Themiclesian politics in the 1800s

Themiclesian politics in the 1800s evolved from centralized, authoritarianism to parliamentary democracy by the end of the century, with a recognized dominant-party period between 1801 and 1819. The iniquity of fiscal burden of war, made acute by consecutive defeat, was one of the most powerful themes in the political scene and has been connected with both the Conservative and Liberal parties that dominated the century. Military failure led to dimunution of royal power and the dissolution of the royal party that supported it.

Profits, connected to broad swathes of society, was another source of contention. Colonial interests aligned with royal desires for expansion and power across Columbia, and its distribution to the crown's supporters in the aristocracy is deeply associated with resentment against military expenditure by aristocrats that opposed the crown. At the same time, the near-complete elimination of tariffs bolstered Themiclesia's international trade and granted influence to those involved in it. After the collapse of Themiclesian monopoly on tea, silk, and porcelain, manufacturing industry allied with political reformism to create the Liberal platform, while the Conservatives came to be characterized by agrarian interests and opposition to unrestricted pursuit of productivity that easily converted into political power.

Like most other democratic systems of the age, Themiclesian democracy was explicitly confined to classes considered invested in society, discriminated first through hereditary right then property. Both parties altered the franchise principally for their political benefit, but neither weathered the risk of disenfranchising existing voters. Suffrage thus extended from fewer than 9,000 holders in 1801 to over 4,200,000 by 1900. Elections were heavily influenced by bribery and gentlemen's agreements between local parties to fix outcomes. As the suffrage expanded, many candidates relied on treating and pressure from "social leaders" like employers, landlords, and gang bosses to support their campaigns; the susceptibility of electors to pressure was often used as an argument against expansion of the franchise by both parties.

Loyal opposition only became institutionally accepted in the premiership of the Lord of Dubh (1826 – 33), previous to which the Conservatives attempted to purged their opponents from all public offices, supporting their dominance. His and several subsequent administrations saw Conservative weakening and the conversion of some supporters to Reformist causes, and previous measures meant to cement power to the gentry, as defined by heritage, allowed an opposition to co-exist. After the widening of the franchise, power in both parties lay with notables who both exerted influence over politicians between elections and assisted in turning out voters during them. These notables were a large subset of Themiclesia's social elites, who collectively dominated not only the politics but the economy as well.

Background

Emperor Gwidh-mjen (r. 1680 – 1738) expanded royal influence by cultivating a faction through lucrative opportunities within his gift that occupied important positions of state and was pliant to the crown's demands, which generally revolved around strengthening military power in Columbia. Members of the faction were either invested by the crown in the success of its colonial ventures or holders of existing interests there, such as over Camian copper extraction and minting of coins, which both funded royal coffers and gave the holder a share of minted coins. This faction developed into a political party around the crown in the 18th century and was responsible for several wars in the region.

However, the royal party's mutualistic relationship hinged on continual military success, which in turn demanded the keeping of a large and expensive army and navy, and Themiclesia's ability to control the Halu'an Sea and Columbia was pressured by Casaterran interests in the area. This military expenditure was borne by metropolitan aristocrats, hereditary nobles and large landowners, particularly those that opposed the growth of the crown's powers. This is because those that allied with the crown were apt to receive benefits from colonial and domestic enterprises that offset their contributions to royal policies.

For the early and mid-18th century, the crown's hold over power was stable, but signs of strain emerged in the First Maverican War, which tested the government's resolve in suppressing Ostlandic revolts in the north of Maverica. Then in the final decade of the century, Themiclesia faced four and a possible fifth convergent, hostile fronts—the Tyrannians and Hallians on naval control over the Halu'an, the Camians and Ostlandics over the north of Maverica, and the Sieuxerrians over Solevant. Interests of the royal party existed in all fronts, which the crown was bound to defend in order to maintain the unity of his faction. This proved impossible to do by force, and the faction split over whose interests would be defended in preference.

The metropolitan aristocrats, facing hiking taxation to defend what they often viewed as corruption between the crown and its cronies, united in 1795 under the leadership of the Lord of Gar-lang to restore peace via the Treaty of Kien-k'ang. Viewing this as a setback, Emperor 'Ei began to intrigue in the reconstitution of his faction, with some success over the next four years and appointing a prime minister that supported rebuilding the military. However, Gar-lang and his faction stirred up renewed fears about warfare in 1799 – 1800, which persuaded much of the gentry that permanent checks on royal power would be necessary, as the emperor could not be trusted to respect the will of the vast majority of the gentry.

Great Settlement

Main article: Great Settlement (Themiclesia)

Gar-lang created a widespread bureaucratic opposition to the throne through resignations, refusal to take office, and stopping funds from reaching the royal purse. At the same time, he applied social pressure on the crown's former allies in the bureaucracy and explained that the crown was not in a position to restitute their lost properties in the colonies. The result of Gar-lang's political manoeuvres is the Great Settlement (大憲, ladh-ng′jarh), whereby Emperor 'Ei made a public oath that he would not govern without the assent of the entire aristocracy, though the mechanism through which this occurs was not in the oath.

Silent Revolution

The silent revolution was a period of rapid political clash that some historians have described as a concrete phenemenon between about 1825 and 1839, when "the revolution grew in volume" taking the form of strikes and public assemblies. According to Roots of Democracy (1950), the analysis wherein now regarded as traditional, two political philosophies competed for general acceptance during this period. It is stated in that work, both philosophies exetnd beyond politics in sensu stricto and included interpretations of history, current interests, and outlook for the nation.

Political philosophy

Roots of Democracy argues that the two main persuasions of political power during the Silent Revolution are a response to the Enlightenment in Casaterra. They seek to answer fundamental questions like why the Themiclesian government exists, whose desires should be enforced, and if there is a natural or equal right to political voice. However, this view is later evaluated as a partial description, since political support for either accreting party came from all classes, many of which did not necessarily embrace all the philosophical extensions of their favoured party. It is a more modern view that considerable overlap existed in the two historical parties, "else their supporters would have been diametrically opposed to each other, with no room of reconciliation or co-operation."

Critics of the Conservatives say that they regard the state, including its government and people, as a form of patrimony, or chattels ordained to serve a fixed interest, and this interest is hereditary and incompatible with the public welfare; equally, they consider Conservative politics as not fundamentally different from absolute monarchy, only that the monarch is no longer personal but corporate—in the shape of the landed classes that have, by the Great Settlement of 1801, formed a represented body and imposed their will in lieu of that of the crown. Apologists of Conservative philosophy argue that as long as a hereditary crown exists, only a hereditary and autonomous aristocracy can resist royal power, and this need justifies the hereditary privileges that the gentry enjoys. In 1830, the principle of virtual representation was also enlisted, arguing that aristocratic interests are inclusive of their tenants and servants, who make up a considerable portion of Themiclesia's population.

Critics of the Reformist lobby argue that their early demands, which involved a politically-active monarch that possessed a gamut of powers enjoyed by Casaterran ones, were dangerous to the maintenance of restrained government, as the monarch has lately behaved badly and as there is no safeguard against similar ones in the future. They said that "propertied men could be created and uncreated by the monarch or legislature, and their political will can thus never become independent of them", while the existing hereditary franchise was less vulnerable to manipulation and more suitable to govern, being "seeped in the real demands, skills, and traditions of administration and statesmanship." Apologists of Reformist thought, heavily influenced by mercantilism, believed that money was the "universal and objective denominator of worth" and access to political power should be qualified around that basis, rather than "superstitions about heredity or nobility of thought."

Economic outlook

Reformists frequently argue that Conservative politics invariably give primacy to the existing interests of the aristocracy, which in 1830 was agrarian; this bias, in turn, leads to protectionism, policies that ensure labour supply in the countryside and restrict mobility, and overtaxation of internal and external trade. It was a key Conservative counter-argument that the economic interests of the gentry were diverse, interconnected, and outward, so their political will must therefore, in their own interest, be moderate and unbiased.

See also

• Themiclesia