• 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

Lists of Heads of Government and Heads of State

Did not expect the MovieBob thing to become the most-discussed part of a list where John McAfee becomes a weird combo of Yeltsin and Ang Sang Su Kyi, but here we are I guess.

i generally hate socialist/technocratic/etc. America TLs where the main gimmick is LOOK I MADE THE FUNNY MAN APART OF A DIFFERENT PARTY but making one of the most side charchter ass people in existence the leader of TECHNOCRACY INC. and essentially like you said the American Gennady Zyuganov is unreasonably funny to me lmfao

My exact thought process was "I need someone to be like Zyuganov but more successful and less of a puppet, who's an American person who complains about lack of technological process--AHA!". I'm glad you enjoyed that.
 
Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom:
1900-1902: Marquess of Salisbury (Conservative)

1900 (Majority) def: Henry Campbell Bannerman (Liberal), Keir Hardie (Independent Labour Party), John Redmond (Irish Parliamentary Party)
1902-1906: Arthur Balfour (Conservative)
1906-1910: Henry Campbell Bannerman (Liberal)
1906 (Majority) def: Arthur Balfour (Conservative), Keir Hardie (ILP)
1910-1915: H.H.Asquith (Liberal)
1910 (Majority) def: Arthur Balfour (Conservative), Fred Jowett (ILP-SDF Alliance)
1915-1918: David Lloyd George (Liberal leading War Coalition)
1918-1921: Bonar Law (Conservative)

1918 (Majority) def: David Lloyd George (Liberal), George Lansbury (SDP)
1921-1924: Sir William Joynson-Hicks (Conservative)
1921 (Majority) def: Christopher Addison (Liberal), George Lansbury (SDP), Micheal Collins (Sinn Fein)
1924-1926: Arthur Steel-Maitland (Conservative)
1926-1932: Walter Runicman (Liberal)

1926 (Majority) def: Arthur Steel Maitland (Conservative), James Maxton (SDP), James Andrew Seddon (Workers)
1930 (Majority) def: Neville Chamberlain (Conservative), Willie Gallacher (SDP)

1932-1935: Henry Devenish Harben (Liberal Minority)
1935-1938: Noel Skelton (Conservative)

1935 (Majority) def: Henry Devenish Harben (Liberal), Oswald Mosley (Reform), Willie Gallacher (SDP), John Beckett (National Labour)
1938-1946: Anthony Eden (Conservative & Unionist)
1939 (Majority) def: Will Gladstone (Liberal), Oswald Mosley (Reform), Clement Attlee (SDP)
1941-1944: The Emergency occurs, Constructive Opposition occurs
1944 (Minority) def: Malcolm MacDonald (Liberal), Oliver Baldwin (SDP), Oswald Mosley (Reform), Jorian Jenks (Country)

1946-: Malcolm MacDonald (Liberal)
1946 (Majority) def: Harold Macmillan replacing Anthony Eden (Unionist), Oliver Baldwin (SDP), Jorian Jenks (Country), Robert McIntyre (Reform)
1950 (Majority) def: Oliver Lyttelton (Unionist), Fred Copeman (SDP), Jorian Jenks (Country), Robert McIntyre (Reform)


‘The Realignment’ is the name often given to the period of 1935-1955 in which British politics found itself shifting to accommodate the combined forces of the Financial Crash of 1929 and the raise of Autocratic Political Movements like National Syndicalism, Kemalism and the QuerFront caused a worry that British politics was unable to cope with said dilemma.

Into this morass was Oswald Mosley, a man who flirted with every political possibility (from Paternalistic Conservatism to Georgism) before nailing his colours to the mast of Social Credit, Corporatism and ‘Centrist’ Populism. Whilst the Reform Party proclaimed itself as a believer in democracy and liberty, many of the party’s members beliefs lead to concerns that Mosley was secretly a Kemalist in the vein of Collins. Mosley’s star would shine bright, and whilst he would manage to nearly topple the Liberals to second place, the real victors would be the archetype of the ‘New Tory Democrat’, Noel Skelton.

Skelton wasn’t meant to be the Tory leader of choice, but the leader designate Neville Chamberlain suffered a heart attack in a chaotic four way battle for his Birmingham Constituency alongside a bloody campaign across Britain and Skelton who had been Shadow Chancellor was chosen by the Magic Circle to become Prime Minister as all the other candidates were either too Whiggish or believed that mowing down Workers with Machine Guns would solve the strikes across the haphazardly nationalised industries.

Skelton got to work trying to bring about his concept of a ‘property owning democracy’ to Britain. The nationalised companies would be ‘co-operated’ and would see workers having partial ownership through various means and some partial Democratic control (though dependent on the industry), the Trade Union Act of 1937 would see the beginnings of the Trade Union Board which help deal with trade union demands and additionally lead to a kibosh in any potential closed shops emerging and Farming would rapidly see the popping up of Cooperative farms helped by the Agricultural Act of 1936.

But Noel Skelton time was short. Already finding himself taking increasing amounts of time off for health reasons, in 1938 during a sabbatical he would suffer a massive heart attack which nearly killed him. On a bed convalescing, he record a message offering his resignation and offering his support for the next Prime Minister.

Eden originally portrayed himself as a moderate compared to the Radical
Skelton supporter Harold Macmillan and the City of London candidate David Colville who both were given firm positions in Eden’s eventual Cabinet. But Eden would firmly push along the Skelton line, alongside increasing the amount of cooperative corporations, he would also push for increased housing, a decentralisation of community assets and invest in unemployment job schemes. This would also see him through the 1939 election as Mosley began to lose steam and the Liberals went with a bastion of the party’s right in Will Gladstone, who’s belief in protecting free trade and the city of London came at odds to many across the country.

Eden would find himself dealing with an unprecedented crisis when in 1941 QuerFront Germany proceed to enter a war with the Red Napoleon lead Soviet Union as and Turkish lead ‘Arab League’ would proceed to battle with the remains of the British and French Empire in the Middle East. Eden would be a confident war leader and guide Britain through the war, but his partial nationalisation of certain assets and war economy to deal with the Arab League and eventually QuerFront Germany after Strasser declared war on the Anglo-French Alliance.

The so called Emergency would see the collapse of Reform, as Mosley’s pacifist leanings and Pro-Strasserist speeches would see his party collapse in popularity, with the vacuum leading to Reform’s Right splintering off as the Country party under the eccentric Jorian Jenks. Meanwhile the Liberal’s would gain Malcolm MacDonald as there leader after an attempt to bring David Lloyd George went poorly and heir presumptive Archibald Sinclair suffered a stroke, of the Fabian Left of the Party, MacDonald’s commitment on Classical Liberalism was very low but his belief in Webbism was high indeed.

The main beneficiaries would be the Social Democratic Party, having be overtaken by Mosley in the thirties would find itself being taken seriously as Oliver Baldwin, a Moderate by the party’s standards would launch a Left Wing Populist Campaign across the country, railing against the continuing injustices of the land and showcasing his party as potential for a true Socialist vision of the future.

This would come to play in 1944, as the Conservative & Unionist Party and Liberal’s would find themselves over taken by the SDP in the polls. Whilst FPTP would stop the SDP gaining more than sixty seats, these sixty seats would lead to a Conservative minority government as the SDP stubbornly refused to enter coalition with any government.

The stress of a minority government would creep up on Eden who’s health would suffer as a result. Alongside this, the Irish Republic would see Collins step down for the leadership of MacBride, who’s quiet support for the continuing IRA campaign in the Four Counties would nearly lead to war as a paranoid Eden proposed sending tanks into Dublin as a possible solution before being talked down. The 1946 election was one of tiredness, and the result reflected this.

Winning the Liberal’s first landslide Majority since 1926, Malcolm MacDonald was seen as saviour of New Liberalism. Rapidly it became apparent that MacDonald wasn’t going to be changing the status quo in many ways. Whilst Tory preference for slavishly following balanced budgets has been replaced by Keynesianism, MacDonald apart from bring some of the boards back into government hands hasn’t been the saviour to the Left as many thought.

As the world turns away from the squabbles of European powers and towards what comes out of the mouths of Cutting, Jingwei and the Leningrad Clique, MacDonald’s slow pairing back from the Empire, stuttering Liberalisation of British culture (even after everything Dr Hirschfeld has published) and increased belief in making Britain the ‘export and finance capital of the world’ is slowly coming to fruition. But MacDonald finds himself a challenger as the realignment begins to stutter.

An avid reader of Marx,a disciple of Skelton and a firm cabinet minister of Eden, Douglas-Home believes that he has the ideas to truly turn Britain into the powerhouse of the world.
 
Last edited:
Good to see someone doing a take on Skeltonism Victorious! The idea of Kemalism replacing Italian fascism as the main influence on the post-war far right is very fun.

1941-1944: The Emergency occurs, Constructive Opposition occurs

This is the spookiest possible way to describe a War Government.

George Lansbury (SDP)

Now that is how you confuse a multiverse traveller.
 
Good to see someone doing a take on Skeltonism Victorious!
Inspired by @Turquoise Blue fascinating posts and me discovering one of my ‘Malcolm MacDonald as Liberal PM’ list made me realise that you could do a timeline that has Skelton Eden versus Fabian MacDonald (who’s more like Blair if anything).
The idea of Kemalism replacing Italian fascism as the main influence on the post-war far right is very fun.
I would say Kemalism is used rather indiscriminately to describe folks than Fascism is since Michael Collins is called one and I more imagine him and followed as a Peronesque entity here. But in general the Failure of the National Syndicalists to expand out of Iberian, alongside Strasser being crushed leads to Kemalism having more success as a generic answer for the woes of Liberal Democracy and Communism.
This is the spookiest possible way to describe a War Government.
I realised that Eden having a substantial majority and generally wanting to avoid the problems of Asquith and Lloyd-George decides to not form a coalition and instead uses emergency powers to guide Britain through the next ‘Great War’.

Now that is how you confuse a multiverse traveller.
I am always fond of ‘a far left party being called the Social Democrats’ as a trope occasionally. The merger of SDF and ILP has lead to an Uber ILP with substantially more reach.

Though this does mean a rather Canadian political system that has emerged but with 30s Politics.

Additionally I like no one has commented on Jorian Jenks leading a ‘Blood and Soil’ Party or Scottish Nationalist takeover of the Reform Party machinery.
 
Note: A fair few people here may be based on real ones, but they all are tantamount to fictional and should not be interpreted as their OTL people.

Chairmen of the Minnesota Democratic Republic after democratisation

Vincent Weber (Conservative) 1990-1996
1990 [31 seats, coal. with LDP and D'90]: def. Walter Mundal (Farmer-Socialist) [30], Tim Pfenning (Liberal Democratic) [12], Martin Olav Sabo (Democrats '90) [10], Tage Albrektsson (United Farmers) [9], Karl Horn (Western Youth League / Greens) [1]
- Minnesota assented to Confederation (for the second time) in 1991 -
1994 [31 seats, coal. with ND]: def. Tim Pfenning (Liberal) [19], Judi Dutcher (New Democracy) [18], Martin Olav Sabo (Democrats '90) [10], Gerald Sikorski (Farmer-Socialist) [8], Tage Albrektsson (United Farmers) [7]

Albert Quie (North Star) 1996-2002
1996 [48 seats, majority]: def. Vincent Weber (Conservative) [15], Tim Pfenning (Liberal) [14], Felix Schlosser (Farmer-Socialist) [12], Carol Jonsson (Farmers and Democrats) [4]
2000 [27 seats, coal. with Conservatives]: def. Theodor Mundal (Farmer-Socialist) [33], Gil Gutknecht (Conservative) [21], Vilhelm Albertsson (Communist) [7], Tim Pfenning (Liberal) [3], Donald Reich (Farmers and Democrats) [2]


Theodor Mundal (People's Alliance [Farmer-Socialist]) 2002-2006
2002 [66 seats, pact with Communists]: def. Beata Mikaelsson (Liberal) [10], Jakob Ramstad (Conservative) [9], Julia Sabo (Farmer-Labour) [5]
2006 [52 seats, pact with Communists]: def. Miko Habich (Non-Partisan League) [31], Mikaela Amble (Conservative) [7]


--- Parliament's Rule 2006-2007 on agreement of President of Minnesota Judi Dutcher ---

Lorie Skjerven Gildea (Independent) 2007-2009
2007 [supported by Liberals & Conservatives]: Miko Habich (Liberal) [36], David Sønju (Conservative) [30], Theodor Mundal (People's Alliance) [17], Julia Sabo (Farmer-Labour) [7]

Miko Habich (Liberal) 2009-2011
2009 [minority]

David Sønju (Conservative) 2011-2017
2011 [49 seats, majority]: def. Miko Habich (Liberal) [37], Tom Bakk (Farmer-Labour) [3], Helle Thorsen (Workers' Alliance) [1]
2015 [42 seats, minority]: def. Miko Habich (Liberal) [36], Paul Thissen (Farmer-Labour) [6], Helle Thorsen (Democratic Progressive) [3]


Konrad Zellers (Conservative) 2017-2019
2017 [minority]

Lori Svenson (Liberal) 2019-2023
2019 [39 seats, minority]: def. Konrad Zellers (Conservative) [31], Paul Thissen (Farmer-Labour) [14], Helle Thorsen (Democratic Progressive) [2], Cam Gordon (Green) [1]

Konrad Zellers (Conservative) 2023-2029
2023 [37 seats, minority]: def. Paul Thissen (Farmer-Labour) [22], Lori Svenson (Liberal) [20], Elke Chaput (Democratic-Progressive) [4], Cam Gordon (Green) [1]
2024 [38 seats, minority]: def. Paul Thissen (Farmer-Labour) [30], Lori Svenson (Liberal) [12], Elke Chaput (Democratic Progressive) [2], Cam Gordon (Green) [1], Kathleen Bleier (Minnesota) [1]


Paul Thissen (Farmer-Labour) 2029-2036
2029 [46 seats, majority]: def. Konrad Zellers (Conservative) [27], Melisa Franzén (Liberal) [6], Nellie Andreassen (Democratic Progressive) [5]
2034 [43 seats, majority]: def. Jeremy Munson (Conservative) [25], Nellie Andreassen (Democratic Progressive) [9], Melisa Franzén (Liberal) [3], Mylène Danielsen (Green) [1]


Tollak Dahlstrom (Farmer-Labour) 2036-present
2036 [majority]
2039 [41 seats, majority]: Kurt Daudt (Conservative) [20], Nellie Andreassen (Democratic Progressive) [14], Anja Grahn (Liberal) [4], Mylène Danielsen (Green) [2]
 
Last edited:
1913-1917: Woodrow Wilson (Democratic)
1912 (with Thomas R. Marshall) def. Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive), William Howard Taft (Republican), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)
1917-1920: Charles Evans Hughes (Republican)
1916 (with Charles W. Fairbanks) def. Woodrow Wilson (Democratic), Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive), Bill Haywood (Socialist)
1920-1921: Robert Lansing (Democratic)
1921-1927: Leonard Wood (Republican)
1920 (with Samuel Gompers) def. Al Smith (Democratic), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)
1924 (with Brice P. Disque) def. Robert M. LaFollette Sr. (Progressive-Farmer-Labor), Al Smith / William Gibbs McAdoo (disputing Democratic tickets)

1927-1937: Brice P. Disque (Republican-National-Labor)
1928 (with Herbert Hoover) def. Theodore G. Bilbo (Democratic), Al Smith (Liberal), Victor L. Berger (Socialist-Farmer-Labor)
1932 (with William H. Murray); disputed [hung electoral college]
1933 presidential vote; Brice P. Disque (Republican-National-Labor) def. Carter Glass (Democratic), numerous Socialist candidates [replacing Morris Hillquit]
1933 vice-presidential vote; William H. Murray (Democratic) def. Robert M. LaFollette Jr. (Farmer-Labor)

1937-1945: Douglas MacArthur (Republican-Democratic-National-Labor)
1936 (with Harry F. Byrd Sr.) def. Robert M. LaFollette (United)
1940 (with Harry F. Byrd Sr.) def. Huey P. Long (United)

1945-1953: Harry F. Byrd Sr. (Republican-Democratic-National-Labor)
1944 (with Daniel J. Tobin) def. Huey P. Long (United)
1948 (with Daniel J. Tobin) def. Earl Long (United)

1953-1957: Dave Beck (All-American-National-Labor)
1952 (with Harry S Truman) def. Earl Long (United)

Based on exchange in @theev 's test thread, seeing rates of unionisation between 1918 and 1920 continue until everybody is in a union in the 1950s. Its just that union is either a military industrial company union or an underground Wobbly cell.
 
Citizen of the World - the Political Career of Mickey Leland

1973-1979: Member of the Texas House of Representatives [88th district]
1979-2002: Representative from Texas's 18th district

defeated Deborah Vee Vernier (Socialist Workers)
defeated C. L. Kennedy (Republican), Bill Fraser (Libertarian)
defeated C. Leon Pickett, Thomas P. Bernhardt
defeated Glen E. Beaman, Jose Alvarado (Independent)
defeated Joanne Kuniansky (Independent)
defeated J. Alejandro Snead
'90: unopposed
'92: defeated Thomas Spink

1993: Democratic Primary candidate for Texas Senate Special Election
lost to Bob Kruger, Richard W. Fisher, José Angel Gutierrez, Gene Kelly, C. "Sonny" Payne
'94: defeated Jack Fields, David Collison (Reform)
'96: defeated Ron Paul
'98: defeated Tommy Merritt, Ron Paul
'00: defeated Carole Keeton Strayhorn

2002: Democratic candidate for Governor of Texas
defeated Joseph Hugh Allen, Gary Espinosa, Dan Morales
2003-2013: Governor of Texas
(with Jim Hightower) '02: defeated David Dewhurst
'06: defeated Florence Shapiro, Kinky Friedman (Independent)
'10: defeated David Barton

2012: Democratic candidate for Texas Senator
defeated Paul Sadler, Leticia Van de Putte, Ricardo Sanchez
2013-2021: Senator for Texas
'12: defeated Ted Cruz
'18: defeated Ken Paxton,
Dale Ross (Independent)
2020: Democratic candidate for President of the United States

defeated Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Michael Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard
2021-present: President of the United States

(with Rocky Anderson) defeated Donald Trump/Mike Pence, Mike Bloomberg/John Hickenlooper (Independent)
 
Last edited:
Mazda does American Content

1850-1853: Charles Francis Adams, Sr. (Free Soil)
1853-1857: Franklin Pierce (Democratic)
1857-1861: James Buchanan (Democratic)
1861-1864: Abraham Lincoln (Republican)
1864-1865: Abraham Lincoln (National Union)
1865-1868: Andrew Johnson (National Union)
1868-1869: Andrew Johnson (Democratic)

1869-1877: John Quincy Adams II (Democratic)
1877-1881: Charles Francis Adams, Sr. (Democratic)
1881-1885: Ulysses S. Grant (Republican)
1885-1893: Henry Adams (Liberal)
1893-1901: Charles Francis Adams, Jr. (Liberal)
1901-1909: Brooks Adams (Liberal)
1909-1913:
Alton B. Parker (Conservative)

Many thought, at the end of John Quincy Adams, Sr.'s fractious Presidential term, that there would be fewer Adamses in the chief magistracy from thence forth. But they wagered without JQAI's son, Charles Francis Adams, a Congressman and newspaper editor who was the Vice-Presidential candidate of the anti-slavery Free Soil Party under Martin Van Buren in 1848. The Free Soilers won enough electoral votes to hold the balance of power, and made a deal with the Whigs to elect the larger party's candidate for President and put CFAI in as VP. This proved to be a canny move, as Zachary Taylor died in December 1850 and put an Adams back into the White House. However, much to the dismay of the Free Soilers, the administration had already reached a compromise with the slave states to perpetuate the institution, and Adams was frustrated in his endeavours as a President without electoral legitimacy or a major power base in Congress - much like his father, in fact.

CFAI was a Republican Congressman during the Civil War, and his namesake son was a Union General, but the next Adams President was a Democrat - Massachusetts Governor John Quincy Adams II, son of Charles Francis Adams, Sr., moved away from the Republicans over the Reconstruction policies of the post-war party, and crossed the floor to stand for the Democrats as Andrew Johnson's successor. He was an unlikely consensus candidate on the Convention floor, but as the slogan of the Convention was "This is a White Man's Country, Let White Men Rule", we can conclude that Adams had at least one or two things going for him. The rejection of Republican Reconstruction policies at the general election was a major setback in American race relations, and at the 1872 convention there was a major revolt of liberal-minded Democrats. This election featured a strong third-party run by CFAI, who returned at the head of the Anti-Masonic Party, espousing temperance, social reform and anti-elitism. Despite this family feud, the next election involved a deal whereby the Anti-Masons would support the Democratic Party in return for the return to the Presidency of their man.

In this way, CFAI became the only person in American history to succeed his own son as President, or to serve two non-consecutive terms. His second term was a bit of a bust, all told, due to the ideological differences within the governing alliance. He was defeated for re-election by General Grant (the electorate felt that two terms, even separated by over twenty years, was enough for any man), but the Republican was weakened by ill-health and financial troubles. The task of radically reforming the USA was left to the insurgent 'Liberal' Party, then led by Henry Adams - son of CFAI and brother of JQAII.

HA combined the white-supremacist mainstream of American political thought (Grant had only ever been an aberration) with the populist anti-elite/anti-corruption rhetoric of the old Anti-Masonic Party and the provincial discontent of the farmers and workers. Henry Adams rejected dogmas like Socialism and Darwinism, instead appealing to natural common-law traditions which he defined as 'Anglo-Saxon'. As such, he restricted moves towards racial equality and non-white immigration. In domestic policy, he restricted civil liberties in accordance with his entropic theory of history (the world was subject to inexorable decline, and therefore the state needed to be a bulwark against the resultant Disorder) and was equally harsh in his opposition to Jews and financiers, whom he presumed to be the same thing.

Due to the authoritarian nature of the Liberal Party administration, the next few elections must be viewed as highly suspect - nevertheless, HA was followed by his Vice-President and brother, Charles Francis Adams, Jr., who won with 84% of the popular vote. The new administration retained the broad character of HA's vision, but moved to implement policies directed at appeasing the masses, including land reform paired with land-based Single Tax - which pleased both the small farmers and the commercial classes. This was also a time of rapid growth in the railroad network, funded by the gains of the state-owned banking system. After CFAII came another brother, Brooks Adams, who reverted to HA's scepticism towards business and succeeded in taking America off the gold standard - ironically serving to underpin the nation's later economic successes.

At the end of BA's second term, the Army made it very clear that they would like a change of government, and consequently the Conservative Party came to power for a brief period (ironically they were much more liberal than the Liberals had been) in which they returned the country to the status of a competitive democracy. While the Liberals would return to power under President Wilson, there would be no more Presidents from the Adams family - not until the military regime of Sam Adams in the 1960s.
 
2020: Democratic candidate for President of the United States
defeated Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Michael Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard

dude the amount of butterflies that would be set off by A. Leland still being around way into the 21st Century and B. Democrats controlling the Texas Governorship between 2002 and 2013 and Cruz's OTL Senate Seat (also apparently Rocky Anderson being a Senator from Utah) would make the likelihood that TTL's 2020 election would look anything like OTL's basically impossible
 
dude the amount of butterflies that would be set off by A. Leland still being around way into the 21st Century and B. Democrats controlling the Texas Governorship between 2002 and 2013 and Cruz's OTL Senate Seat (also apparently Rocky Anderson being a Senator from Utah) would make the likelihood that TTL's 2020 election would look anything like OTL's basically impossible
You really think Leland surviving is gonna butterfly things that much?
 
You really think Leland surviving is gonna butterfly things that much?

yeah i hate to 'great man' things but Leland really was a once in a lifetime figure who would have went much farther if he had lived as long as he did ITTL.

More than Leland surviving is Democratic control of the Texas Governorship and Senate Seat. the amount of legislation that wouldn't/now would get passed and the events that now wouldn't happen (butterflying away the entire 2016 Cruz Campaign) given those conditions would radiate out intensely
 
You really think Leland surviving is gonna butterfly things that much?
A Democrat governor of Texas, and a Democrat Senator from Utah during the late 2000s-early 2010s would result in some quite big butterflies. For example if the entire Senate was the same in 2009 plus one more Democrat from Utah, they might pass a completely different healthcare bill. And if the composition of the Senate is changed in any other way that would have massive ramifications on the Obama administration. And Leland being in the Senate during Obama's second term would also have major consequences. Even if we suppose things remain more or less the same after this, Ted Cruz not being a Senator and 2016 presidential candidate changes the Republican primary as well. And the 2013 government shutdown might avoided. Plus a Democrat being elected governor of Texas multiple times would have downballot effects in terms of House races, and someone of Leland's politics winning statewide in a state like Texas would dramatically alter the conversation around what the Democratic Party should pursue in terms of policy and candidates. These are not small changes.
 
The BBC? I’m Irish!

2009 - 2017: Barra O’Bama (Republican)
2008 (with Seosamh Bidun) def. John McCain III (Democrat)
2012 (with Seosamh Bidun) def. Willard Romney (Democrat), Michael Rubens (Alliance)
2017 - 2021: John Drumpf (Democrat)

2016 (with Michael Pence) def. Eláir Clinton (Republican), Bearnárd Cliff (People Before Profit), Michael Rubens (Alliance)
2021 - 2025: Seosamh Bidun (Republican)

2020 (with Kamala Ó hUrmholtaigh) def. John Drumpf (Democrat), Bearnárd Cliff (People Before Profit), Howard hÍomhair Schultz (Alliance)
 
Last edited:
Political Career of Thomas Cochrane, the Tenth Earl of Dundonald

1780-1793: Member of the Crew of four Royal Navy ships

1793-1795: Midshipman of the HMS Thetis

1795-1800: Lieutenant of the HMS Barfleur

1800-1801: Commander of the HMS Speedy

1801-1818: Vice-Captain in the Royal Navy

1801-1804: Commander of the HMS Arab

1805: Ran as a Radical candidate for the Borough of Honiton (lost)

1806-1807: Radical MP for the borough of Honiton

1808-1818: Radical MP for the borough of Southwark


1818: Convicted for fraud, imprisoned, and stripped of all honours and rank

1818-1819: Imprisoned in the King's Bench Prison

1819-1821: Radical MP for the Borough of Southwark

1822-1825: Admiral of the Blue Squadron of the Royal Navy of the Kingdom of Buenos Aires

1825-1827: Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the Navy of the Republic of Venezuela

1828-1834: Vice-Admiral of the Blue Squadron of the Navy of the British Isles

1834-1845: Admiral of the Blue Squadron of the Navy of the British Isles

1841-1844: Commander of the British Navy in the Baltic during the Circassian War

1845-1855: Admiral of the White Squadron of the Navy of the British Isles

1846-1849: Commander-in-Chief of the North America and West Indies Station of the British Navy

1850-1854: Commander of the British Navy in the Philippines during the New Granadine War of Independence

1855-1856: Rear-Admiral of the Blue of the Navy of the British Isles

1856-1860: Admiral of the White Squadron of the Navy of the British Isles


Born to a Scottish aristocratic family with ties to the military, Cochrane's naval career technically began when he was five years old, when he was listed on the crews of four Royal Navy ships. This practice existed to allow seamen to rapidly acquire the years required for promotions. Cochrane's true naval career began in 1793, when during the French Revolutionary Wars he was appointed midshipman of a ship commanded by his uncle. In 1795 he became a lieutenant, and only a few years later he was court-martialled for being disrespectful of the ship's first lieutenant. However, in 1800 he made a name for himself by taking a captured French vessel to secure British hands despite a storm that threatened to result in its loss. For this act of daring, he was appointed commander of the HMS Speedy. Here he achieved some of his most famous daring acts; most famously, through the use of false colours, he captured the much larger Spanish frigate El Gamo. After thirteen months he was relieved and given command of the HMS Arab, a much smaller vessel that he found dilapidated. But despite this, he caused an international incident when he captured an American merchant vessel.

With the end of the French Revolutionary War in 1804, Cochrane finally walked on land at last. But he was disturbed at what he saw in the navy and desired reforms that would diminish what he saw as government interference in the command and corruption in naval appointments. After his petitions were refused, he befriended Francis Burdett, the leading Parliamentary radical of the 1810s, who pointed him towards parliamentary reform and the re-establishment from the "ancient constitution" as the panacea of all of Britain's ills. In 1805 he ran for the Borough of Honiton, but he faced defeat after failing to pay the necessary bribes to win election to that rotten borough; running again in 1806, he paid the appropriate bribes and won election. He quickly became an influential Radical in the halls of Parliament, and in 1807 he won election to a borough with a sizeable electorate. Here his staunch opposition made enemies out of the government, while even his allies found him hot-headed. When in 1810 Burdett barricaded himself in his house to resist arrest, Cochrane created a plan which would not only kill the arresting officers, but also destroy part of the house. Horrified, Burdett promptly turned himself in.

Ultimately, Cochrane's undoubted charisma and popularity with the public was entirely insufficient to overcome the many enemies he made, including among those who would otherwise be his friends. In 1818, rumour spread in the London Stock Exchange that war with France was afoot, with "officers of government" corroborating this. Stocks immediately soared in the frenzy, and numerous people sold off their stocks, but then it immediately became clear that this was not the case and stocks immediately came down. A number of people sold off their stocks when they were at their peak, and among them was Cochrane, and after the government proved there was a concerted effort behind this fraud, it accused him of being part of it. Cochrane denied this, alleging that this was a clear example of the government prosecuting its political opponents, but to no avail, and he faced a trial for this. The King's Bench, dominated by High Tories, motivated the Jury to find him guilty despite all evidence of this being circumstantial at best; it did so, and he was sentenced to a year in prison and the loss of all of his appointments and honours. This proved greatly unpopular, and after he got out of jail he won re-election to Parliament; however, he found himself for want of money and resigned. In Parliament before the Popular Revolution, members technically could not resign, and instead they were appointed to sinecures that made them ineligible to remain members; reportedly the government pondered refusing to appoint him to the sinecure to drain him further of money, before deciding he was less dangerous out than in Parliament.

In 1821, Cochrane moved to the Kingdom of Buenos Aires. Known in Platine circles today as the "English Occupation", this was a nominally independent state created by British invasion; officially it was merely in "personal union" with the United Kingdom, but unofficially it was a British colony, governed by a British-appointed viceroy with a frail parliament that he ran roughshod over like a Stuart. It had a navy, but also a great dearth of talent. Cochrane asked if he could enlist; despite consternation over his radicalism and conviction for fraud, he was enlisted as "Admiral of the Blue". When in 1822 Britain declared war on France, it sparked a war, and in 1823, Spain entered on the side of the French, Cochrane successfully stopped a Spanish attack. He achieved some of his most notable exploits in this period, and he even bombarded and briefly captured Montevideo. However, the Kingdom of Buenos Aires was deeply unpopular, and even Platine nationalists preferred being a colony to Spain than to Britain. When in 1825 a Platine nationalist revolt led by Bernardino Rivadavia rose up and declared a republic, the Kingdom of Buenos Aires ceased to exist. And though the First Platine Republic immediately faced Spanish reoccupation, its dream lived on.

But Cochrane was out of a job, and he could hardly join the rest of the Buenos Aires Navy to be incorporated within the Royal Navy; instead he joined up with the nascent Republic of Venezuela. Created in a British invasion, its leader, the old Francisco de Miranda, wanted his new nation to stand on its two feet. When Cochrane offered to enlist, it was accepted, and he was immediately made its Admiral. In this role, he destroyed large portions of the Spanish Navy that surrounded it and took Maracaibo from Spanish hands, and this proved decisive in not only ensuring Venezuela could devote resources to getting llaneros and other inland elements on their side, but also ensured that it could separate itself from Britain. But then in 1827 came the news of the overthrow of the British monarchy and its replacement by a new, more radical administration; Cochrane was openly ecstatic, but Miranda believed this revolutionary administration was Jacobin. This was a cause of Miranda pushing for Cochrane to resign. But Venezuelan independence was assured; Spain was terrified of brining the revolutionary British Isles against it, and Venezuelan independence was one of terms of the peace treaty between Spain and the British Isles.

Heading back home, Cochrane was offered a pardon, and not only that; he was appointed as Vice Admiral of the Blue Squadron and given the job of ensuring India would stick with the British Isles. Through a series of thinly-veiled threats, Cochrane got the Royal Navy in India on his side, in a move that was decisive in the revolutionary government keeping ahold of India. But this radical activity also excited many in Portuguese Goa, where it caused an army mutiny and a revolution. Cochrane proved decisive in the success of the Goan War of Independence's success when he bombarded the Portuguese navy stationed there, and despite this act of undeclared war astonishing many and causing a diplomatic incident, ultimately the British government appreciated having Goa as a client republic which could be commercially dominated.

Cochrane achieved not only fame, but also the restoration of his honours and rank, as well as a new fortune, which he increased with new inventions. With the death of his father, he also became the Earl of Dundonald. With the cessation of hostilities he could finally revel in the fame. But in 1840 a Russian invasion of Wallachia caused the Circassian War, and France and the British Isles, fearful of Russian control of the Danube, declared war on it in defence of the Turkish Empire. Cochrane was given full command of the British Navy in the Baltic, and here he launched yet more daring escapades. He aimed at destroying the Russian Navy in the region, and in this he was not entirely successful. Nevertheless, he terrified many, and part of the reason Russia was finally forced to the bargaining table to accept the deep losses of the independence of Circassia and the re-establishment of the Crimean Emirate was the fear of a bombardment of St. Petersburg. Cochrane yet again returned home a hero even if some of his...suggestions on how to combat the Russian Navy horrified many.

With peace achieved, Cochrane served as commander-in-chief of the British Navy in North America. But in 1848 war broke out between the British Isles and Spain over the New Granadine War of Independence, and Prime Minister Wilfrid Lawson sought for the might of the British Empire to be wrought on it and the peoples of Spanish America liberated in the form of client republics. But as for Cochrane, Lawson wanted him sent to "liberate" the Philippines, whose ports he believed it would be beneficial to commercially dominate. And so, Cochrane led a fleet which, in 1851, successfully took over Manila. But as in the 1762-1764 and 1798-1804 occupations, the British Isles found it close to impossible to expand beyond it and other ports due to local resistance. Even after Cochrane declared the establishment of the Philippines as an independent state with its own flag inspired by those of Venezuela and New Granada, few were convinced this was anything more than the legitimization of a British occupation. And despite his use of bombardment being efficient and terrifying to the Spanish, it was simply not enough to win over civilians to his cause.

But when a Spanish fleet came from Mexico in an attempt to retake the Philippines, Lord Cochrane made history - and not in the good sense. Cochrane ordered a ship packed with sulphur, towed adjacent to the Spanish fleet, and burned; the effects of this were apparent when out came a poison gas directed by the wind, which forced the Spanish fleet into a frantic and rushed retreat. And though Cochrane attempted to ensure this would not harm civilians, the inhabitants of Palanan were forced to evacuate for days. Cochrane also used cyanide shells on Spanish ships, and their effects proved even more horrific. Yet, in 1854, when Spain was finally forced to negotiate, British failure to occupy the entire Philippines led it to be used as a bargaining chip, to be returned. To many, Cochrane's occupation seemed useless. But it did have one major effect. Spain was forced to conscript many Filipino soldiers; it was they who had successfully defeated the British invasion. But if they could oppose the largest navy the world had ever known and win, who else could they oppose and win? And so, the Filipino War of Independence in the 1870s owes much to this moment.

Returning to the British Isles, Cochrane found many divided. Prime Minister Wilfrid Lawson condemned his use of chemical warfare and demoted him to Rear-Admiral, and though many were divided, a parliamentary committee forced him to testify. He defended the use of chemical warfare, claiming that warfare was inherently horrific, and that chemical warfare could limit casualties by bringing it to a swift end while making war too horrific to contemplate. Ultimately there was enough revulsion that the Aix-la-Chapelle Declaration of 1863, codifying the laws of war, was directly inspired by this. And as the discourse of the era increasingly swung against Lawson and his "secret diplomacy" and alleged desires to make himself dictator, he alleged that Lawson was an usurper and a would-be tyrant. He became an unofficial leader of the "Independent Radicals" despite not having a seat in Parliament; indeed, being a Scottish aristocrat, he was ineligible except as a representative peer. And when the 1856 elections saw the defeat of Lawson's Radicals, the new administration, dependent on Independent Radical support, restored him to his position. But Cochrane did not rest; he kept inventing, he kept creating new schemes to make money, and he kept inventing new tactics up until his death in 1860.

Today, Lord Cochrane is a man who evokes mixed emotions. To some, especially those in Venezuela and Goa, he was a hero who fought on the side of liberty, and to others, especially those in Spain and the Philippines, he was a horrifying warmonger and the father of modern chemical warfare. But nevertheless, he was ultimately a successful man. He made his name legendary, and he directly inspired the exploits of characters of nautical fiction. He was a memorable man, and if not in a good way, so be it.
 
The BBC? I’m Irish!

2009 - 2017: Barra O’Bama (Republican)
2008 (with Seosamh Bidun) def. John McCain III (Democrat)
2012 (with Seosamh Bidun) def. Willard Romney (Democrat), Michael Rubens (Alliance)
2017 - 2021: John Drumpf (Democrat)

2016 (with Michael Pence) def. Eláir Clinton (Republican), Bearnárd Cliff (People Before Profit), Michael Rubens (Alliance)
2021 - 2025: Seosamh Bidun (Republican)

2020 (with Kamala Ó hUrmholtaigh) def. John Drumpf (Democrat), Bearnárd Cliff (People Before Profit), Howard hÍomhair Schultz (Alliance)

come out you jack and tans
 
after @Walpurgisnacht 's magisterial John McAfee bit, I decided to do my own thing with Technocracy Inc.

1913-1917: Champ Clark (Democratic)
1912 (with John Burke) def. Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive), William Howard Taft (Republican), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)
1917-1925: Henry Ford (Republican)
1916 (with Albert B. Cummins) def. Champ Clark (Democratic), Bill Haywood (Socialist)
1920 (with Albert B. Cummins) def. Carter Glass (Democratic)

1925-1929: Hiram Johnson (Republican)
1924 (with Nicholas Murray Butler) def. William Gibbs McAdoo (Democratic), Henry Ford (Independent), Al Smith (Liberal)
1929-1930: Bibb Graves (Democratic / Nationalist)
1928 (with Edward L. Jackson) def. Hiram Johnson (Republican), Howard Scott (Technical Alliance)
1930-1933: Edward L. Jackson (Nationalist)
1933-1937: Henry Ford (Technical Alliance)
1932 (with Howard Scott) def. Edward L. Jackson (Nationalist), numerous Democratic and Republican regional candidates
1937-1940: Howard Scott (Technical Alliance)
1936 (with Hugh S. Johnson) def. Huey P. Long (Union)
1939-1940; Second Constitutional Convention - Establishment of North American Technate


Basic bit is that the economy implodes as WW1 starts, with France and Britain just withdrawing their debts from the US in gold and devaluing the dollar to kingdom come over night. The US never gets stuck into the war but essentially reaps the economic whirlwind - even the commiseration of the Entente's victory comes as little relief as radical elements emerge onto the scene, either proposing a proletarian revolution and alleging a sinister Jewish plot.

The Republicans essentially get captured by Ford, riding the wave of nativism and louder anti-Semitism. He however outstays his welcome, as the Klan runs amuck, and his heavy handed crushing of the incipient socialist movement means he essentially outlives his usefulness to the American establishment.

His technocratic tinkering isn't sufficient to save the US from another financial crash as the otherwise booming British financial market crashes in 1927. Hiram Johnson finds himself having to fight a rearguard action from the Klan and ends up toppled as the Klan's GOP allies form a coupon with the Democrats. The Klan themselves grow weary of Graves and his 'socialistic' attempts to deal with the economy and he is done away with. Then the Klan get holed below the waterline by nightmarish scandals and even their footsoldiers grow disgusted with the organisation. Into the breach steps the old man, Ford - in reality now little more than wheeled about by the Technical Alliance, once tied to Ford by apron strings and now the only viable political force with Socialism banned, the Democrats and Republicans discreditted and the Nationalists a spent force...
 
after @Walpurgisnacht 's magisterial John McAfee bit, I decided to do my own thing with Technocracy Inc.

Thanks, I'm glad to have inspired a bonafide Mumby classic.

I do like a bit of technocracy, partially because it's got a tremendous possibility to go wrong (smart people with inbuilt biases and no checks can talk themselves into awful things), partially because it's presented utopically in so many sources from Plato on down despite this, and partially because of all the real-world regimes that asymptotically approach it.

Ford is a good figure to use here, certainly.
 
Back
Top