• 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

The Thirty-Ninth HoS List Challenge Thread

The Thirty-Eighth HoS List Challenge Thread

  • Foreign Policy in Socialist Somaliland: From the USSR to China - NotDavidSoslan

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Resuscitation of History - Bene Tleilax

    Votes: 3 15.8%
  • Headstrong Herbert Hoover - Wendell

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Chaos Is A Lavr - Walpurgisnacht

    Votes: 9 47.4%
  • "The Same Orders Are Given By Her" - Steve Brinson

    Votes: 10 52.6%
  • The Last March of the House of Stuart - Indicus

    Votes: 9 47.4%
  • No Say in the Vision: South East Africa, 1945 - 1968 - Warthog

    Votes: 4 21.1%

  • Total voters
    19
  • This poll will close: .

Walpurgisnacht

It was in the Year of Maximum Danger
Location
Banned from the forum
Pronouns
He/Him
April Fools! I moved the start of the contest to the next day! (This is absolutely 100% the real reason and I did not forget.)

The rules are simple; I give a prompt, and you have until 9:00pm on the last day of the month (or whenever I remember to post the announcement on that day) to post a list related to the prompt. As for what constitutes a list? If you'd personally post it in Lists of Heads of Government and Heads of State rather than another thread, I think that's a good enough criterion. Writeups are preferred, please don't post a blank list, and I'd also appreciate it if you titled your list for polling purposes. Once the deadline hits, we will open up a multiple choice poll, cocurrent with the new challenge going up, and whoever receives the most votes after a week gets the entirely immaterial prize.

As alluded to above, April is well known for fools, pranks, and japes and tomfoolery of all kinds. Unfortunately, at the broader political scale lists operate at, these sort of things don't exactly translate well. The merry amusement of the few can become the calamity and disaster of many. That's why this challenge is themed around Mistakes. If there's anything the last year, and 47 specific days of a previous year, have taught us, it's that politics often hinges not on intentional plans, but unintentional errors.

Good luck!
 
Last edited:
Foreign Policy in Socialist Somaliland: From the USSR to China

Presidency of Abdillahi Masoud (1964–1967, foreign policy)

Masoud, the dictator of Somaliland between 1962 and 1987, aligned Somaliland with China during the Sino-Soviet split.

In early 1966, Masoud made a fateful decision; with the Soviet Union and China completely at odds, he chose to align Somaliland with the PRC, ceasing to take Soviet aid and paying a state visit to China, where he secured $200 million in technical aid from Mao Zedong. Chinese workers were sent to Somaliland, where they helped with projects such as the expansion of Berbera port, and Somaliland mostly replaced the Soviet Union with China as an arms supplier. Historians believe this turnaround to have been based on ideological grounds, as Socialist Somaliland put a heavy emphasis on militarism, religion and ethnicity, thus making it closer to Maoist China.

Masoud also drew increasingly close to Romania and North Korea, as his policies and leadership style bore a heavy resemblance to Juche, and Nicolae Ceausescu sought to have Romania play an important role in the Third World. The People's Democratic Party of Somaliland (PDPS) developed strong party-to-party relations with the WPK, which continued until the end of the Second Republic, and Somaliland's few natural resources were exported to, among other countries, Romania.

During that time, Somaliland also became involved in arming and funding left-wing rebellions in Eritrea, Aden and Dhofar. Masoud held a grudge against Said bin Taimur due to his refusal to modernize Oman, as well as the fact he was a slave owner. The ELF managed to withstand most Ethiopian offensives with the Somali support, which was one of the main reasons the Derg took power in 1972.

Somaliland's relations with Western countries were tense; the United States began a military buildup in Ethiopia after the 1964 war, leading Masoud to expel the Peace Corps from the country due to their alleged involvement in a coup attempt. The socialist regime had also a rivalry with former colonizer Britain, and France.

The shift towards the weaker China instead of an actual superpower led to the Soviet-backed Ethiopia easily defeating Somaliland in the next war they fought.

In 1976, four years after the communist revolution in Ethiopia, President for Life of Somaliland Abdillahi bin Masoud sent over 43,000 soldiers to invade Ethiopia and install an anti-Derg communist government in the latter country. Since Somaliland had been victorious, at least militarily, in a 1964 war between the two countries, Masoud, who closely micromanaged his forces, expected a quick victory, and in spite of initial successes, the Soviet Union quickly provided a massive military airlift to Ethiopia, with more modern weapons than anything in the arsenal of the Somaliland People's Army. In 14 June 1977, Ethiopia proclaimed victory, deeply destabilizing Somaliland and leading to an ethnic insurgency and eventually to the country's reunification with Somalia in 1991.
 
If there's anything the last year, and 47 specific days of that year, have taught us, it's that politics often hinges not on intentional plans, but unintentional errors.
Don’t know if this is tongue-in-cheek, but I think you’re thinking of 47 days from a different year…
 
The Resuscitation of History

1989-93:
Donald Rumsfeld/James Baker (Republican)

1988: Gary Hart/Lee Iocacca (Democrat)
1993-2001: Mario Cuomo/Patricia Schroeder (Democrat)
1992: Donald Rumsfeld/James Baker (Republican), Ross Perot/James Stockdale (Independent)
1996: Trent Lott/Dick Lugar (Republican)
2001- : Oliver North/Jeb Bush (Republican)
2000: Pat Schroeder/Mel Carnahan (Democrat)


History is like a machine. Sometimes it runs despite all reason, sometimes any small malfunction can cause a cascade.

Following the collapse of the Reagan-Ford superticket, Richard Allen must've been relieved to have his friend Donald Rumsfeld's phone number handy to offer him the running mate position at short notice. The former Secretary of Defence readily accepted and was subsequently elected Vice President in 1980. He was unable to save his friend Allen from being fired as National Security Adviser over his conduct surrounding the Vietnam POW's issue but was able to get his quietly appointed to his own personal staff. This kept him out of the way during the Iran-Contra scandal which his boss was able to concisely disavow given his own opposition to the former country. This put him in a strong position going into the 1988 primaries. Jack Kemp on his left, Pat Robertson on his right and Lamar Alexander on the outside, he was able to gain a commanding lead going into the convention. For his running mate he chose James Baker, a Senator from Texas and protege of his former rival Poppy Bush. In the ensuing battle of Realism vs Idealism the GOP would win four more years over the disaster ticket of Hart/Iacocca.

Allen found himself promoted to Secretary of Defence alongside retained Reagan officials Dick Thornburgh, Nicholas Brady and Ann Dore MacLaughlin with Bill Bennet eventually returning to the Department of Education. With his allies Dole and Cheney leading the Republicans in Congress, his agenda was ready to hit the ground running. And then it all kept going wrong. There was the standard Republican problems with race coming to the fore with the 1992 L.A Riots. The presidents not-reluctance to cut spending to welfare against the advice of OMB Director Paul O'Niell who favoured raising taxes. The Sofaer nomination was dogged by allegations of ideological bias (though Coleman was nominated with little such controversy.) But of course it would be his foreign policy that would seal his fate. His support of the Revolutions of 1989 and alienation of Gorbachev enabled the birth of the USS, midwifed by the State of Emergency. But this would become overshadowed by his handling of the Kuwait Crisis. He refused to get involved against Saddam Hussein's potential invasion, instead choosing to personally mediate between the Iraq dictator and the Sheikh of the aggressed nation in what amounted to strong arming Kuwait to lowering oil production enabling Iraq to repay its now decreased debt. This last action gained him the criticism of both the left and right (though mostly the right) and lost him the support of his neoconservative allies. This new political homelessness turned the DNC into a battle to succeed him, quickly boiling down to a slugfest between Mario Cuomo and Al Gore. The former would eventually win the nomination and eventually the election (along with his vice president assuaging womens groups as well as capitalising on the "Hartache.")

Pragmatic Progressivism may have dominated the domestic scene in the 90's alongside the burgeoning internet. But abroad the USS had quickly regained its footing clashing with the US and NATO in Yugoslavia and Transnistria. This combined with the rise of China as a third party to ignite a second cold war clipping the wings of the American empire. As the new millennium dawned the Republicans new they had to learn from the mistakes of the Lott campaign in order to face this new world. And the culture warriors in coalition with the remaining neocons felt that the man most victimised by Vice President Rumsfeld during the Iran-Contra scandal would be a perfect candidate...
 
Headstrong Herbert Hoover

Contemporaries mark Herbert Hoover's decision to defy the bulk of his party and veto the Tariff Act of 1930 as the biggest mistake of his doomed presidency. They point to the resignation of much of his cabinet which followed, and his futile reelection bid as an independent after he's refused renomination as evidence of this. Things were so bad for Herbert Hoover that his opponent from 1928, Al Smith, the former governor of New York, and, along with senators from some southern states, a Democratic champion of the vetoed legislation, not only once more secured the Democratic nomination, but went on to win the presidency in his own right.

Though bad for Mr. Hoover, the Al Smith presidency made important strides. No tariff bill as extensive as the one Mr. Hoover rejected ever passed in congress again. But important reforms were made to the banking and financial sectors were enacted, along with unemployment insurance and a federal retirement benefit program for the citizenry. Smith's most important legacy perhaps might be in foreign policy wherein his vociferous public criticism of the NSDAP government in Germany from 1937 ultimately contributed to its fall from power following the Czechoslovak War. Recently released British archival documents indicate that Washington's open contempt for the Hitler regime in Germany was decisive in Prime Minister Chamberlain's decision to refuse any compromise with Germany over a revision of borders favorable to it against Czechoslovakia. In Poland and the Baltic republics, Smith is viewed rather differently, as Poland, which participated on the side of Germany in the Czechoslovak War, suffered the greatest loss of territory from it, and the Baltic republics signed mutual defense pacts at bayonet point with Moscow that saw them reduced to little more than protectorates.

Many have speculated on the role the Czechoslovak War played in the decision of Stalin to engage in a full-scale war with the Japanese after some raids by that country's forces in the Russian Far East as well as what the conflict in Central Europe meant for China. The second Russo-Japanese War saw the insular empire deprived of its mainland holdings, with Manchuria and Port Arthur joining the Republic of China, a communist regime forming on the Korean peninsula which today is the world's sole titularly communist state (even as it is governed more like a theocratic and dynastic state), and the reversion of southern Sakhalin to Russian control.

Despite the war in Asia and the end of the depression at home, no doubt helped along by a naval expansion secured as Smith weakened the Neutrality Act throughout the mid to late 1930's, as well as by the end of Prohibition, American voters opt to return the Republicans to the White House in the 1940 election, choosing the youngest President of the United States to date, Thomas Dewey. A critic of any direct involvement in the war in Asia, Thomas Dewey disengages from European affairs somewhat relative to Smith, taking no position on the Yugoslav Civil War and the Italian manipulation of it, nor on decolonization, which sweeps Africa, Asia, and those areas of the western hemisphere still then under European domination. Washington even presents itself as supportive of decolonization as Dewey visits the Philippines to inaugurate the independence of that country agreed to by his predecessor and himself initiates efforts towards independence for Puerto Rico and a condominium with the British to eventually reunite the two halves of the Samoan Islands group and the Virgin Islands. Dewey does aggressively fight communism in the United States and western hemisphere as a war between Finland and the USSR shortly after the war with Japan and a separate spat between Hungary and Romania partly instigated by Rome results in Soviet expansion.

Dewey's real legacy was domestic wherein he champions and achieves passage of civil rights legislation. vociferously prosecutes the Ku Klux Klan opposing his efforts, lowers taxes, admits Alaska and Hawaii as states, hoping to strengthen the position of the U.S. against Soviet expansion and/or a resurgent Japan, and sees to fruition the atomic weapons program begun at the behest of his predecessor. Under Dewey's leadership, the United States take full advantage of emerging markets to expand trade opportunities and further grows the navy to protect its commerce, drawing the ire of the Royal Navy even as London scales down its fleet with the decline of its empire, tensions that grow further still under Dewey's successor, businessman, movie mogul, and former bureaucrat under Al Smith Joseph Kennedy.

Presidents of the United States, 1929-present:

Herbert Hoover (Republican) 1929-1933
Alfred E. "Al" Smith (Democratic) 1933-1941
Thomas Dewey (Republican) 1941-1949
Joseph P. "Joe" Kennedy (Democratic) 1949-1957
John Bricker (Republican) 1957-1965
Ronald Reagan (Democratic) 1965-1973
Dewey Bartlett (Republican) 1973-1979
Howard Baker (Republican) 1979-1989
Lloyd Bentsen (Democratic) 1989-1997
William S. "Bill" Cohen (Republican) 1997-2005
Ben Nighthorse Campbell (Democratic) 2005-2013
Wardell A. "Ward" Connerly (Republican) 2013-2021
Michael R. "Mike" Pence (Democratic) 2021-present.

One wonders what may have transpired instead had Hoover not bucked his party and signed into law the Tariff Act of 1930. Given the way Japan and some other countries approached the depression, it's entirely conceivable that Hoover's real mistake would have been in actually signing the tariff as it would excuse other large economies enacting similar measures and might have worsened and expanded the depression. One like effect though might have been keeping Al Smith out of the White House. Hoover loses reelection, if he even seeks it, but if he signs the tariff bill, he owns it, and the Democrats then likely nominate an opponent of the tariff like John Nance Garner or Al Smith's ally turned rival and successor as governor of New York Franklin Roosevelt.

While Smith's health began a precipitous decline toward the end of his term in office, Roosevelt's health issues were arguably much more debilitating. Also, Roosevelt, as governor throughout the thirties, used his platform to frequently criticize his one-time ally in the White House, presumably hoping to have succeeded him yet again. Roosevelt apparently championed a much more aggressive approach to tackling the recession, and created programs in New York, such as the Civilian Conservation Corps, which he viewed as a model for national policy under a bolder president than Smith. Still, his controversial New York Industrial Recovery Act, attacked by the courts and reconstituted in one form or another ultimately bankrupted the state, with the state's finances and economy really only improving when Nelson Rockefeller was governor. In foreign policy, Franklin Roosevelt publicly criticized Smith's "pontificating" about Europe before ultimately relenting and supporting the president's position once war broke out in Europe in 1938.

Roosevelt's convenient switch in stance extended into the Dewey presidency when Roosevelt, no longer in office and still holding on to the faint hope of election to the White House, chastised Smith's successor over his inaction to preserve Yugoslavia, a contrived state invented in the aftermath of the world war now split among several countries, against threats from within and beyond. Critics of President Dewey contend that his administrations investigation for Soviet espionage of Roosevelt aide Harry Hopkins was the result of the governor's criticism. Others contend that the inquiry was warranted, and Roosevelt's critics point to the governor's lack of opposition to Soviet expansion in his many foreign policy pronouncements as indicative of Soviet sympathies. At minimum, Roosevelt, unlike Smith, will extend diplomatic recognition to the USSR which did not happen formally until Finland fell and Romania ceded lands east of the Prut, thereby completing the Soviet takeover or domination of the entire territory (and then some) of the former Russian Empire during the Dewey administration.

A potentially significant effect might be that it takes much longer for any Catholic to reach the presidency. Indeed, Joseph Kennedy likely never rises to prominence, as he was not known to be politically active in any meaningful sense prior to his involvement with the campaign of fellow Catholic Al Smith in the latter's second, and first successful, attempt at winning the presidency. Candidates also seem unlikely to secure nomination after previously losing a presidential nomination as there won't be the Al Smith example. In between Smith's presidency and his own, Joe Kennedy worked in the film business where his family remains influential today. Since that time, other people in that space have sought office with varying degrees of success. It's entirely possible that people don't leave the film industry for electoral politics were it not for the Kennedy example.

Assuming Roosevelt won two terms, who might succeed him? With the possibility of a more precarious international situation, perhaps Henry Stimson, the consensus intraparty challenger to President Hoover who had been his secretary of state before the Tariff Act veto. As a secretary of state, Stimson would be well positioned to tackle burgeoning international crises and might still emerge as a consensus figure in a factious Republican Party. It is possible that Stimson may engage more robustly in Europe as the Hoover administration had sought to be more assertive in world affairs than the previous Republican teams. On the other hand, the opposite may be true as well. It is doubtful that Stimson will utilize or grow the field of intelligence the way Dewey did the FBI, as "gentlemen don't read other gentlemen's mail". Stimson is also unlikely to move the needle on racial equality and likely pursues a protectionist trade policy and does nothing one way or the other about decolonization. Still, it's entirely possible that he serves two terms, leaving one to wonder who would win the 1948 election under these circumstances.

With the civil rights question still festering, perhaps there's a dark horse possibility for election in 1948: Hubert Humphrey. Instrumental in bringing his Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party into the Democratic fold and in trying to get the latter on board with President Dewey's civil rights advances, it seems possible that, in the Tariff timeline, Humphrey would have been well-positioned to be the nominee, and a fresh face after several aged presidents. Well-connected to the labor movement, Humphrey likely continues Stimson's trade policy, but actively champions decolonization without the larger navy pursued by Smith and Dewey. The challenge would be in seeing whether Humphrey could actually deliver on racial progress the way Dewey did, all while managing an economy that is more unionized due mainly to Roosevelt's policies and more insulated due to Hoover's and Stimson's approaches.

Appointed by President Knowland to the Supreme Court, then-senator Richard Nixon might well have been the successor to Humphrey. An avid anticommunist, the also relatively young Californian might try to tie the former president and whomever the Democrats nominate to succeed him to the Soviet Union, assuming that around this time, Communist insurgents gain control of Albania, and Jiang's government in China gives way to its former adversaries turned coalition partners in the Chinese Communist Party. Nixon's policy record as a senator and campaigns in California suggest that he might have been able to pull large contingents of working-class white voters away from the Democrats while also perhaps teasing if not delivering on the racial progress promised by Humphrey and growing the economy.

Nixon probably would have the wherewithal to stick it out for two terms, but his abrasive personality and deep cynicism probably leave him unpopular enough after eight years to see a Democrat elected. An inoffensive reformist Midwestern governor would fit the bill, Matthew Welsh. Having a track record of working across party lines, he may well have won reelection, and likely continues the Humphrey/Nixon civil rights efforts.

Herbert Hoover (Republican) 1929-1933
Franklin Roosevelt (Democratic) 1933-1941
Henry Stimson (Republican) 1941-1949
Hubert Humphrey (Democratic) 1949-1957
Richard Nixon (Republican) 1957-1965
Matthew Welsh (Democratic) 1965-1973
Spiro Agnew (Republican) 1973-1977
Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson (Democratic) 1977-1983
Ernest F. "Fritz" Hollings (Democratic) 1983-1989
Joseph R. "Joe" Biden (Republican) 1989-1995
Robert Patrick "Bob" Casey (Democratic) 1995-2000
Richard A. "Dick" Gephardt (Democratic) 2000-2009
James H. "Jim" Webb (Republican) 2009-2017
Edward M "Ned" Lamont (Democratic) 2017-present
 
Last edited:
Chaos Is A Lavr
Commander-in-Chief of the Russian State:
1917-1919: Lavr G. Kornilov (Military Dictatorship)
1919-1942: Lavr G. Kornilov (Union of Russian Salvation)
1942-1953: Alexei A. von Lampe (Union of Russian Salvation)
1953-1956: Nikolai V. Lvov (Union of Russian Salvation)

There have been many--quiet in the front!--thank you--many governments throughout history, and the vast majority of them have been wanted by some group of the population. Our current government is very much wanted by the London stockbrokers, by the financial establishment, and by the men who print the Times. The government in the United States is wanted by the trade unions, by the African-Americans, and by at least a few of the Filipino rebels--the few who pay attention to their oppressors' elections, I suppose! The government in--actually, for a non-European example, my teaching assistant this term, a lovely girl, she's from the old Nigeria Colony--it's Halimat, her name, here she is, wave hello to Halimat--and the government her parents liked is wanted by the Hausa Muslims in the North and their clerics, and the government her parents are here because of is wanted by the Igbo Christians of the South and their oil companies. Very few governments can survive without being wanted by somebody, which is what makes this section of Russian history so confusing. The Union of Russian Salvation was, from the very start, a government nobody wanted.

I said, quiet in the front!

It was, it really was! Many people, and this is a complete misconception, believe that Kornilov's elimination of Kerensky was some political masterstroke, but the whole thing practically fell into his lap, just like the rest of the coup. The driving force behind the March on Moscow, and I know I showed you that film of the time, that early Riefenstahl, with the cheering crowds and the white stallion--pure myth, all of it. It wasn't Kornilov who marched himself to Moscow, it wasn't Kerensky who fled to a 'retirement' that was nothing of the sort. Both of them were driven around by--slide, please, Halimat--Vladimir N. Lvov.

Yes, yes, actually, I enjoyed that interruption. He does look like a prat. That's because he was. The worst kind of prat--a prat who thought he was a man of wisdom and discernment. In the service of that wisdom and discernment, he went to Kerensky as an agent of 'powerful forces' he himself had never met, and told Kerensky all about their vague conservative plans. Kerensky then made the fatal mistake of telling Lvov to go report on these discussions for him, and Lvov took that inch and made it a yard, a yard he dragged all the way to being an ambassador, allowed to speak for Kerensky to--slide, please, Halimat--General Kornilov, of course. Lvov goes and he tells Kornilov that he's considering three different ways to resolve the current crisis with the Supreme Soviet and their Majority faction, one of which is that Kornilov becomes a dictator over Russia, and Kornilov says he likes that idea. Well, who wouldn't? But what he doesn't say--and this is what new scholarship, a lot of close reading it was for me to find this, this is what I found--is that he wants it now. He just prefers the idea. He could have, and did, take it, but he's not ready to do it, not in that frame of mind.

Lvov then makes the same dunderheaded error he did last time--he takes the other fellow literally, in a way that makes him a fulcrum of history and jolly important and a Good Man To Have On The Team! And he goes to Kerensky, and tells him Kornilov is demanding to be made dictator! [1] And that's that for Kerensky, off he goes into retirement after calling Kornilov, who marches--not very grandly, mind you--into St Petersburg for a meeting and gets hailed by the Duma as a savior when he was just expecting a meeting with his boss. I've had days like that myself. So all of a sudden, he's the one in charge, and of course he can't say he wasn't expecting that, err, were you expecting someone else, perhaps you mean another Kornilov? That's a quick and easy way to get pulled off your horse and thrown in the Neva. And so, and I once again have had days like that myself, as I'm sure you'll all remember, he pretends that was his idea! All along! And Lvov is the only person who can contradict him, and in his pea-like brain there's no contradiction! This is all how it should be, and it was all his idea!

Kornilov himself had a thin vestige of ideas that could be called his own, which he expressed in--next slide, please, Halimat--oh, forgot that, yes there you go there's the Riefenstahl I was talking about, dreck like all of her films, but sadly historically important dreck--next slide, please--in his policy towards his neighbours, mostly, there they are on the map, now, with that little photo in the corner of him shaking hands with Mannerheim and Petilura. The famous one, and, ah, well, here is it--next slide please, Halimat--much bigger! Which makes it much more prominent now I've, ah, teased it slightly. And the Army, of course, he shook it top to bottom, or rather he unshook it back into Tsarist ranks. But again, this all goes back to what I was talking about in the last lecture. From Kornilov's perspective, all of these were military matters, of holding off wars and making allies, and that was a world he was comfortable with. When it came to politics, like all the White generals, he had a few bare atavisms stretched over a pit of deep discomfort with the idea of making a decision. And so he did not decide.

The Russian State was not--I have made this point many times--it should not be considered a military dictatorship, even if it could have been, because nearly all the time the military refused to dictate! Russia was under a civilian dictatorship under the impression that it had become a military one by virtue of putting on an uniform every so often. The continuity with the February revolution wasn't severed by Kerensky's blood--power remained wrapped around the Duma like an old overcoat, even if said Duma was now a right-wing rump, with Octobrists and industrialists and Tsarists and the odd compromising Kadet strait-jacketed into a single political clique headed by our old upwards-falling friend V. N. Lvov. Military rule, ironically, was held off well until Kornilov died, his liver, like so many Russians, and the Duma, who happened to be in position to want the new government, gave themselves a government they didn't want by supporting--slide, please, Halimat--Alexei von Lampe[2]!

Once again, Lvov blundered Russia into a pit by acting on the world he wanted to see, rather than the world that actually existed. von Lampe presented himself, this was his pitch, he was a man to clean up Russia! And when Lvov heard this, what he heard in his head was--actually, fair point Halimat, there's a strong chance he heard nothing at all, there was just the sensation of horses' hooves and shiny buttons and the firing of cannons for a military parade. Exactly like that Riefenstal clip, in fact. Of course, when von Lampe, in his role as de facto quartermaster of the army--left him with no opposition, of course, especially after Wrangel was shot besieging Bukhara--he'd been dealing with his authority being chipped away by magnates who wanted to sell weapons, he'd been dealing with corruption in high society, he'd been dealing with all these ethnic minority guerillas out on the steppe who Kornilov wasn't too bothered by, and he was going to "clean up" all of it--starting at the top.

It took Lvov a little too long to realise he was riding a tiger, and what pulled his fat out of the fire--yes, a fire tiger, like that LEGO set, another very enjoyable interruption but I would prefer a little less of this sort of thing--was his son[3], who you can see--slide, please, Halimat--yes, that's him right there, and the chap giving him the medal? Well, no prizes for guessing that one. By that time, von Lampe had turned around from his internal enemies to his external ones, staring across the Black Sea at the SIMB, and was happy enough to bundle the elder Lvov out of the way rather than killing him if it kept his chief foreign minister--himself only really up there because of so many purges--on side. The man who killed Kerensky by mistake ended up as military governor of Tomsk, and while I'm sure he didn't appreciate it it really is a lovely city. Really! I went there for a research trip, few years back. The ideal place to sit back, think of your mistakes, and watch your son make his big mistake, when it came to the Riga Pakt and the Rhineland War and Operation Trebizond, that would knock over the tottering remnants of the regime made by yours, albeit one he did sort of take responsibility for, which brings us on to...

...yes, thank you Halimat, you're right, I'm afraid that'll have to be covered next lecture.

[1] All of this is OTL. Really.

The only actual difference is that in OTL, Lvov also communicated a "suggestion" by Zavoiko, an oil baron and political ally of Kornilov's, that Kerensky could be shot after about a week of him remaining to keep the soldiers happy, to Kerensky, which meant that Kerensky assumed that Kornilov's putsch would mean he would be shot. This meant he was heavily opposed to the idea of a Kornilov dictatorship for obvious reasons, and so when the misunderstandings spiralled, they did so into a conflict.

[2] The sources in English about von Lampe are a bit thin on the ground--he had a semi-important role running logistics for the Volunteer Army, but is best known for his work in exile as an archivist, and for trying to bridge the gap between White emigre orgs and the Nazi collaborators in the ROA. What lets a political exile succeed is very different to what lets a leader in a regular nation succeed, but his record from the Civil War is solid enough that I think he'd make a good showing, and he did have some Top 10 facial hair.

[3] One unsourced Wikipedia page says Nikolai Lvov was an officer under Kolchak who hid under a fake name as a geography teacher before being shot as an alleged German collaborator. That's enough for me, by the way, if you ever wondered how much rigor goes into these things.
 
"The Same Orders Are Given By Her"

Leaders of the Commonwealth of Britain
1947-1949: Tom Wintringham (British Section of the Workers' International leading United Front)
'49 died in office (heart attack)
1949-1951: J. B. Priestley (British Section of the Workers' International leading United Front)
'51 resigned at prompting of Parliament
1951-1954: Tom Driberg (British Section of the Workers' International)
'54 resigned at prompting of Parliament
1954-1985: Dan Smith (British Section of the Workers' International)
'85 retired
1985-1987: Margaret Thatcher (British Section of the Workers' International)
'87 removed by vote of no confidence
1987-1987: H. A. R. "Kim" Philby (British Section of the Workers' International)
'87 retired due to ill health
1987-1991: Norman Le Brocq (British Section of the Workers' International)
'91 retired due to age
1991-: Jack Straw (British Section of the Workers' International)

The Commonwealth of Britain (and its de facto subsidiaries in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization states of Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and Newfoundland) had earned a place as the fly in the Comintern's ointment; though Wintringham's pragmatic willingness to accept support for the Second English Revolution and Priestley's ecumenical united-frontism had made London a fellow-traveller of Moscow, the folk-socialism that had grown in the New Model Armies and been welded to pre-revolutionary theoreticians to bolster Dan Smith's developmentalist ambitions was ultimately not compatible with Muscovite orthodoxy. Comrade Kaganovich could say of the BSWI that they counted as Communists - they dined with them, at the very least! - but privately, NATO represented a Third Way to both its supporters and detractors, a Red Empire with ambitions that could not coexist with that of Lenin and Trotsky's heirs.

Margaret Thatcher - veteran of the Home Front and the Thaxted Brigades, onetime project manager on the Tube Alloys effort to light up isolated areas of then-allied Australia very quickly and with great expenditure of heavy metal - was one of the few members of Dan Smith's 'expertocracy' to move from the expanded Civil Service to Congress*, trading the untrammelled (so long as it didn't impinge on Smith's goals of revolutionising the status of the North and making lots of money) authority held by Inner Party administrators like Philby, Dell, and fellow chemist Franklin for the political pulpit of Congress House. This proved a wise decision - Thatcher was a key voice on Smith-era initiatives like the New Towns Project, National Public Service, and the Industrial Democracy Acts, and was able to raise her public profile among rank-and-file Internationalists. In 1980, in a vote widely considered a proxy for Dan Smith's succession, Thatcher triumphed over Denis Healey for the position of BSWI Secretary; though John Stonehouse put forward a token effort upon Smith's retirement five years later, Thatcher's position was difficult to assail.

That changed two years later, for reasons that - in some ways - had been a long time coming. The postwar era had seen more than a million people move from Ireland (as well as smaller contingents from Iceland and Newfoundland); some were fleeing the sectarian violence that accompanied the 'reintegration' of the former Northern Ireland, while others sought to earn higher wages in industries like construction and care. They were joined by others; refugees from the British attempts to have its cake and eat it too in the West Indies and Biafra and Malaya and the People's Republic of China (Hong Kong), dissidents from Soviet Europe and McCarthyist America who traveled through thaw and stayed through cold, students and skilled workers from across the world. These migrants took on temporary, menial labor, making housing and healthcare programs substantially less expensive to the public purse and enabling the children of former British menial laborers to move up into more prestigious work; their reward was to be barred from citizenship and informally steered to segregated boroughs scattered across the North and London's Outer Belt. Informal estimates put the non-citizen population of cities like Liverpool, Dundee, and Smith's own Newcastle at upwards of 25% of their total population - many of whom had been in the country virtually since the Wintringham Era.

By the Thatcher era, the Smith Doctrine on migration was falling apart. The wage differential between citizens of non-UK NATO countries (whether they lived in Britain or elsewhere) and British citizens was more and more controversial as declining British exports led to increasing unemployment; groups like the English Action League coordinated actions that ran the gamut from letter-writing campaigns to wildcat strikes to bombings. Thatcher - and advisors such as the academics Alan Clark and John Powell - feared what was increasingly referred to in the Outer Party as the 'Malayan Scenario', where Britons not of immigrant background perceived the government as 'coddling' foreign groups, lost faith in the BSWI, and struck back, resulting in the installation of a non-socialist right-wing dictatorship or bourgeois democracy, most likely with the aid and support of the Americans. That this example stretched the actual history of the Malayan War to its breaking point - Britain was not, after all, an extractive resource-based economy, and there was no British equivalent of Indonesia - was less the point than the Inner Party's increasing worries that it was out of touch with a mythicized and largely mythical English proletariat, rooted in organic communities and fearful of the outside world. The short-term costs - staffing shortages, often quite severe, in vital sectors like construction and healthcare, followed by the expense of retraining thousands of redundant mineworkers to those jobs - seemed bearable, especially since the party would have (or so it believed) public opinion on its side.

Tensions festered through 1985 and early 1986, as the slow collapse of British Steel and British Aerospace in the face of competition from Yugoslavia, Mexico, and Japan left many skilled workers unemployed. Not even Thatcher's signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with her American counterpart, the dying Richard Nixon, was enough to shore her position up - she needed to placate both Inner Party critics and mass discontent. Drastic action had to be taken. The first shock was the 13 March announcement that, over the next year, the British government would wind down its guest worker programs on a sector-by-sector basis and begin 'encouraging'** foreign citizens in the country to repatriate. Less than a week later, this was followed by the Battle of Bow, where a St Patrick's Day parade heavily attended by members of the Residents Association and Self-Determination Leagues was attacked by fascist paramilitaries armed with bats; though the Metropolitan Police was present, they did not intervene until well after the fight had begun, and Thatcher (on an official visit to Kissinger's German Democratic Republic) did not comment on it until late the next day. Then came Operation Sojourner, where the Home Office (this time under Thatcher's orders) arrested and deported more than two thousand people (including around six hundred foreign students), many of them guilty of no crime but ostensibly legal activism.

Thatcher miscalculated the response within her own government; over the next year, Michael Mansfield and Chris Mullin would bring a legal case on behalf of respected doctor and Residents Association activist Dr Cheddi Jagan, and went on to win a surprising degree of support culminating in legal protections against deportation in 1989. She miscalculated the response from foreign powers - America had seen Nixon's Project Fear campaign against student radicals, the Soviet Union had pervasive censorship of extraparty activism, China's problems with labor militancy had culminated, just a year earlier, in Wang Sheng's government firing on protesting seasonal construction workers (Thatcher had, at the time, publicly stated that she was "appalled by the indiscriminate shooting of unarmed people"), but none of that prevented those powers from condemning her actions and even putting up punitive sanctions. Perhaps most of all, she miscalculated the response from her own people; Ofstat internally estimated that twice as many Britons opposed the volte-face on migration than supported it, while sporadic sympathy protests by students and opposition groups were so prevalent that the BBC could not hide them during the May Day Parade.

Still, tensions remained low going into the summer, helped by the BoB's decision to quietly strengthen the pound rather than devalue, which placated the growing consumer sector. Protests tapered off, and the first closure of a guest worker office (Agriculture and Mines on 1 June) passed quietly; though ultranationalist youths continued to attack minority groups (the RA Research and Data Office estimated more than five thousand violent incidents in May and June alone, including at least eighteen murders), Sojourner had done its job in silencing opposition to these attacks. Then came the death of Anthony Okafor, born in Cardiff to Biafran parents, on 11 June; though he had been murdered by members of the English Socialist Front - White Section, his death was reported as an 'accident' and covered up by the Merseyside Police. Okafor had been a student at the University of Liverpool, and his classmates and professors were the first to rise in protest. They were soon joined by many, many others from across the country; and the protests snowballed. The tensions that had been covered up by force and fear and bread and circuses were awakened again; the British public had not forgotten the Thatcher government's attitude towards migrants, nor were they happy with its attitude towards youth culture, increasing inequality, or corruption. The 'general grievances protest', as it was derisively referred to by many within the organized civil rights movement, was formless but tenacious; three weeks after its establishment in Tom Mann Park near the UOL campus, it showed no signs of stopping.

It is unclear why the Thatcher government made the decision to break it up by force. Was it a show of strength? Did she think the genie could be returned to the bottle, the relative peace of the past few months revived? Did she believe, as elements of MI5 reported at the time, that the Mann Park protests were being supplied by the CIA's underworld contacts? Does it matter? Another question - who authorized the order to fire on those protestors? Was it an on-the-spot decision? Why were the police armed in the first place? How many people died - twenty-six, as initial reports have it - ninety-one, as the official numbers came out - or the four hundred fifty the NGOs estimate?

After all that, the Thatcher government ground to a long halt. Nixon - perhaps more accurately, the troika led by Ambassador Lovestone, Senator Rockefeller, and Vice President Clements, as Nixon's health problems grew ever more debilitating - announced new and debilitating sanctions on Britain, sanctions that were accompanied by coordination with the increasingly radical and disaffected union movement. Thatcher actually gained some popularity, then, for her resolute unwillingness to bend to foreign pressure; the lady was not for turning, and Britannia would stand alone if it had to. But it was too little; as the winter of 1986 saw rising industrial action, no abatement in public opposition, and sporadic police mutinies, it was increasingly clear the BSWI needed a change of course. Foreign Minister Philby quietly negotiated British entry to the United Nations, then brought the knives out in Congress in January. Thatcher could, perhaps, have held on with the help of military reactionaries - but most likely not for long, and in any event she stood down quietly. The party quietly digested its bad actors, tossed some scapegoats to the wolves, and - backstopped by oil exports and the growing services and technical sectors - moved on. The dead remained unanswered for.

(Four years later, a reformist veteran of the student movement - albeit the Smith-era student movement - took over. Reformists across the world hoped that his leadership would reshape the British government, bring it into the twenty-first century with robust democratic and civil liberties. They were, generally speaking, disappointed.)

*Technically speaking, the body Thatcher joined in 1959 was still known as the House of Commons until the Shawcross-Neumann reforms of 1962; it would not become the British People's Congress until 1962, the same year it began convening in the purpose-built Congress House in Greenwich. Its former location, confusingly also known as Congress House, had been shared with the Trades Union Congress; that building would remain the TUC headquarters into the 21st century, but was renamed A. J. Cook House after the former political prisoner.

**What did 'encourage' mean? It was unclear at the time. Thatcher and her inner circle seem to have assumed that this would be non-coercive, and possibly paired with some sort of relocation fund, but details on this were not forthcoming from the Civil Service, mainly because the Civil Service did not have a plan. As such, lower-level public-facing administrators were unable to communicate that plan to either their colleagues or the people they were supposed to 'encourage', leading to widespread concern that the Thatcher government might take part in some light ethnic cleansing; a plan elements within the Metropolitan Police did develop as Operation Driftwood, with unclear levels of involvement from the Home Office. Adding to concerns, English Action League elements created public postings purporting to be from the Department of Housing and Planning, directing non-citizens to repatriate before 1 May 1987 on penalty of fine and deportation 'without exception'.
 
Last edited:
"The Same Orders Are Given By Her"

Leaders of the Commonwealth of Britain
1947-1949: Tom Wintringham (British Section of the Workers' International leading United Front)
'49 died in office (heart attack)
1949-1951: J. B. Priestley (British Section of the Workers' International leading United Front)
'51 resigned at prompting of Parliament
1951-1954: Tom Driberg (British Section of the Workers' International)
'54 resigned at prompting of Parliament
1954-1985: Dan Smith (British Section of the Workers' International)
'85 retired
1985-1987: Margaret Thatcher (British Section of the Workers' International)
'87 removed by vote of no confidence
1987-1987: H. A. R. "Kim" Philby (British Section of the Workers' International)
'87 retired due to ill health
1987-1991: Norman Le Brocq (British Section of the Workers' International)
'91 retired due to age
1991-: Jack Straw (British Section of the Workers' International)

The Commonwealth of Britain (and its de facto subsidiaries in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization states of Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and Newfoundland) had earned a place as the fly in the Comintern's ointment; though Wintringham's pragmatic willingness to accept support for the Second English Revolution and Priestley's ecumenical united-frontism had made London a fellow-traveller of Moscow, the folk-socialism that had grown in the New Model Armies and been welded to pre-revolutionary theoreticians to bolster Dan Smith's developmentalist ambitions was ultimately not compatible with Muscovite orthodoxy. Comrade Kaganovich could say of the BSWI that they counted as Communists - they dined with them, at the very least! - but privately, NATO represented a Third Way to both its supporters and detractors, a Red Empire with ambitions that could not coexist with that of Lenin and Trotsky's heirs.

Margaret Thatcher - veteran of the Home Front and the Thaxted Brigades, onetime project manager on the Tube Alloys effort to light up isolated areas of then-allied Australia very quickly and with great expenditure of heavy metal - was one of the few members of Dan Smith's 'expertocracy' to move from the expanded Civil Service to Congress*, trading the untrammelled (so long as it didn't impinge on Smith's goals of revolutionising the status of the North and making lots of money) authority held by Inner Party administrators like Philby, Dell, and fellow chemist Franklin for the political pulpit of Congress House. This proved a wise decision - Thatcher was a key voice on Smith-era initiatives like the New Towns Project, National Public Service, and the Industrial Democracy Acts, and was able to raise her public profile among rank-and-file Internationalists. In 1980, in a vote widely considered a proxy for Dan Smith's succession, Thatcher triumphed over Denis Healey for the position of BSWI Secretary; though John Stonehouse put forward a token effort upon Smith's retirement five years later, Thatcher's position was difficult to assail.

That changed two years later, for reasons that - in some ways - had been a long time coming. The postwar era had seen more than a million people move from Ireland (as well as smaller contingents from Iceland and Newfoundland); some were fleeing the sectarian violence that accompanied the 'reintegration' of the former Northern Ireland, while others sought to earn higher wages in industries like construction and care. They were joined by others; refugees from the British attempts to have its cake and eat it too in the West Indies and Biafra and Malaya and the People's Republic of China (Hong Kong), dissidents from Soviet Europe and McCarthyist America who traveled through thaw and stayed through cold, students and skilled workers from across the world. These migrants took on temporary, menial labor, making housing and healthcare programs substantially less expensive to the public purse and enabling the children of former British menial laborers to move up into more prestigious work; their reward was to be barred from citizenship and informally steered to segregated boroughs scattered across the North and London's Outer Belt. Informal estimates put the non-citizen population of cities like Liverpool, Dundee, and Smith's own Newcastle at upwards of 25% of their total population - many of whom had been in the country virtually since the Wintringham Era.

By the Thatcher era, the Smith Doctrine on migration was falling apart. The wage differential between citizens of non-UK NATO countries (whether they lived in Britain or elsewhere) and British citizens was more and more controversial as declining British exports led to increasing unemployment; groups like the English Action League coordinated actions that ran the gamut from letter-writing campaigns to wildcat strikes to bombings. Thatcher - and advisors such as the academics Alan Clark and John Powell - feared what was increasingly referred to in the Outer Party as the 'Malayan Scenario', where Britons not of immigrant background perceived the government as 'coddling' foreign groups, lost faith in the BSWI, and struck back, resulting in the installation of a non-socialist right-wing dictatorship or bourgeois democracy, most likely with the aid and support of the Americans. That this example stretched the actual history of the Malayan War to its breaking point - Britain was not, after all, an extractive resource-based economy, and there was no British equivalent of Indonesia - was less the point than the Inner Party's increasing worries that it was out of touch with a mythicized and largely mythical English proletariat, rooted in organic communities and fearful of the outside world. The short-term costs - staffing shortages, often quite severe, in vital sectors like construction and healthcare, followed by the expense of retraining thousands of redundant mineworkers to those jobs - seemed bearable, especially since the party would have (or so it believed) public opinion on its side.

Tensions festered through 1985 and early 1986, as the slow collapse of British Steel and British Aerospace in the face of competition from Yugoslavia, Mexico, and Japan left many skilled workers unemployed. Not even Thatcher's signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with her American counterpart, the dying Richard Nixon, was enough to shore her position up - she needed to placate both Inner Party critics and mass discontent. Drastic action had to be taken. The first shock was the 13 March announcement that, over the next year, the British government would wind down its guest worker programs on a sector-by-sector basis and begin 'encouraging'** foreign citizens in the country to repatriate. Less than a week later, this was followed by the Battle of Bow, where a St Patrick's Day parade heavily attended by members of the Residents Association and Self-Determination Leagues was attacked by fascist paramilitaries armed with bats; though the Metropolitan Police was present, they did not intervene until well after the fight had begun, and Thatcher (on an official visit to Kissinger's German Democratic Republic) did not comment on it until late the next day. Then came Operation Sojourner, where the Home Office (this time under Thatcher's orders) arrested and deported more than two thousand people (including around six hundred foreign students), many of them guilty of no crime but ostensibly legal activism.

Thatcher miscalculated the response within her own government; over the next year, Michael Mansfield and Chris Mullin would bring a legal case on behalf of respected doctor and Residents Association activist Dr Cheddi Jagan, and went on to win a surprising degree of support culminating in legal protections against deportation in 1989. She miscalculated the response from foreign powers - America had seen Nixon's Project Fear campaign against student radicals, the Soviet Union had pervasive censorship of extraparty activism, China's problems with labor militancy had culminated, just a year earlier, in Wang Sheng's government firing on protesting seasonal construction workers (Thatcher had, at the time, publicly stated that she was "appalled by the indiscriminate shooting of unarmed people"), but none of that prevented those powers from condemning her actions and even putting up punitive sanctions. Perhaps most of all, she miscalculated the response from her own people; Ofstat internally estimated that twice as many Britons opposed the volte-face on migration than supported it, while sporadic sympathy protests by students and opposition groups were so prevalent that the BBC could not hide them during the May Day Parade.

Still, tensions remained low going into the summer, helped by the BoB's decision to quietly strengthen the pound rather than devalue, which placated the growing consumer sector. Protests tapered off, and the first closure of a guest worker office (Agriculture and Mines on 1 June) passed quietly; though ultranationalist youths continued to attack minority groups (the RA Research and Data Office estimated more than five thousand violent incidents in May and June alone, including at least eighteen murders), Sojourner had done its job in silencing opposition to these attacks. Then came the death of Anthony Okafor, born in Cardiff to Biafran parents, on 11 June; though he had been murdered by members of the English Socialist Front - White Section, his death was reported as an 'accident' and covered up by the Merseyside Police. Okafor had been a student at the University of Liverpool, and his classmates and professors were the first to rise in protest. They were soon joined by many, many others from across the country; and the protests snowballed. The tensions that had been covered up by force and fear and bread and circuses were awakened again; the British public had not forgotten the Thatcher government's attitude towards migrants, nor were they happy with its attitude towards youth culture, increasing inequality, or corruption. The 'general grievances protest', as it was derisively referred to by many within the organized civil rights movement, was formless but tenacious; three weeks after its establishment in Tom Mann Park near the UOL campus, it showed no signs of stopping.

It is unclear why the Thatcher government made the decision to break it up by force. Was it a show of strength? Did she think the genie could be returned to the bottle, the relative peace of the past few months revived? Did she believe, as elements of MI5 reported at the time, that the Mann Park protests were being supplied by the CIA's underworld contacts? Does it matter? Another question - who authorized the order to fire on those protestors? Was it an on-the-spot decision? Why were the police armed in the first place? How many people died - twenty-six, as initial reports have it - ninety-one, as the official numbers came out - or the four hundred fifty the NGOs estimate?

After all that, the Thatcher government ground to a long halt. Nixon - perhaps more accurately, the troika led by Ambassador Lovestone, Senator Rockefeller, and Vice President Clements, as Nixon's health problems grew ever more debilitating - announced new and debilitating sanctions on Britain, sanctions that were accompanied by coordination with the increasingly radical and disaffected union movement. Thatcher actually gained some popularity, then, for her resolute unwillingness to bend to foreign pressure; the lady was not for turning, and Britannia would stand alone if it had to. But it was too little; as the winter of 1986 saw rising industrial action, no abatement in public opposition, and sporadic police mutinies, it was increasingly clear the BSWI needed a change of course. Foreign Minister Philby quietly negotiated British entry to the United Nations, then brought the knives out in Congress in January. Thatcher could, perhaps, have held on with the help of military reactionaries - but most likely not for long, and in any event she stood down quietly. The party quietly digested its bad actors, tossed some scapegoats to the wolves, and - backstopped by oil exports and the growing services and technical sectors - moved on. The dead remained unanswered for.

(Four years later, a reformist veteran of the student movement - albeit the Smith-era student movement - took over. Reformists across the world hoped that his leadership would reshape the British government, bring it into the twenty-first century with robust democratic and civil liberties. They were, generally speaking, disappointed.)

*Technically speaking, the body Thatcher joined in 1959 was still known as the House of Commons until the Shawcross-Neumann reforms of 1962; it would not become the British People's Congress until 1962, the same year it began convening in the purpose-built Congress House in Greenwich. Its former location, confusingly also known as Congress House, had been shared with the Trades Union Congress; that building would remain the TUC headquarters into the 21st century, but was renamed A. J. Cook House after the former political prisoner.

**What did 'encourage' mean? It was unclear at the time. Thatcher and her inner circle seem to have assumed that this would be non-coercive, and possibly paired with some sort of relocation fund, but details on this were not forthcoming from the Civil Service, mainly because the Civil Service did not have a plan. As such, lower-level public-facing administrators were unable to communicate that plan to either their colleagues or the people they were supposed to 'encourage', leading to widespread concern that the Thatcher government might take part in some light ethnic cleansing; a plan elements within the Metropolitan Police did develop as Operation Driftwood, with unclear levels of involvement from the Home Office. Adding to concerns, English Action League elements created public postings purporting to be from the Department of Housing and Planning, directing non-citizens to repatriate before 1 May 1987 on penalty of fine and deportation 'without exception'.
I like this, especially the complex relations between Britain and the Soviets. How does this version of Britain differ from the USSR in economics and level of repression?
 
The Last March of the House of Stuart

Life of Henry James Stuart (1824-1863)

1827-1830: Royal Prince [Jacobite]

1830-1848: Prince of Wales [Jacobite]

1848-1863: Pretender King Henry IX of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland etc. [Jacobite]

1852-1861: Captain in the Austrian Imperial and Royal Army

1861-1863: Member of the Staff of General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate Army

1863: Killed at the Battle of Gettysburg


The Jacobite cause followed the line of the Stuart king James II deposed by the Glorious Revolution and it claimed that it was this line which consisted of Britain's rightful rulers, by divine right rather than any earthly law. In truth, it had long since ceased to be a cause with any credibility ever since the great defeat of 1745, and even the Hanoverians who sat on the British throne had long since ceased to pay it any mind. It lacked support in the various courts of Europe, and in Britain, little more than a small nonjuring movement and a few aristocratic clubs could be said to support it. Despite it all, the line continued to maintain hopes of such a restoration, and the Stuart line continued to be raised in the manner of English aristocrats abroad so, if they ever returned to London, they would be greeted as fellow Englishmen. And even this was interrupted by European events. James Charles Stuart or "James IV", the son of the famed Bonnie Prince Charlie, was faced with the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. This forced him to flee Italy for Vienna, and he took up arms against the French in the army of Austria. Most bizarrely, this meant that he fought on the same side as Hanoverian Britain, which while causing the British government the small grief of the antiwar movement calling it crypto-Jacobite, weakened his claims a fair amount. But it made James a war hero in Austria. He grew old enough to see the birth of his grandson Henry, but he soon died of old age - in a Europe whose reactionary order he fought and bled for was beginning to falter.

Henry James Stuart grew up an English aristocrat in Vienna, not forgetting the cause of his ancestors nor the principle of divine right. As the Jacobite Prince of Wales, he often greeted visitors from Britain, though most of them considered him not as their rightful heir apparent but little more than a novelty, a relic of a feudal past. Despite it, he lived a life of luxury, and only occasionally did he notice the rising revolutionary impulse, which he of course abhorred. Then came the year 1848, and Austria and Germany succumbed to revolution for a time. His father "James V", the Jacobite pretender and a strong supporter of efforts to stop the Hungarian Revolution of that year, became a vehement supporter of the ultraconservative Count Baillet von Latour; when Latour's efforts ended up alienating too many in Vienna and sparking an uprising, James Stuart ended up lynched and killed by a mob which, in all likelihood, did not know of his royal pretence. Young Henry became the new Jacobite pretender, "Henry IX", and soon after the Vienna Uprising ended crushed, he turned his father into a symbol and martyr for the cause of reaction and monarchy. His "coronation" saw many Austrian aristocrats attend for that reason, and it certainly did help him get some support in Europe's various royal courts - none of them would ever deign to support an actual invasion of England, however. He hoped this would create sympathy in Britain itself, but it failed, for it made it too easy for sympathizers of 1848 - of which there were many - to accuse opponents of being Jacobite traitors. Perhaps hoping to give himself some degree of credibility, Henry soon enlisted in the Austrian army. Becoming a captain on the basis of his parentage, he saw very little action - and he preferred it that way. It was only in 1859, with the Second Italian War of Independence, that he saw any real action, and his small service at the victory of the Battle of Treponti made himself a war hero of sorts.

With the outbreak of the American Civil War, Henry saw it as a conflict between a Roundhead North and a Cavalier South. He saw in the Confederacy the cause of divine right and ordered society for which he and his ancestors had fought, and despite later romantic accounts there is little evidence he opposed Confederate slavery. When the Prince of Joinville, a member of that upstart Orleanist line, volunteered to serve the Union and became a member of the staff of McClellan, Henry thought he could do one better, and he made a grand mistake. He offered his services to the Confederate army, and it made him a member of the staff of Robert E. Lee. This turned many heads. For many in the Union, this proved the Confederacy to be antithetical to republicanism, and conspiracy theories abounded of him plotting to crown himself King of America. British sympathizers of the Union quickly declared this another reason Britain should not intervene on the side of the Confederacy, and British nonconformists regularly toasted "the cause of Cromwell and Lincoln" thanks to this very association. And political cartoons of the Prince of Joinville and Henry Stuart jousting abounded. In the end, however, Henry Stuart was an utterly unimpressive member of the staff. He had little relevant army experience and thus no advice to give. But as Lee invaded Pennsylvania, he was quick to propagandize himself and take some credit for this. In the end, however, Lee's invasion faltered. The Battle of Gettysburg saw it decisively defeated, and by a chance bullet, Henry James Stuart became a casualty of war.

With this defeat, the Jacobite claim travelled up the family tree, and with the Stuart line extinct it travelled to the dukes of Modena. In practice, this meant that what little Jacobite movement existed collapsed. For putting an end to Jacobitism for good, Ulysses Grant received accolades. British Nonconformists credited his Puritan stock and praised him in the same breath they praised the Roundheads and Cromwell, and it is not hard to see him memorialized in modern Britain. In Europe, Confederates tried to pass off the Union as king-killers for this - but killing a pretender king in battle was hardly the same thing as executing a real king by guillotine, and such claims made little headway. Indeed, it may have hurt their cause in Britain, for it made them seem like enemies of the British constitution. With the end of the Civil War, Henry James Stuart became the subject of much romanticism by Lost Causers, a royal scion of Europe come to help the Cavaliers of the Old Dominion. But fundamentally, though Henry Stuart's bizarre service did give the Jacobite cause a relevance it had not had in over a century, he also gave it an ignoble end that put it in the ground - forever.
 
Last edited:
No Say in the Vision: South East Africa, 1945 - 1968

Military Occupation:
Lieutenant-General Clifford Borain, 1945
Governors:
Major-General Evered Poole, 1945 - 1951
Air Chief Marshall Arthur Harris, 1951 -1965

Deputy Governors:
AG "Sailor" Malan, 1945 - 1949
Sybrand Engelbrecht, 1949 – 1965

Chairs of the Advisory Council:
Colin Steyn, 1946 – 1949
David Teixeira Ferreira, 1950 - 1951
Nicolaas Havenga, 1951 - 1952

Chairs of the Legislative Council:
Eben Dönges, 1952 - 1957
Oswald Pirow, 1957 - 1961
Hendrik van den Bergh, 1961 -1966
Governor:
Malcolm MacDonald, 1965 - 1968
Deputy Governor:
Anthony Duff, 1965 - 1968
Chair of the Transitional Council:
Moses Kotane, 1966-1968


Genesis​

The British Mandate Territory of South East Africa was a creation of the Halfway House Protocol, an agreement between the victorious allied states for Britain to control the territories of the defeated South African Republic and the Laurentian provinces of Portuguese Mozambique that the Republic had occupied before World War Two.

The territory was the brainchild of Jan Smuts, the allied commander and Union Prime Minister. In the wake of the war, he saw the opportunity to bring the former Republic into “civilised” South Africa, and extend the Union to the Save River. Smuts was never that clear of how this would come about, speaking frequently, but vaguely, in the Union parliament of “our partners”, and “our brothers in Pretoria” – the same was as he spoke of “our brothers in Windhoek” – and “the long-term growth of the subcontinent.

Smuts’ untimely death in 1949 meant he never saw the territory’s changing face. Perhaps that was for the best. Historians still argue whether it was the indifference of the first governor, or the single-mindedness of the second that shattered Smut’s vision, or whether the aspirations of the majority were always going to consign his plans to the dustbin of history.

A Quiet Pool​

The first Governor of South East Africa, Evered Poole, claimed in his memoires that Smut’s vision was of a partnership between the “loyal” Anglo and Afrikaner soldiers and the “practical” Afrikaner and Portuguese industrialists that would outweigh the “fanatic” nationalists, and gradually woo the conservative farmers away from them with better equipment, fertiliser and transportation. Poole bought into this, to some extent, although he mainly wanted a peaceful territory, and he reported to London, not Cape Town anyway. He focussed on post-war reconstruction, and took counsel from prominent white South East Africans like Colin Steyn from Bloemfontein, David Ferreira from LM, and the visionary industrialist Hendrik van der Bijl. Poole appointed the three men to the Advisory Council, which had been set up by the Halfway House Protocol, where they served alongside former resistance fighters Andrew Mlangeni, Eduardo Mondlane, and Moses Kotane.

Poole left the ‘De-Nazification” programme to his deputy, the fighter ace Commodore AG “Sailor” Malan. Malan had fought much of the war alongside black Caribbean and Rozvi pilots, and had indeed been based in the Rozvi Kingdom for the first half of the war. He hated apartheid and all its works, and gave no quarter to the men who he saw as complicit in the racism, censorship and abuses of state power by the van Rensburg regime. Malan was also a firm proponent of socio-economic and political rights for the majority black population – and of the democratisation project more broadly, both aspects Poole showed little interest in. Malan was a friend of the third key man in Pretoria, the Royal Rozvi Representative.

Brighton Hove had fought the war on the Rozvi Kingdom’s eastern front, relieving Buchwa, liberating Chicualacuala, and routing the Republic’s army in the battle of Chókwe. In the post-war settlement, the government in Danamombe named him as Representative, working alongside the Governor, in theory, but in practice, mostly with his friend and former comrade-in-arms, Malan.

The relationship between the three men, or more accurately between the Governor on the one side, and his deputy and the Representative on the other, went from polite to quiet, as Poole attempted to avoid any discussion of controversial matters, but matters came to a head in a meeting of the Advisory Council in May 1948, where Poole and Steyn wanted to appoint a lawyer named Charles Swart as President of the Supreme Court of the Transvaal, effectively the chief judge of the territory, despite Swart’s previous involvement with the van Rensburg regime as a prosecutor initially in Bloemfontein, but later in LM during the war. The Council meeting broke up without a decision on a recommendation to the Governor, and when Poole signed the proclamation of appointment the next day, Malan submitted his resignation.

Poole replaced Malan with his Quartermaster General, Brigadier-General Sybrand Engelbrecht, who served him without disagreement until the former’s early retirement on health grounds in 1951.

Bomber​

To replace Poole, Churchill wanted a man he could rely on to hold the line against communism, and what he perceived as increasing communist influence in the territory. He selected Air Chief Marshall Arthur Harris, retired five years earlier, out of favour with the previous Atlee administration. Harris was not new to Africa: he had lived for some years in Kenya as a young man, and had fought under Smuts in the Tanganyika campaign during World War I, but he returned to Britain in 1917 and enlisted in the Royal Flying Corps, later the RAF, where he served the remainder of his military career.

Harris was sent to Pretoria with a very different vision from Poole: prevent the growth of communism in the territory and securing it as a loyal subject of the Empire. From this perspective, he was even less sympathetic than Poole to members of the Advisory Council complaining that a talented official or businessman had participated in the van Rensburg regime, its army or security services. When Ferreira retired in 1951, Harris replaced him with Nicolaas Havenga, a retired lawyer who had been mayor of Ladybrand during the war, who Poole had been using as an administrator in the eastern Orange Free State since then. Havenga’s appointment was seen as “an excellent compromise” by both the Governor’s supporters and men like Eben Dönges who advocated for “white self-government”. The former resistance fighters on the Advisory Council, however, were outraged, Mlangeni describing the appointment as “aimed at suppressing the political aspirations of the majority of the people who have no say” and Kotane refused to attend Council meetings chaired by Havenga. Protests by the communists in Krugersdorp, led by Fischer, and in Bloemfontein, led by Thabo Mofutsanyana were broken up by the police, although they allowed Sailor Malan’s speech in Johannesburg to go ahead.

But worse was to come. Early in the new year, Frederick Sturrock, a Johannesburg businessman who had served on the Advisory Council since 1949 announced his retirement, ostensibly on health grounds, although there were rumours that he was increasingly unhappy with the conflict in Council. Harris, deciding that an anti-communist, and someone with more security experience was needed, replaced Sturrock with “Lang” Hendrik van den Bergh, who had been chief of police in Bloemfontein during the war. The protests this time were massive. Mlangeni and Malan lead a protest of nearly 100,000 people through central Johannesburg, and Mondlane led a protest in LM.

The protests continued, more or less weekly until the morning in early February 1952 when the territory woke up to the news that Malan had been shot dead at his office in Yeoville the previous evening. Johannesburg police assigned blame to thieves, but the protestors had other views.

Then bombs were set off outside railway stations in Benoni and Rustenburg, which Harris immediately blamed on “the communists”.

Kotane, right up until his death always denied the Communist Party was involved, and that the decision to begin the armed struggle was not taken until some years later. To this day, historians and conspiracy theorists argue whether communists did in fact set off the bombs, either without Kotane’s knowledge, or he disowned them due to the backlash that resulted - or whether “Lang Hendrik” had the bombings done to justify the response he was itching to motivate for.

Either way, the response from the Governor was immediate: police crackdowns, an extended curfew in black townships, and the Communist Party was banned. The communist leadership went into hiding, and the African nationalists found their activities heavily circumscribed, for all that Mlangeni and Mondlane were technically still on the Advisory Council.

Things Fall Apart​

Harris approached the Secretary of State for the Colonies with a plan for limited self-government, arguing that if be brought the whole white population on side, it would be easier to deal with the “black communists”. Oliver Lyttleton was quite happy with this approach - and the oversimplification that this would be a key step to “preventing communism in the British Commonwealth and Empire”.

So despite the security situation, elections were held for a Legislative Council, which would hold some limited powers over the territory’s domestic law. Men and women with residency and property qualifications could vote – the property qualifications effectively restricting the franchise almost entirely to white people. For the duration of the campaign, Harris kept security tight in the black townships and villages, and allowed (well-policed) white rallies to go ahead. He never said anything, but it was fairly obvious that Harris favoured Havenga, and the cluster of “moderate” Afrikaner and Portuguese businessmen the latter campaigned with. The results, when counted, shocked the governor.

All the seats in the 1952 election went to Eben Dönges and his allies, a group that largely conflated “white self-government” with Afrikaner nationalism. Van den Bergh was elected as part of this group. The Afrikaner nationalists were supported by the “practical” industrialists such as Francois du Toit, Havenga was bought off with an appointment to the Supreme Court (and a promise that he would be its President), and there was now only limited opposition from a few white “liberals”. Vanishingly few whites held to Smuts’ vision of loyalty to the Crown and some day joining the Union in Cape Town. Smuts’ vision had given way to a political culture that set itself in opposition to that, one of Afrikaner self-determination – and white privilege. The main groups contesting the Afrikaner nationalists were not “loyal” anglophiles, nor the white liberals, but the – unrepresented – African nationalists and communists.

Over the next decade, Harris became increasingly isolated from London, especially after what he saw as the fiasco of Suez. MacMillan’s increasing dismissiveness of imperial power east of Suez angered him, and Colonies Secretary Macleod’s openness towards independence for African colonies disturbed him. At the same time he had no love for the nationalist attitudes Dönges expressed, and once he was replaced by Oswald Pirow in 1957, he left day to day business with the Legislative Council to his deputy.

The one area where he remained firm, and aligned with the Legislative Council was on fighting communism. Both the African nationalists and the communists led protests and strikes, often working together, and so Dönges, Pirow, and even Harris were quite happy to use apply the epithet “communist” to any opponents of the territory’s government.

Then in July 1960, police stations were bombed in Carletonville, Giyani, and Chókwe. Harris declared a state of emergency and attended a Legislative Council meeting for the first time in years. Van den Bergh dealt with security matters for the Legislative Council, and Harris found he a man he could talk to, since the man largely avoiding the nationalist jargon Pirow spoke with, instead talking of security and order.

As the sabotage campaign continued, van den Bergh increasingly gave direction to the police, with occasional consultations with Harris, until in March 1961, Oswald Pirow was assassinated when a car-bomb went off outside a church he was to have spoken at. Van den Bergh took over the Legislative Council, and instituted a major crackdown, capturing and detaining Fischer and Motsoaledi, and Mondlane was killed “resisting arrest”.

Harris conveyed MacMillan’s misgivings over the extent of the crackdown to van den Bergh, who is said to have retorted curtly that any compromise now will be a big farce. They would rarely speak again.

For the next three years Harris watched from the sidelines as the increasingly militarised police clashed with increasingly well-armed saboteurs – and increasingly well-supplied black and white protestors in Johannesburg, Vanderbijlpark, and LM. From outside the territory, the wind was cold. Mlangeni had gone into exile in Gaborone, and was protected there by Chief Khama, for all that it was a British colony. Moses Kotane and Thabo Mofutsanyana appeared out of hiding in the Rozvi Kingdom, and was welcomed in Danamombe by Brighton Hove, now leading the newly-elected Workers’ Party government. Forces were gathering, and there was nothing Harris could do as the “white self-government” he had replaced Smut’s vision with was buffeted from all sides.

Winds of change​

In 1964, two things changed the territory’s situation drastically. Firstly, the Labour Party under Hugh Gaitskell displaced the Conservative government in London. Gaitskell was not merely a left-wing politician, he was a firm anti-racist, and in opposition, had been deeply critical of the discrimination policies of the Union government in Cape Town, and of the Legislative Council in Pretoria even more. Gaitskell also supported of independence for African colonies as a way to keep alignment within the Commonwealth, and stave off links between African nationalism and Moscow. The new Colonies Secretary, Barbara Castle, instructed Harris to “begin endeavors towards a peaceful end to the conflict in the territory, as precursor for independence negotiations”.

The second event took place a few months later in the neighbouring territory of Basotholand, which was transitioning from limited self-governance to independence. Prince Bereng Seeiso was crowned King Moshoeshoe II, and in his speech at independence he committed the new Kingdom of Lesotho to “fully support” the movement for freedom in South East Africa. There were loud cheers in the audience, and a photographer snapped Castle clapping. When the new King sat down, the first to congratulate him were Gaitskell and the Rozvi king, who both spent quite some time talking with him.

As 1965 dawned, Harris knew his time was up, and sure enough, in mid January he was recalled to London. Castle met him, and briefly and baldly told him someone else was needed to usher in a new era for the territory. Engelbrecht was also being retired, and they would both be replaced by career diplomats.

Van den Bergh, who had been making increasingly concerned calculations of the security situation, agreed to negotiations and then promptly retired into obscurity. The last of his words to appear in print, shouted over his gate at a journalist who was asking questions were “Do you want to talk about farming? If not, get away from here?

So it was in April 1966, that Moses Kotane was sworn in by Governor MacDonald as Chair of the Transitional Council, with Castle and Rozvi Prime Minister Brighton Hove at his side - as was Sailor Malan, who it turned out had not been killed, but had been in hiding in Lesotho, running supplies to the protestors. Chief Luthuli, the new Prime Minister in Cape Town, also attended, but they are very different men, leading very different countries, and there is no talk of unification, except in the most idle of Johannesburg’s taverns.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top