parliamentary principles and processes; as they would not dream of of weakening these in favour of strong executive government (this would be tyranny and, worse, positively continental), any extension of the franchise was automatically a genuine transfer of primary political power.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: July 19, 2014, 01:56:16 PM »

By the time what Al considers democracy prevailed, Britain had just exited a catastrophic World War and was facing a full-fledged rebellion in Ireland and the elites were in no position to "disallow" anything.

As a coda to this, by 1918 the landed interests that had formed the core of Britain's traditional political elite were left pretty much bankrupt due to the agricultural depressions of the 19th century, which destroyed their main source of income (i.e. rent). This situation was not improved by Lloyd George's introduction of death duties* or by the further loss of earnings due to various social and political changes in Ireland (ironically some of this was carried out by a Tory government). The next generation was also severely depleted due to the slaughter on the Western Front (statistically speaking the most likely people in the British Army to be killed there were junior officers; they went over the top with their men, and were easily identifiable due to their different uniforms). Ultimately they even lost control of the political party that used to exist in order to further their interests; before 1914 the Conservative Party was generally led by members of the landed elites, after 1918 it was generally led by members of the upper middle class and the presence of aristocrats in senior cabinet posts became increasingly rare - where once they had been ubiquitous - and began to look anachronistic. Had he been born a few decades earlier, Alec Douglas-Home's background would not have been a political problem for him.

*Which would count as one of the great longterm political masterstrokes of the twentieth century, if the Liberal Party had managed to survive the consequences of its own incompetent foreign and military policies. Oh well.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: August 19, 2014, 10:40:12 AM »

Why were the UK Liberals so incompetent?

In terms of running the country or electorally? I'm presuming that you mean before 1931 o/c.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: August 19, 2014, 11:15:30 AM »

And now for some hilariously crass Labour propaganda from the 1929 General Election:


1929 was the first General Election in which women under thirty had the vote. Many male commentators dubbed this the 'flapper franchise' because they were sexist idiots in a rather patronising reference to the supposedly frivo fashions of young women at the time. Note the young woman in the cartoon is dressed accordingly:


She is also wearing red, the colour of the Labour Party and the only strong colour used in the cartoon (note that it is also used for MacDonald's (ordinary and democratic) tie and for the border of the picture).

In the background we see the Conservative Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin and Liberal leader David Lloyd George acting like sexist fossils from distant years before 1914. They are the 'poor old dears' that the young woman regards as 'pathetic'. At the sight of a young woman they tip their - grotesquely unfashionable and hideously elitist - top hats. Lloyd George's reputation for womanising is here referenced - and transformed into something highly negative - with a leerish wink; Lothario as dirty old man.

But it isn't just their hats and manners that are old fashioned, for they are wearing starched collars, morning suits, and spats. Contrast with the Ramsay MacDonald's ordinary (fashionable) three piece suit, his ordinary collar and tie, and his democratic trilby. The overall effect is slightly less subtle than the average lump hammer.

Here's a question to ponder though. What is the significance of the cartoon? Is the fact that it is a clear attempt to appeal to the votes of young women (contrast with typical political images of the era which focused largely on 'women as mothers' or - and this was particularly the case with Conservative propaganda - 'women as housewives': vote Conservative for lower prices on tea and groceries dear!) by playing with the idea that the other parties were old fashioned and inherently sexist more significant than the fact that it plays with sexist tropes itself?
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,051
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: August 21, 2014, 12:33:14 PM »

Why did the U.S.  succeed in establishing long-term "democracy" while such things did not (generally) happen after the independence wars of Latin America?
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: August 24, 2014, 11:48:08 AM »

Why were the UK Liberals so incompetent?

In terms of running the country or electorally? I'm presuming that you mean before 1931 o/c.

I mean electorally.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: August 24, 2014, 01:44:56 PM »

I'd actually argue that what did for them as a major party was not electoral incompetence, so much as political incompetence, specifically the sort that led to a) British involvement in the First World War and b) the subsequent gross mismanagement of the war effort by the Asquith government. Liberal Party factionalism - Asquith and Lloyd George both led separate Liberal Parties at the 1918 and 1922 elections; the Party only unified again in time for the 1923 election - added considerably to this credibility problem, and it is notable that the only senior Liberal with any mass credibility in the 1920s was David Lloyd George, who's populist image - never typical of a party dominated by a narrow circle of patrician and would-be patrician1 Oxbridge men - was only reinforced by his record as a wartime Coalition Prime Minister. There was also the great damage that the War had done to the general credibility of Liberalism across in Britain; what did it even mean to be a Liberal after 1914? Peace, Free Trade and Progress were key to Liberalism's prewar appeal, and the War had either destroyed or grossly distorted all three.2 To all of this we can then add a further act of gross political incompetence; Asquith's decision to pull support from MacDonald's minority Labour government in 1924 and trigger an immediate General Election. This was stupid for two reasons; the first was that elections in 1922 and 1924 had left the Liberal Party as bankrupt financially as it was politically, and the second was Asquith toppled the Labour government due to some trumped-up red scare bullsh!t, which guaranteed that the election would be fought in an atmosphere of anti-Soviet hysteria (infamously added to - and how - by the Zinoviev Letter). The Liberal Party's core lower middle class support stampeded to the Tories and Liberals never recovered.

Not that the Liberals were ever really that good at elections, mind. The campaign against the Corn Laws in the mid 19th century gave them such a great winning issue that sixty years later it was still at the core of Liberal electioneering:




Unsympathetic people might suggest that this was perhaps a little complacent.

1. i.e. H.H. Asquith (never Herbert!), the son of a West Riding wool merchant who spent a lifetime purging all remaining traces of his provincial background, including and especially his embarrassing Christian name.

2. Progress in the Edwardian Liberal sense was linked to technological progress and the rise of the machine, i.e. the very things that led to the horror of mechanised war.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: August 24, 2014, 02:22:49 PM »

Thanks Al.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2014, 12:31:05 AM »

why does whales get their own national football team and why are they so bad, what's gareth bale gotta do to get some notable international play?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: September 03, 2014, 01:53:03 PM »

a) because the Football Association of Wales is older than FIFA*, b) because John Charles is dead, c) no idea, possibly never.

*FUN FACTS:

1. Due to its venerable age the FAW is on the International Football Association Board (the body that writes the rules). Even more absurd is that so is the Irish Football Association (i.e. Northern Ireland)!

2. Multiple members of its governing council live in nursing homes!

3. The FAW almost always votes the opposite way to the FA, no matter the issue or reasoning!
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: September 03, 2014, 06:04:31 PM »

at what point did 1979 become historically inevitable?
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: September 03, 2014, 06:25:37 PM »

at what point did 1979 become historically inevitable?

When they created the calendar.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: September 03, 2014, 10:52:00 PM »

at what point did 1979 become historically inevitable?

When they created the calendar.

Hardly.  There have been many calendars that by the time the year 1979 in them arrived, they were but historical trivia.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: September 06, 2014, 05:12:13 PM »

What's the deal with England's crazy different levels of local government? Why is it like that?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: September 13, 2014, 02:00:41 PM »

What's the deal with England's crazy different levels of local government? Why is it like that?

Botched local government reorganisation upon botched local government reorganisation. There was a project of wholesale local government reform that started in the 60s, but the government that ended up at the end of the timeline managed to cock it up pretty terribly (I am sure everyone will be shocked to learn that this government was the Heath government). The Thatcher government then poked holes in the new structure - abolishing upper tier local government in metropolitan areas (London included) for reasons that were largely political* - and then from the 90s governments of both colours decided that unitary authorities were a good idea, but seemed content to introduce them on a piecemeal basis. Tony Blair's enthusiasm for the idea of the American Big City Mayor added yet another layer of complexity; some local authorities (particularly ones with a reputation as basket cases) adopted them, and it was the model chosen for the rebirth of London government. The result of all this is an incomprehensible mess.

*Not that the GLC or - especially - the Metropolitan Counties ever worked particularly well.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: September 27, 2014, 11:07:16 PM »

     How did the arrangement of the Northern Ireland-Republic of Ireland split come to be? Or to be a little less vague, whence did the relevant political divergence between Dublin and Belfast spring from?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 11 queries.