• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Indicus's maps, wikiboxes, &c thread

Callan

Racist name by the way,
Published by SLP
Location
Toronto
oLD LoNdOn

Seriously this is really good stuff. A really good look into all the myriad ways such a revolution would change every aspect of a nation’s culture and politics. That kind of reform to one of the last hangovers of medieval governance is great, as well as the wider implications for the history and development of London. Stuff like “Submayor” is phresh.

I notice that the county of London appears to be a lot smaller than OTL; does the city proper continue to sprawl beyond it’s borders like with Paris and such places OTL or are there just a lot less people?
 

Alex Richards

Certified Goose Aware
Patreon supporter
Published by SLP
Location
Derbyshire
oLD LoNdOn

Seriously this is really good stuff. A really good look into all the myriad ways such a revolution would change every aspect of a nation’s culture and politics. That kind of reform to one of the last hangovers of medieval governance is great, as well as the wider implications for the history and development of London. Stuff like “Submayor” is phresh.

I notice that the county of London appears to be a lot smaller than OTL; does the city proper continue to sprawl beyond it’s borders like with Paris and such places OTL or are there just a lot less people?
Looks to be the pre-65 County of London to me, which does rather make sense considering that Lyon was only separated out from the Rhône départment in 2015- a radical change to administration 'rationalising' matters in the 1840s is the sort of thing that by 150 years later has become 'no this is rational and so correct'.
 

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
oLD LoNdOn

Seriously this is really good stuff. A really good look into all the myriad ways such a revolution would change every aspect of a nation’s culture and politics. That kind of reform to one of the last hangovers of medieval governance is great, as well as the wider implications for the history and development of London. Stuff like “Submayor” is phresh.

I notice that the county of London appears to be a lot smaller than OTL; does the city proper continue to sprawl beyond it’s borders like with Paris and such places OTL or are there just a lot less people?
Thank you. Yeah, it's how the revolutionary impulse for "modernization" can sweep aside the old order and establish something in its place. IOTL, the Municipal Reform Act of 1835 ignored the City of London, and this had to do with a couple reasons - first, there were much more severe cases of badly administered cities (at least the City of London had elections, unlike those municipalities with councils filled by co-option), and second the City of London was pretty powerful and wealthy which was enough to hold off any outside reform. Post-1835 the City's antiquated government was now an extraordinary thing, and there were various attempts to bring the City of London in line with the rest of the municipalities or merge it in with London, but clearly none of these attempts succeeded. ITTL, with the Radicals being more eager for reform than OTL's Whigs, the City of London is a target to change into something more modern.

The borders are, as @Alex Richards notes, similar to the borders of pre-65 institutions covering London (the earliest of which would be the Metropolitan Body of Works), and urbanization does still sprawl beyond the city limits. I suppose London would be smaller than OTL - with the British Isles undergoing some strife over what the nation should look like for a while after the Revolution, the rise of the British Empire would be hamstrung somewhat, and this I imagine would reduce the expansion of London if not dramatically so.

Old London is an unusual name, but honestly it's difficult to come up with a really distinct name considering the City of London has been known as "London" or some variation thereof for almost two millennia. The strongest parallel to this would be New York's amalgamation I guess, and at least there they had an obvious name for the former New York.

On "Submayor" - I got that from Jeremy Bentham's Constitutional Code. One of the things he proposed in this really, really long draft for a constitution for any nation was that subdivisions (which would be coterminous with constituencies and demarcated regularly) would have administrations organized exactly as that at the top level, and also named as such but with "sub-" prefixed (so "sub-prime minister", "sub-registrar" etc.). Bentham was, IOTL and ITTL, an enormous influence on early nineteenth century radical thought since his thought was eventually pretty radical, and also he didn't believe in natural rights so that's a way to avoid being called a Jacobin. ITTL, his thought's impacted his homeland more heavily (the British Isles has a Civil Code like he always wanted) and so this is sorta meant to be a trace of Bentham's influence.
 
Revolutionary Britain: Landing Day

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect1120.png

Landing Day, officially A Day of Thanksgiving for the Securement of Representative Government, is a day commemorating the landing of William III on the British Isles as part of the Glorious Revolution commemorated on the fifth of November.

Ultimately, it originates in 1605, with the Gunpowder Plot when one Guy Fawkes along with English Catholics attempted to blow up Parliament and assassinate the king. In honour of the "divine deliverance" of being saved from this attack, its anniversary November 5 became a day of commemoration known as Gunpowder Treason Day. It quickly gained anti-Catholic overtones, with bonfires in which the pope waslit in effigy. Following the Puritan Revolution and the execution of Charles I in 1649, this day gained new connotations. With Cromwell's absolutist regime, the day was no longer officially celebrated due to the Puritans frowning on open celebration, but unofficial bonfires were still lit. After the collapse of the Cromwellian regime and the restoration of the Stuarts, the event was re-formalized. However, it also intensified in magnitude. With such events as the Exclusion Crisis, it became a partisan affair, and it also saw rioting that meant that militias had to be called in. Fireworks were banned under James II, but commemoration continued despite it being frowned upon.

As part of the Glorious Revolution, William III landed in the British Isles at Brixham on the fifth of November 1688. As such, the day gained new connotations of celebrating the Glorious Revolution, and it also became more pro-establishment despite associated disorder. Overtime, also, the pope was burned less and less and Guy Fawkes more. Rioting continued to be an issue. Furthermore, hated figures such as the king of France were also burned in effigy. With the French Revolution, so indeed were many revolutionary figures, most notably Thomas Paine, who despite being a British national hero today was then considered a murderous terrorist. As the ruling regime grew unpopular, figures such as Addington and Perceval were also burned in effigy, and in 1827 the Popular Revolution occurred.

When the Charter of Liberties and Securities were enacted in 1829 with its abolition of civil disabilities on Catholics, the Fifth became a day of opposition, with the lighting of government figures like Whitbread in effigy, as well as attacks on Catholics. In an attempt to stem this disorder, in 1835 the Whitbread government abolished Gunpowder Treason Night and replaced it with Landing Day, to celebrate the landing of William III at Brixham and the Glorious Revolution. It, along with Rights Day (celebrating the Bill of Rights and, in Scotland, the Claim of Right) on 16 December were part of an extended attempt to tie together the Popular Revolution with the grand British narrative of liberty. The bonfires and rioting were to be supplanted by feasting and peaceful celebration of the hard-fought liberties the people extracted from tyrants. Yet, Gunpowder Treason Day continued to be commemorated along with rioting and disorder, and it was not till the Lawson era that this receded. Though the restoration of the Catholic episcopacy in 1857 resulted in the return of such disorder (most infamously an anti-Catholic mob destroyed the Charter column in Liberty Square), it nevertheless continued to recede, and by the 1870s the fifth of November was primarily Landing Day. Nevertheless in many parts of the country Guy Fawkes continues to be lit in effigy, and in others bonfires are still lit. In many cases the roots of this celebration in "gunpowder treason" were forgot.

Indeed, Landing Day became a generic day of celebrating British Liberty, with figures of liberty unassociated with the Glorious Revolution like Hampden and Sidney often invoked. Furthermore, Charter Day, celebrated from 1852 in honour of the Charter of Liberties and Securities, began to grow in stature, and today it is very much the British Isles's national day. The bicentennial of the Glorious Revolution in 1888 was a grand, unabashed celebration, and saw much commemoration; on this day, a statue of William III was unveiled at Brixham by a director of the Batavian Republic in honour of the new Anglo-Dutch alliance. The proclamation of magisterial assent of the First Female Suffrage Act, which was cynically implemented by the Moderates solely because they voted for them but nevertheless opened the door considerably towards true universal suffrage, took place on the fifth of November 1896 to tie it to liberty. And so, Landing Day continued as a day of celebration.

However, then came the dramatic rethinking of historiography by revisionists throughout the twentieth century. Many asked whether the anti-Catholicism of the Glorious Revolution should really be hastily ignored, as Radical and Moderate historians often do. Some alleged that all the stated successes of the Glorious Revolution were in truth successes of the Popular Revolution or alternatively the Puritan Revolution, simply attributed to it as part of national myth-building. And so, with that, the Glorious Revolution was no longer perceived near-unanimously as a good thing by the people of the British Isles. Instead, to accommodate this sentiment, the government began to stress the First Female Suffrage Act which is viewed with near-unanimous praise. Nevertheless, there are still many who are willing to look past the Glorious Revolution's anti-Catholicism and celebrate Landing Day for William III regardless.

Today, Landing Day continues to be a notable day on the British national calendar. Though it is not the national day of the British Isles, it is still a day of festivity. And though the reasons for celebration have changed, a four-hundred year old celebration continues to this day.
 
Last edited:
Sanjay Raj: Bhole Commission protests

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect1170.png

Jagjivan Ram’s ascension to the post of Prime Minister represented a hallmark in Indian history. Not only was he the first non-Congress PM, not only was he the last surviving minister from Nehru’s first cabinet, but he was a Dalit. He was a member of the untouchable caste. This shaped his life in many ways. When he was in school, he smashed every pitcher of water set up exclusively for the Dalits, and through this he was able to force the school authorities to accept Dalit use of the main pitchers. He was a proud follower of the Bhakti Hindu saint Ravidas, with a firm belief that all humans were equal before God. This belief was reflected in his Independence Day addresses, where he proclaimed that all people were equal regardless of caste, creed, or any other factor. And one belief he held was that reservations could be used to uplift the lower castes.

And so, after the revolutionary 1982 election ended the Sanjay Raj, and after he became prime minister, he immediately set up a commission led by R. R. Bhole to look into reservations for lower-castes - this gave it the informal name of Bhole Commission. Even as Jagjivan Ram abolished Sanjay’s amendment, even as he broke up the nationalized press, even as he gave some reparation to victims of Sanjay’s campaigns of forced sterilization, the Commission continued. The report was completed in 1984, and it incorporated reservations not only for Dalits, but also for Other Backwards Classes, who were to be divided into Intermediate and Depressed Backwards Classes and given reservations accordingly [1]. The wealthy were to be excluded from reservations, to prevent their monopolization by the upper-classes. In total, a 49.6% quota was established, though a majority of the Indian population was eligible for them. A month or so after it was submitted, despite advisors telling him that doing so would destroy his electoral career and bring new divides to the forefront, Jagjivan Ram announced the implementation of the Bhole Commission Report.

The result was protest across North India. From schools across North India, upper-caste students went to the streets, chanting “Bhole nahi” (“Say No”), “Jagjivan hatao” (“Remove Jagjivan”), and “Tanashahi nahi chalegi” (“Tyranny will not do”). At least Sanjay, they said, didn’t destroy their spirit. And indeed, they asserted, if casteism still existed, then why was a Dalit the Prime Minister? These protestors were joined by government workers, mothers, and many others, all against the implementation of reservations.

It was in Delhi University that an enduring symbol of the Bhole Commission protests was created. One student, Jitendra Chadha, wished to send a message to Jagjivan Ram in the strongest way possible. He doused himself in gasoline, and lit himself on fire. Although he ultimately survived, he sustained third-degree burns and was hospitalized for weeks. This sadly inspired many more, by other students. At its peak, three students across North India immolated themselves every day. Among them was one twelve-year-old. One woman from Punjab even willed her eye to Jagjivan Ram, so he could see the effects of his decision.

Immediately, Jagjivan Ram went on air. With his usual dignity, he proclaimed that he understood the pain of the students, that he understood that they felt they have no future. He heard what they were saying loud and clear. He stated they should stop killing themselves, that they had long, prosperous lives ahead of them, that there was no reason they should kill themselves. He stated that he would implement further economic reform, to make a better job market for all. Yet, he refused to budge on reservations. With the boldness which he displayed as Defence Minister in 1971, he reasserted that that casteism was a five thousand year old evil that had to be eradicated. He was firm in his belief that only reservations could break the casteism he fought against over the course of his whole life.

Nevertheless, this display of sympathy and pledge for further economic reform slowed down the self-immolations. Jagjivan Ram ordered health care workers to encircle universities in case anyone would need immediate treatment, and he ordered the police not to attack protests except as a last resort. But by the time they came to an end, 212 people immolated themselves, and 97 of them died. The images of people burning themselves were displayed in newspapers, on television, and were seared in the minds of millions.

There were and are also many supporters of the Bhole Commission report, who view it as an assault on the privileges of the upper castes. Some Dalits, who viewed Jagjivan Ram as a sellout, as nothing more than the stooge of upper-castes, suddenly found much to admire, and other Dalits who already admired him loved him even more. Here was the Prime Minister risking his career, his legacy, and his life fighting for the emancipation of the lower-castes. This event is still considered the greatest blow against casteism since the great Gandhi’s 1931 fast unto death. And as many noted even at the time, the majority of Indians who were formerly excluded from jobs and university places were eligible for the new reservations. New opportunities were created, and many took and continue to take full use of them.

This massive division even extended to his own cabinet. The Hindu nationalists Vajpayee and Advani left the IDRP to form the Bharatiya Loktantrik Party citing “anti-Brahmin prejudice”, while the farmer leader Charan Singh too left to re-create his Lok Dal over the exclusion of Jats in the reservation scheme. Despite retaining a majority, Jagjivan Ram believed it needed to be asserted with an election, to crush the splitters. And so, he called one. Though he and the IDRP won, his majority was slimmed substantially.

Jagjivan Ram’s premiership ultimately survived the discord of the Bhole Commission protests, however weakened it was. Yet, it dashed the hopes of many. There were many who believed that he would restore normalcy after the horrors of the Sanjay Raj, that he would be a second Nehru. But this event showed that normalcy would never be achieved. India would never be the same again.




[1] IOTL, the brief Janata Party government established the Mandal Commission in 1979 to look into reservations for lower-castes. The eventual report was similar to TTL’s Bhole Commission, but it did not include any division between Depressed and Intermediate Backwards Classes - this division was recommended by L. R. Naik, its only Dalit member, but wasn’t in the final report. Though the report was completed in 1980, neither Indira nor Rajiv wanted to open the can of worms that implementation would bring. Instead, after the Congress party was defeated in 1989 and after V. P. Singh came to power, it was implemented in 1990. The result was giant waves of protests including self-immolation, which ultimately brought down his government. However, despite this, the implementation of the findings of the Mandal Commission have forever altered Indian politics, bringing caste divides to the forefront.
 
Last edited:
Revolutionary Britain: Legislature of Ireland

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect1853.png

The Legislature of Ireland is the legislature of Ireland, as one of the subsidiary legislatures that exist across the British Isles in an arrangement which has been called "pseudo-federal". Though officially it exists only through an Act of British Parliament, in practice the Irish Legislature is fairly powerful.

It is ultimately derived from the Irish Parliament pre-1797, which grew out of the feudal council of the Lordship of Ireland to evolve on broadly similar lines as England's Parliament, which it was subsidiary to. In 1494 Poyning's Law was passed, which decisively made Ireland's Parliament subsidiary to England's. After the Tudors made England a Protestant nation, due to the failure of the Reformation in Ireland, it retained Catholic nobility and Catholic MPs. Though they were barred after the Puritan Revolution, in 1660 with the return of the Stuarts they were allowed back; nevertheless, land redistributed after the Cromwellian period remained in the hands of Protestants. After the Glorious Revolution, and the passage of civil disabilities, non-Anglicans were forbidden from becoming MPs or indeed any office. Increasingly, in the eighteenth century, a movement rose to establish Irish legislative independence, to keep its laws from being subsidiary to English laws, and this movement began with William Molyneux (1656-1698). Nevertheless, Ireland remained decisively in Britain's orbit, contributing much to wider British society; Irishmen like the famed writer Jonathan Swift, the moderate philosopher and politician Edmund Burke, and the playwright and Whig politician Richard Sheridan all contributed to wider British society.

During the American Revolution, in an effort to stop a French invasion, Ireland saw vast amounts of militarization with the establishment of the Irish Volunteers, and they petitioned for the establishment of legislative independence; this and fears of Ireland breaking away like the United States, as well as the agitation of MPs like Henry Grattan, resulted in the accomplishment of Irish legislative independence in 1782. In 1791, Catholics were given the franchise (if they passed qualifications), though they were forbidden from membership, and reform was in the air. The 1790s also saw the creation of the Society of United Irishmen, inspired by French Revolutionary ideals, and they were radicalized by the mass repression of radicals into becoming a society seeking violent revolution. In 1796 a French army led by Lazare Hoche landed on Ireland, and concurrent rebellions saw the taking of Dublin. An Irish Republic was declared, with Wolfe Tone as the President of the Government. The Great Irish Rebellion had begun, and it took five years for it to be decisively crushed, though petty warfare lasted much longer. In its wake, the British government believed that Ireland would need to be integrated, passing the Acts of Union 1797 which unified Ireland and Britain through.

Yet, Ireland took this union unhappily, and it saw much resent. It continued to see periodic revolts, and many felt despair at Ireland being reduced to a mere English province. After the Irish Famine of 1824, there was another large rebellion in Ireland, though it was crushed. In 1827, the British government was overthrown and, with the influence of Irish people like Daniel O'Connell, the eventual Charter of Liberties and Securities included an ambitious declaration of religious liberty which gave Catholics religious liberty. And indeed, Daniel O'Connell's influence in radical circles in Britain decisively expanded, and he was also a firm supporter of the restoration of "Grattan's Parliament", idealizing it while ignoring that it lacked many things important for nationality like a responsible government and was massively corrupt. Nevertheless, through his influence, he forced the Lawson administration to create a subsidiary Legislature of Ireland in 1847, which O'Connell viewed as the first step on the road to full repeal of the Union. It had limited powers of taxation, and any and all of its legislation could be overridden by the Parliament of the British Isles, but nevertheless O'Connell heralded it as the "restoration" of Ireland's Parliament.

However, soon afterwards, O'Connell died, Irish radicals split, and his son proved a bad successor; this split enabled Moderates to control the Legislature of Ireland decisively, and they opposed further moves for Irish autonomy. As such, Ireland lacked even a responsible executive. This only changed in the 1870s with the land agitations; this merged into Irish nationalism, most of all pushing of responsible government. In 1884, this was established, as the Chief Secretary along with other Irish ministers was given non-voting membership in the Legislative Assembly on the model of British Parliament. This resulted in the establishment of responsible government in 1884. Subsequent sympathetic administrations gave Ireland increasing amounts of autonomy, though it didn't stop Irish Nationalists taking control of the Legislature in 1961. A subsequent referendum for independence failed, but these tensions remained, with the Irish Nationalists continuing to advocate independence. Furthermore, the Irish Legislature directly inspired movements for a Highland Legislature, and many others; today, that the British Isles is pseudo-federal is ultimately rooted in Ireland's Legislature.

Most recently, the Radical landslide of 2018 effectively reduced the Nationalists to a minor party, though they are striving for a revival, and elections in Ulster in 2019 confirmed that they are still a force to be reckoned with. Will Ireland remain a part of the British Isles, or will it break away? Perhaps only time can tell.
 
Last edited:

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
Like the differently-shaped Parliament diagram. What exactly is Productionism?
Thank you.

The horseshoe-shaped parliament layout is something which is used IOTL in Australia and Bangladesh, and formerly in Ontario. My thought process in its use in this wikibox series is that, after the burning of British Parliament, some people advocate keeping the opposing benches layout (to maintain the intensity of debate and also "tradition") and others advocate moving to a European-style hemicycle (to stress the unity of the nation with a clean shape). So, in effect, this horseshoe layout gets used for Parliament after its burning, and becomes the typical layout for parliaments based on that of Westminster, including this one.

Productionism (I might change the name) is an ideology focused on the producing classes taking control of society from the idle classes through various means, at its most radical the public ownership of land and capital. It's not that cliche of socialism with the symbols switched around you see sometimes in AH (at least, I hope it's not), so my idea is that instead it grows out of the ideas of people like Babeuf, Saint-Simon, and Bronterre, rather than Marx as in OTL, and as a result it looks dramatically different.
 

Walpurgisnacht

a subscription to supply the people with staves
Location
Banned from the forum
Pronouns
He/Him
Productionism (I might change the name) is an ideology focused on the producing classes taking control of society from the idle classes through various means, at its most radical the public ownership of land and capital. It's not that cliche of socialism with the symbols switched around you see sometimes in AH (at least, I hope it's not), so my idea is that instead it grows out of the ideas of people like Babeuf, Saint-Simon, and Bronterre, rather than Marx as in OTL, and as a result it looks dramatically different.
Oooooh, nice. I do like a good bit of alternate ideological development.

The rhetoric about "unproductive classes" does suggest a slightly Sorelian tinge to the movement, which could have...interesting results.
 

Thande

Jabs First Brexit
Published by SLP
Productionism (I might change the name) is an ideology focused on the producing classes taking control of society from the idle classes through various means, at its most radical the public ownership of land and capital. It's not that cliche of socialism with the symbols switched around you see sometimes in AH (at least, I hope it's not), so my idea is that instead it grows out of the ideas of people like Babeuf, Saint-Simon, and Bronterre, rather than Marx as in OTL, and as a result it looks dramatically different.
That sort of existed in OTL under the name 'producerism', although I'm not sure how much it was a coherent ideology and how much just a Wikipedian label slapped on things after the fact (like 'the Progressive Era' or whatever). A lot of rhetoric in the late 19th century US was about how both industrial and agricultural producers (as opposed to the more traditional idealisation of just agricultural ones) were morally superior to both the idle rich and the idle poor.
 

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
Oooooh, nice. I do like a good bit of alternate ideological development.

The rhetoric about "unproductive classes" does suggest a slightly Sorelian tinge to the movement, which could have...interesting results.
I took that terminology broadly speaking from Saint-Simon, who believed society was divided between the "industrial class" and the "idling class", and that the industrial class needed to take over society. He called his ideology "industrialism". Now, obviously in English the "industrial class" and "industrialism" denote something very different, so instead I used the term "producer". I can imagine other terms are in use for the divide between elites and everyone else, like "profit-monger" vs "working class", and the good ol' "bourgeoisie" vs "proletariat".

Obviously Sorel's butterflied away with the British Isles having a revolution in 1827 and all, but his ideas (or something like them) may still be in the air.

That sort of existed in OTL under the name 'producerism', although I'm not sure how much it was a coherent ideology and how much just a Wikipedian label slapped on things after the fact (like 'the Progressive Era' or whatever). A lot of rhetoric in the late 19th century US was about how both industrial and agricultural producers (as opposed to the more traditional idealisation of just agricultural ones) were morally superior to both the idle rich and the idle poor.
The idea that society's divided between the lazy elite and the people who really produce The Stuff is an old one - during the French Revolution, the idea that the Third Estate did all the work (unlike the First and Second Estates) was a big thing, and it even featured in What is the Third Estate?, the influential pamphlet that kicked it all off. And of course the Marxist discourse of proletariat vs bourgeoisie is much the same idea.
 
Sanjay Raj: Indian general election 1984

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
The grand defeats of the Indian National Congress in 1982 brought Sanjay Gandhi’s brutal dictatorship to an end. Jagjivan Ram became Prime Minister, the first Dalit to attain that office. With the massive majority of the Indian Democratic Revolutionary Party (IDRP), he had the Forty-Third Amendment passed, which reverted India to a parliamentary system while reversing the centralizations of power done by Indira and Sanjay. The constitution was purified. With the Forty-Fourth Amendment, emergencies were made much harder to proclaim, and the basic structure doctrine was made explicit. Sanjay Gandhi was tried and imprisoned on charges of theft from the treasury. Jagjivan Ram’s government broke up the press, consolidated into a single government-operated newspaper by Sanjay Gandhi, into multiple competing papers, while those papers which did go underground were now fully legal. He dedicated memorials to the victims of the various massacres, including the infamous 1981 Amritsar Massacre, the so-called “Second Jallianwala Bagh”. For the victims of Sanjay Gandhi’s campaigns of mass sterilization, the government declared subsidies and some reparations. As India entered 1984, it seemed everything was getting better. The future seemed bright.

In 1984 this all changed. Jagjivan Ram had previously established a commission, the Bhole Commission, to look into establishing caste-based reservations in government jobs and university spaces, and it was in 1984 that the report of the Commission was completed. It suggested, in total, a 49.7% quota divided between Scheduled Castes, Depressed Backwards Classes, and Intermediate Backwards Classes, though a majority of the Indian people were eligible for these new reservations. Despite his advisors telling him that implementation would amount to political suicide, Jagjivan Ram believed that he had to implement caste-based reservations to break the power of the upper-castes. And so, he announced the full implementation of the findings of the Bhole Commission.

The result was a wave of self-immolations by upper-caste students. For a time, three students immolated themselves every day. But nevertheless Jagjivan Ram stood firm. Though he offered his sympathies to the students, he refused to budge on caste-based reservations. And this caused the collapse of his cabinet, as the Hindu nationalists Vajpayee and Advani left and so did the farmer leader Charan Singh, over the issue of reservations. Having lost much of his cabinet, having a dramatically weaker position, despite retaining a substantial majority, Jagjivan Ram announced an election. And so it was in 1984 that the nation went to the polls.

Jagjivan Ram’s IDRP had an enormously weakened position, as upper caste voters wouldn’t dare countenance him, and various regional leaders refused to support him owing to a desire not to see their own popularity harmed. His previous press conferences had been lightweight affairs, due to the press being grateful for his actions ensuring freedom of speech; now this ceased to be the case as journalists routinely gave him tough questions, ones he often had difficulty answering. Many quarters of Indian society openly cursed his name for the establishment of caste-based reservations, either for diminishing the privileges of upper-caste Indians, or for not including certain groups - Jats, or Khatris. In particular, victims of Sanjay’s campaign of mass sterilization desired inclusion in the reservation scheme, citing that in many parts of India, they were considered all but untouchables. It seemed Jagjivan Ram was heading for defeat.

Amidst this came the Sanjay Congress. Though it was enormously weakened by the great split of 1982 and the subsequent defeat, it still existed, and it had been bolstered by its victory in the 1983 Awadh elections, caused almost entirely due to the popularity of the incumbent Chief Minister V. P. Singh. Effectively hollowed out of most of his membership, what remained was little more than a Sanjay Gandhi personality cult. With Sanjay in jail for theft from the treasury, members attempted to hold protests, but none of these protests proved to be anything of significance. In the absence of Sanjay, his wife Maneka Gandhi became its leader. As she had no political experience whatsoever and indeed had served as a model before marrying Sanjay, most thought she would bring the rump of the Sanjay Congress to its final collapse. But she was intent to make sure this wouldn’t happen.

During the Bhole Commission protests, Maneka was there to console the mothers of immolated children. She was there to denounce the Bhole Commission report as divisive. And indeed, this was much commented by the media, that she was willing to attack Jagjivan Ram so decisively. By the time elections were announced, Maneka had partially built up a new public image.

With the elections, Maneka faced the same accusations that Sanjay had faced in 1982, that there had been campaigns of mass sterilization, that the soul of Indian democracy had nearly been killed. She faced hecklers deriding her and her husband, chanting slogans such as Indiri Bachao (“Save Your Penis”), and Sanjay continued to be compared to the dictator of Pakistan, Zia-ul-Haq. But these issues she sought to tackle. The Sanjay Congress did not run candidates in much of the nation, with the hopes instead of centralizing their efforts to those constituencies that Maneka felt could be won. She stated that, yes, there had been severe atrocities during Sanjay’s tenure as President, that there was no apology possible for the horrors of mass sterilization...and that if Sanjay had known, he would have stopped them. She alleged that it had been a secret cabal of advisors, bureaucrats, and lower-level administrators that had committed the atrocities, and that now this cabal had latched onto the current government - the clear implication was that there was a plot to continue mass sterilization that was wholly unconnected to Sanjay. Despite being widely mocked in the press as reminiscent of the old medieval adage of “the king’s evil advisors”, it was nevertheless a defence that did partially succeed.

Most of all, she attacked Jagjivan Ram. She alleged that he was conspiring to divide Brahmins and Dalits from one another for his own electoral gain. She increasingly relied on Hindu nationalism despite being a Sikh, stating that Brahmins and Dalits should unite in their common faith - that common faith was, of course, Hinduism. It was explicit enough that Hindu nationalists would know to vote for her, but implicit enough that she could deny being a Hindu nationalist. The Hindu nationalist and Maratha regionalist Shiv Sena, led by Bal Thackeray, supported the Sanjay Congress during the Emergency, and Maneka ensured they would continue to offer such support. The fact that she was a young woman, and an ex-model at that, meant that few politicians took her seriously enough to take the time to attack her and her campaign.

But all the while, Jagjivan Ram laid out his own campaign across the nation. He gave speeches where he adeptly walked the line between defending his own policies and conveying his sympathies to the students who immolated themselves. He extolled the achievements of his tenure as PM, namely restoring democracy and purifying the constitution. He often faced heckling by people who accused him of not caring about upper-caste people, of only caring about revenge. But this he denied. He stated that lower-caste people had jobs, and that they needed reservations in order to get any measure of help from the state. And he stated that he would make it easier for upper-caste people to get jobs as well through comprehensive economic reform, to create a booming economy for all. He made these speeches all across the nation, and they were widely covered in the media. It seemed he was making up for his diminished popularity.

At the same time, Charan Singh led his new party, the Lok Dal, in opposition to Jagjivan Ram and his government. He derided him as anti-farmer and brought the powerful vote of the Jat ethnic group against him. The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Loktantrik Party (BLP) likewise attacked Jagjivan Ram, alleging that he was animated by anti-Brahmin sentiments as well as a desire to divide Hindus. Both of these parties harshly attacked Jagjivan Ram while totally ignoring Maneka Gandhi.

But at the same time, Jagjivan Ram went hard against these two parties. He alleged that Charan Singh was an unscrupulous and power-hungry man, an old man in a hurry, who reduced his base to a mere vote-bank. At the same time, he alleged that the Hindu nationalism pushed by the BLP was false. Jagjivan Ram was a follower of the Bhakti Hindu saint Ravidas, and he stated that the Ravidassia school of thought, with its belief in the equality of Hindu and Muslim alike, of low-caste and upper-caste alike, all before a God which could be worshipped by all, was the truest form of Hinduism in contrast to the Hindutva pushed by the BLP. While Jagjivan Ram had pushed this belief even before the election, and the Ravidassia movement had already been spreading across Dalit communities throughout India, it had now been effectively weaponized. It was an effective attack, one which put the BLP on the defensive.

It was a few weeks before the election that a game-changing party shift emerged. Subramanian Swamy, who during the Emergency organized opposition to the regime among the diaspora and famously snuck his way into Parliament in 1976 to denounce the then-prime minister Indira Gandhi to denounce her for killing democracy before escaping, had in 1983 been dismissed from the administration for anti-Muslim sentiments, though he alleged it was really because Jagjivan Ram and Vajpayee had conspired to sideline him. He initially refused to support any party in the 1984 election. But Maneka had been in contact with him, and successfully brought him into the Sanjay Congress a few weeks before the election. And so it was that one of the most famous opponents of Sanjay Gandhi was now brought into Sanjay’s party. It was a game-changing event, one which added much credibility to the Sanjay Congress.

A mere three weeks before the election, another game-changing event shook Indian political society. Jagjivan Ram’s son, Suresh Kumar, was caught in flagrante delicto with a college student, and pictures were published in a newspaper run by the Sanjay Congress. A married man well over the age of forty having an affair with an eighteen-year-old woman rocked the nation. If Jagjivan Ram couldn’t teach his own son that extramarital affairs in general, and with a woman who was barely an adult in particular, was wrong, opponents said, what right did he have to lead the nation? But Jagjivan Ram was quick on the scene. He made his son apologize on television, then disowned him, and derided the Sanjay Congress for sleazy tactics worthy of Richard Nixon. He attempted to shift the debate back to policies, but was only partially successful.

Come the election, polls and other electoral studies showed massively conflicting results. They showed everything from a majority for the Lok Dal to a parliament divided between four or more parties. But almost everyone was sure that Jagjivan Ram and his IDRP would be destroyed totally and utterly, that it would cease to exist.



They were wrong. The IDRP led by Jagjivan Ram retained a majority, even if a small one. Jagjivan Ram’s campaign had proved more successful than anyone expected, even with all the snags it hit, turning a surefire defeat into a victory. But perhaps the greatest shock came in the other results. The Lok Dal and, in particular the Bharatiya Loktantrik Party, utterly failed to win many seats at all. But perhaps the biggest shock was the electoral performance of the Sanjay Congress. Under the effective leadership of the canny Maneka Gandhi, it rose from 17 seats to 117 seats. It was now to be India’s Official Opposition. It shocked everyone, even Maneka herself. Many were unnerved, worried that this sudden surge could be used by the Sanjay Congress to take power democratically and restore Sanjay’s horrific dictatorship. A happy Maneka announced the Sanjay Congress had every intention of taking back power. Furthermore, she tried to take a step towards gaining further legitimacy

In 1982, the courts ruled that Sanjay’s faction of the Congress party had to refer to itself as the Indian National Congress (Sanjay); with the other faction integrated into the IDRP and the Sanjay Congress having become the opposition by 1984, Maneka requested the courts to see if it could be recognized as the official successor of the Congress party. But this Jagjivan Ram could not allow. He could not allow the venerable Congress party of the past to be associated with the Sanjay Congress, and so he requested 120 MPs from his own party to officially “separate” from the IDRP to create the Indian National Congress (Democratic), and it was only this kept the Sanjay Congress from being recognized as the official Congress party.

Nevertheless, Jagjivan Ram declared the victory of the IDRP. He once again enumerated his party’s policies, and he declared he would make India a better nation for all Indians regardless of race, caste, or creed. But people were worried. Worried about the policies that would be pushed by the IDRP. Worried about the revival of the Sanjay Congress. Worried that Jagjivan Ram would fail.

And so, as India entered 1985, it entered a period of uncertainty.
 
Last edited:
Revolutionary Britain: Ram Mohan Roy

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect2102.png

Ram Mohan Roy was a Bengali socio-religious and -political reformer in Colonial India.

Born into an aristocratic Bengali Kulin Brahmin family with a long history of service within the Mughal Empire, Ram Mohan Roy proved to have a career dramatically different to what one would expect. In his youth, he traveled much outside Bengal, learning non-traditional religious concepts, while also learning Persian, Sanskrit, and English, in addition to his native Bengali. He was taught in an Islamic madrassa, where he read the Quran and absorbed his concepts; it is believed that this influenced his later rigid monotheism, though this is disputed. He worked with the East India Company as a young adult, as the servant of one John Digby, and from here he gained the Christian influences which also influenced his theology.

His theology, as published in an 1803 tract, consisted of a belief in a very rigidly monotheistic interpretation of Vedanta Hinduism, which excluded any and all idolatry. He alleged that this was the "pure" Hinduism which once existed in the time of the Vedas and Upanishads, before being corrupted over time. He also grew interested in the Bible, reading it and finding that a lot of it was fully reconcilable with his Hinduism. Specifically, he was drawn towards Unitarian Christianity, with its own belief in a rigidly monotheistic god, its denial of the divinity of Jesus, and its associated politics of liberty. The sect he founded of Brahmo Samaj is in many ways a syncretism between Hinduism and Unitarian Christianity.

Ram Mohan Roy was also increasingly brought towards socio-political activism. In 1821, he railed against the fresh new restrictions on the press established by the Governor-General of India. He stated that freedom of the press was an inheritance from the Mughal era, pointing to its news service, and that the British authorities were going against established custom. It is perhaps the first advocacy for freedom of speech in Indian history. From here, he moved more and more into the domain of politics. He railed against the practice of sati, the Bengali practice where widows would burn themselves on their husbands' funeral pyres, and he condemned it as against pure Hinduism. His texts on the matter also influenced many in Britain, particularly Unitarians who agreed with most of his religious beliefs. He also founded the Vedanta College to teach youth in new western ways of education, and advocated administrative reform.

In the wake of the Popular Revolution, Ram Mohan Roy was ecstatic. He had long idolized the French Revolution, and believed parliamentary reform was an excellent cause; now, Whigs and Radicals controlled the British Isles and were intent on just that, passing the Charter of Liberties and Securities, as well as the Frame of Government. He believed it was an excellent opportunity for reforming India's administration. And so, he left India for the British Isles in 1829, where he was quickly greeted by cheering crowds. In addition to widespread glorification of his effort against sati, Unitarians believed he was one of them and as such celebrated his effort in extending the Unitarian faith in India. In short, he was a celebrity. He also quickly gained connections with the British administration, including with the Prime Minister, Lord Althorp. Many Indians were joyous, believing that he would serve as an unofficial Member of Parliament for India. But there were those who wanted him to become an official Member of Parliament.

Core among them was the radical philosopher Jeremy Bentham. His religious views were viewed as being similar to Unitarianism, and he too saw much to admire in Ram Mohan Roy's fight for the freedom of the press. Many others, like the Radical MP Joseph Hume, also saw much to admire. [1] With religious checks having been abolished, he was now eligible. And so, in 1830, he was drafted to run in East Finsbury against the Whig-turned-Tory Robert Spankie. Though he faced questions over his religion, whether he was a Hindu "heathen" or a Christian, he evaded them by giving the impression of being a Unitarian while still leaving room to maneuver. When his eligibility was questioned owing to his Indian birth, he stated that he was a natural-born British subject due to his birth in Company-ruled Bengal. With East Finsbury being a generally Radical grand division, it was an easy victory for Ram Mohan Roy. And so, Ram Mohan Roy, with his flashy turban and exotic "Oriental" robes, was sworn in as an MP.

In office, however, Ram Mohan Roy experienced difficulties. He was thoroughly disenchanted with the short lived Althorp administration after it passed an Irish Coercion Act, believing that the causes of Ireland and India were intertwined. His increasingly radical opinions were shouted down. After the Mountain Whigs led by Samuel Whitbread split the Whig Party and formed their own government, Ram Mohan Roy joined them. But even this government proved too moderate for him, as reform continued to be sluggish. Furthermore, he faced attacks from the Tory press, who derided the idea of a "Hindoo" seated in the Parliament of a Christian nation. He was repeatedly accused of blasphemy and faced numerous failed petitions for unseating. And even those who sympathized with him were often condescending, more covertly racist than Ram Mohan Roy anticipated. The only fellow MP he genuinely liked was Daniel O'Connell, if only because they were both representatives of colonized peoples. But nevertheless, Ram Mohan Roy did propose an anti-sati bill and he got it passed, ending the practice. Furthermore, when time came for renewing the East India Company's Charter, he advocated the creation of a Legislative Council with a partially-elective composition, as well as the full implementation of the Charter of Liberties and Securities in India, proclaiming that good government was the only cure for rebellion; he only grew more radicalized by his experiences as MP. These were ultimately watered-down; the sixteen-person Legislative Council only had four elected seats, and only some rights like religious liberty, trial by jury, and freedom of the press were assured. In 1833, Ram Mohan Roy declined to run for re-election.

Instead, he took a ship to the United States, where he was met by Unitarians who loved him. His arrival caused a brief craze there - children were baptized with his name, and a small Western settlement was named after him. However, he quickly grew disenchanted when he realized the full scope of American slavery - how, he thought, could the land of civil and religious liberty have so much slavery? And so he decided to go back to India, armed with experiences of interacting with the colonizer, as well as a truckload of western books.

Back in India, he met up with friends like Dwarkanath Tagore, learning that though things had improved, it was not nearly enough. And so, Ram Mohan Roy went to work to improve things. He published the works of Locke, and Bentham, and Sidney, and Cicero, and many other works, in Sanskrit, Persian, Bengali, and many other languages. He wrote a lengthy dialogue between a thinly-veiled version of himself in discussion with various Britons, to serve as an introduction to the Western canon, whose learning he believed was necessary for the youth to gain advancement. He presented the Charter of Liberties and Securities to the Maratha Peshwa, and he requested its immediate adoption. Though it was refused, some in the royal court did take notice of its provisions, and found them to be not quite so radical; the 1861 Decree of Rights took much inspiration from this document, and today Maharashtra's modern Declaration of Liberties also owes much to it. Ram Mohan Roy established schools and colleges as far afield as Bombay and Delhi. He was hopeful that the cause of good government in India would be accomplished beyond his lifetime. And so he died in 1841. Even in death he sparked controversy one last time, when he requested to be buried rather than cremated.

Ram Mohan Roy is remembered as a radical icon, as a Bengali nationalist hero, and as a reformer of the British Isles. The Goan Constitution, issued in 1829, included a dedication to Ram Mohan Roy and his fight for the "cause of liberty", even though it established the Goan Republic as an explicitly Catholic state [2]. More recently, after independence, the Bengali government gave him the Bangla Mukti Patak for his accomplishments for Bengali and wider Indian freedom.




[1] While the idea of a Hindu MP in 1830 may seem totally insane, note that in OTL in 1832 both Bentham and Hume wanted Ram Mohan Roy to become an MP. Note than in OTL he was likely ineligible - the oath to become an MP at the time required one to swear "on the true faith of a Christian", and though Ram Mohan Roy was influenced by Christianity, he was not a Christian. ITTL, this isn't an issue because no such oath has to be sworn.

[2] In case this seems insane, note that in OTL the restoration of the 1812 Spanish Constitution in 1820 included a dedication to Ram Mohan Roy, despite affirming Spain as an explicitly Catholic state.
 
India's 2016 election

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
layer6.png

The 2016 Indian presidential election was held on November 3, 2016.

In the 2016 Loktantrik Party presidential primaries, to the astonishment of many, the controversial flamboyant billionaire tycoon Vijay Mallya became the nominee of his party, despite his vastly controversial career as a seller of alcohol as well as his lack of any government experience whatsoever. He ran on a populist platform with the motto "Sara Jahan se Accha" and opposed "anti-national" sentiments as well as illegal immigration from Bangladesh. Despite facing widespread accusations of xenophobia as well as sucking up to Russia, he nevertheless won the primaries. The 2016 Samata Party primaries were won by Rabri Devi Yadav, the wife of former president Lalu Prasad Yadav, who faced off a strong socialist challenge by Bhim Singh, and she advocated the continuation of incumbent President Chouhan's policies; however, she was dogged with serious accusations of corruption as well as improper use of government assets.

Despite leading in virtually all presidential polling, and despite Mallya's campaign being dogged with controversies left, right and centre, Rabri's lead gradually narrowed, and she herself was dogged with serious accusations of corruption which dented her polling. Being a well-known quantity, she had already faced many attacks and a substantial portion of the Indian population hated her already. Ultimately, Mallya won in the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote.
 
Last edited:
Majlis-i-Dharam of the Punjabi Republic

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect1853.png

The Majlis-i-Dharam is a consultative assembly, as well as a house of legislative proposal, in Punjab.

The Majlis was founded in 1888, as part of Prem Nath Kaul's formation of the Punjabi Republic. The dead Kingdom of Punjab previously had Sikhism as its established religion, with the Akal Takht and its Jathedar having vast amounts of influence, but at the same time Hindu temples as well as mosques were given patronage, and vassal states had their own established religions. The Punjabi Revolution was quickly succeeded by Prem Nath Kaul leading an army to crush the vassal states, and he also forced out opponents from their houses of worship; the subsequent Sannyasi Rebellion was quickly crushed. Being a secularist, he nevertheless believed that state's control over religion would have to be tightened; as a result, in a system inspired by the French Concordat, he made Sikhism, Hinduism, and Islam co-official in Punjab. His belief was that Punjabi secularism would not be the separation of religion and state, but rather the union of all religions and state.

As such, he made houses of worship part of the state administration and their membership were now salaried members of the state who required accreditation. Though it was possible for houses of worship to opt out, in practice intimidation as well as the financial advantage made this rare. Upon the promulgation of a civil code based on the French code, Prem Nath Kaul appointed religious councils full of supporters, for them to argue that his abolition of polygamy and other such reforms were in accord with Islam, Hinduism, and Sikhism. These assemblies quickly issued long arguments in favour of the new civil code which, while failing to stop a new rebellion against the new imposition, nevertheless made it smaller than it would have been. Furthermore, in 1888, he assembled them together in proportion to their numbers to issue a formal report of support for Prem Nath Kaul's reforms; this is considered the first meeting of the Majlis-i-Dharam. It was later formalized as an institution in 1892. Being a Kashmiri Hindu, Prem Nath Kaul felt extreme respect towards the ninth Sikh Guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur, who famously martyred himself resisting the persecution of Kashmiri Hindus; as such, the institution was given a motto quoting Guru Tegh Bahadur - "Sacrifice your life, but relinquish not your faith". Today, this great expression of religious freedom remains its motto.

Later, in 1912, the makeup was reformed further so that it had a set membership to be drawn from lists of eligibles drawn up by electoral colleges of house of worship leaders. Furthermore, in addition to its consultative powers, it was now given the power to request endowments, or waqfs, from the Legislative Body, thus making it a council of legislative proposal. Furthermore, conventions were now established - the Grand Mufti, the Grand Mahant, and the Jathedar of the Akal Takht are by convention to always be appointed - and one other member was now to be appointed, to represent other religions (typically this member is Christian or Jain). In addition, five extra members are appointed, to be appointed and dismissed at the leisure of the government. As such, at times the Majlis-i-Dharam has been at odds with the ruling government, though it typically attempts to take a neutral position to prohibit being associated with any one party after non-neutrality has caused waves of anti-clericalism.

Further proposals have emerged for reform. One has been the institution of separation of religion and state, including the disestablishment and/or abolition of this chamber. Another has been separating out members - one proposal has been to create seats for the untouchable caste, which exists in all religions of Punjab; however, this has been opposed for potentially enlargening the caste divide, and Sikhs in particular oppose it because in theory Sikhism opposes the caste system (in practice, it is alive and well). Some have proposed creating separate representation for the Udasi sect of Sikhism, a sect which downplays the line of the Gurus in favour of the line from the son of the first Guru, Guru Nanak, which has resulted in widespread accusations that the Udasi are simply Hindus who feel reverence towards Sikh Gurus or a separate religion altogether. Other proposals exist for making it truly an elective body, either by the people or by the electoral colleges. Nevertheless, all attempts at reforming this body have failed, and it appears it shall maintain its makeup for years to come.
 
Revolutionary Britain: Inns of Court

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect1745.png

The University of Inns of Court, usually known as Inns University or simply Inns, is a university of law in the British Isles, and it is the premier university of law in the nation.

This institution is ultimately rooted in the medieval institutions of the Inns of Courts and the affiliated Inns of Chancery, guilds where students were taught the law of England and certified to serve as lawyers. These were collegiate institutions where students were educated in the practical customary law of England, in a field which excluded theory; this is likely partially responsible for the perception of Anglo-American law as based in precedents rather than on theory and set principles. Initially, students first learned at the Inns of Chancery and then moved to the Inns of Court, but this process was discontinued by the seventeenth century. During the Puritan Revolution the Inns lost many students, but they nevertheless regained their stature after the Stuart Restoration; it was only during the eighteenth century that they gradually deteriorated. Of the Inns of Court, only Lincoln's Inn gave a comprehensive legal education, and the Inns of Chancery grew so totally and utterly detached from teaching the law that they became little more than places for lodging and food.

After the Popular Revolution, reform of the law quickly became a goal of the government, and under Justice Minister Henry Brougham, in the 1830s, various law codes were passed which not only dramatically reformed and codified the law, but also introduced certain legal principles for judges to consult when making their decisions. While this recourse to principles was not new - Lord Mansfield (1795-1793) also introduced legal principles into English law - they now covered most of British law. This served to further weaken education of the law within the Inns of Court. As word came of this bad education of the law into Parliament, it constituted a committee to monitor the education of the law, and in 1836 reported that either its education was severely bad or non-existent, depending on the Inn. This influenced the government to pass the Inns of Courts Act 1837, which constituted the Inns into a single university - though they kept their property and continued to hand out certifications for the bar, they were to be affiliated with the university. [1] More controversial was how neither students nor professors would have to pass religious tests, in the same impulse of the era which resulted in the establishment of the non-denominational London University and the eradication of religious tests for students in Oxford and Cambridge.

Over the following decades, the institution of Inns University resulted in the Inns themselves hosting lecturers from the university, while increasingly the Inns grew to resemble dormitories rather than educational institutions. Furthermore, law was increasingly taught at other universities, though law degrees must be certified by an Inn of Court to this day. The education of law grew increasingly complicated over time.

Today Inns is a vast, diffuse university. It exists primarily in London, but there is one campus located in Dublin, owing to the historic institution of King's Inns there in 1541. Many great lawyers and politicians come from the university, including seven Prime Ministers and numerous other chief magistrates and heads of government all around the world.

[1] In OTL, a similar proposal came in 1854 and a few other times in the nineteenth century, but they were refused. Instead, legal education flowed out of the Inns, and today the Inns of Court serve as lawyers' associations.
 
Revolutionary Britain: House of Lords election, 1867

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect2439.png

Following the Popular Revolution, there were a string of fights between the Lords and Commons. While the fear among many Lords after the events of 1827 led to mass abstentions of Tory peers, after it became increasingly clear that the Popular Revolution was not another 1793 many of them returned to sit in sessions. Nevertheless, the Lords felt nothing but disdain towards the new regime, and they desired the restoration of the Guelphs at every opportunity. Furthermore, they opposed bills proposed by the Commons, and this only added to the tumult of the Headless State era. After the Radicals' attempts at municipal reform were blocked in 1833, the resulting 1833 and 1834 elections brought the Radicals to power with a strong majority; the subsequent Municipal Reform Act was passed through the ennoblement of 20 Radicals over the veto of the Lords. It disturbed many, who viewed this as an usurpation of the power of the Lords and the emergence of a "Jacobin" style assembly government; it was here that the first talk of reforming or abolishing the Lords emerged. The two chambers would be brought into crisis again in 1846, after the rise of Wilfrid Lawson to the premiership. When he declared his support for the creation of an Irish Legislature, this resulted in mass defections of Radical lords and the defeat of the Irish Legislature bill, but when the Radicals gained a strengthened majority in 1847, it resulted in the mass ennoblement of 150 Radicals, and this enabled the passage of the Irish Legislative Bill. Furthermore, as part of the disestablishment of religion in 1851, the Lords Spiritual were removed from the Lords. However, the Lords had been reduced to a mere joke, a shell of its former self, and its power was effectively gutted by the success and intense popularity of the Lawson administration. To Lawson, this was to be celebrated; he believed the democratic element of the British constitution had to be strengthened, and to him cutting down the Lords was a part of that.

But this angered many Moderates. It seemed with the power of the Lords gutted, with the old tripartite model broken, that any hope of averting the destruction of the constitution had failed. Though the Moderates under John Russell would attempt to restore the old constitution by enthroning the Duke of Cambridge as monarch, this Second Enthronement Bill proved a failure after the Commons voted it down, causing the collapse of the Second Russell Government. Its defeat and the collapse of Russell's administration caused the rise a new Moderate ideology, one which accepted that restoring the monarchy was impossible. In 1864, the Moderates under George Grey came to power, and they were determined to restore the Lords' power not through cutting down the power of the Commons, but rather by making the Lords more representative of the nation, to thus gain its trust. The Frame of Government (Amendment) Act 1867 thus changed the composition of the Lords dramatically. Half of its membership was to become representative peers, elected by the peerages of England, Scotland, and Ireland through bloc vote. Beyond that, lords were to be elected by various bodies; ten universities, 18 from electoral colleges consisting from county councils, twenty from large cities, 15 by the outgoing Commons, 25 by the Crown (and thus the ruling ministry), and finally 12 Lords Agent-General by the colonies. Beyond that, various Moderate peers were ennobled, in order to undo the effects of the previous mass ennoblements. These components were to be replaced upon every dissolution to Parliament. This composition would be retained until the Aberdeen Gifting Scandal, which subsequently caused the abolition of hereditary peerages.

In the Lords election of 1867, the Moderates won a decisive plurality of the Lords thanks primarily to strong support for their uncontroversial governance and the general failure of the Radicals to compete in the new system. It served to strengthen the party, enabling their strength in an increasingly democratic era.
 
Revolutionary Britain: Hampden House

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
rect5280.png

Hampden House is an office building which is the seat of the Cabinet Office, as well as the Prime Minister's Office. As such, it is the headquarters of the British government.

Unlike many, many buildings, public squares, streets, and towns named after John Hampden, a building on this site was named Hampden House well before the Popular Revolution, as it was owned by the very same Hampden family. It was later purchased by George Downing and torn down to be replaced by townhouses; a legacy of this is that the street which Hampden House faces is Downing Street. Designed by Christopher Wren, they were completed by 1684. One of these buildings, at number 10 Downing Street, would shuffle around in ownership, and by 1733 it reverted back to the King. He then gave the property to Robert Walpole, the first Prime Minister, in gratefulness for stabilizing the nation's financial system, though instead Walpole suggested giving it to the person holding the position of the First Lord of the Treasury (that is, himself), and he subsequently enlarged it. Subsequent prime ministers, however, took much less use of this property, instead using properties they already owned in and near London as their residence. As such, the building instead became dilapidated and there was little appetite for spending the money for repairs. Two prime ministers did use the site as their residence: Lord North and Pitt the Younger. After Pitt lost power, 10 Downing Street was again mostly uninhabited, merely used for certain.

Following the Popular Revolution, it continued to be uninhabited and fell into further disrepair. Samuel Whitbread's ministries (1831-1833 and 1834-1837) would see the rise of plans to demolish the Downing Street houses and replace them with various offices, but this project collapsed after Parliament burned down and suddenly the government had far more important things to build. It was during Wilfrid Lawson's long tenure as Prime Minister from 1846 to 1856 that these plans were revived. Lawson's tenure saw the rapid growth of governmental bureaucracy, as his tenure was dominated by Britain's intervention in the New Granadine War of Independence (1848-52). Existing buildings ceased to be enough to house them. At the same time, flaws with executive administration were exposed, and rationalizations were desired. And so, in 1854, the Downing Street townhouses from Number 1-12 were unceremoniously torn down, and a new Hampden House - named after the old structure on the site - was established in 1858. In general, Prime Ministers used their own personal residences in London to live in, and this would remain the case until Number 3 Carlton Road was turned into such a residence in 1899. Subsequent expansion of the governmental bureaucracy in Whitehall resulted in ever-expanding government buildings, and these were later connected to one another. The rise of mass media subsequently connected the Prime Minister and his cabinet to Hampden House rather than their residences, and as a result it is viewed to this day as the centre of the executive branch of the British Isles.
 
Last edited:
Top