• 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

Normalise Your Mum
Published by SLP
Location
Toronto
#21
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

She needs an artificial Mountain, not AV
Patreon supporter
Published by SLP
Location
Derbyshire
#22
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
#23
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.
 

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
#24
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:

Indicus

<insert title here>
Location
Trawno
Pronouns
he/him
#25
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: