De Bordeaux was a worthy chancellor. In case the Conservatives manage to get a landslide he might come back.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
From the way the narrative seems to be going, it seems unlikely he'll be the party leader anymore.
Depending on the election results, I could see him serving in a Conservative cabinet. Maybe not as the Chancellor, but on a ministry.
July 1845
Arthur de Caen was an oddity in Anglo-French politics, but the epitome of what the 'Anglois' on the French side of the channel stood for. An aristocrat from a family of Norman intellectuals, educated in Oxford but a native Frenchmen, owner of a hundred acres in northern France but a long term resident of Londres. He had spent the last decade and a half carefully planning, making the right friends and placating the right rivals. Rather than embrace de Bordeaux's French-led Unionism he remained carefully critical of it, and while he was ideologically closer to the Yorkists he made it clear that the Liberals did not stand for a divided Dual Monarchy. When widespread economic depression hit both France and England in equal measure, confidence in the Conservative Parties collapsed, and de Caen was vindicated as a voice of reason and reconciliation. But this came with a price. Instead of reaping the benefits of de Bordeaux's fall from grace, he was forced to share the rewards with the various nationalist parties. In England, the English Liberals lost ground to York and the Irish Nationalists (though gained amongst the Anglois minority), and the Legitimistes remained the uncontested masters of the Midi. So, a Coalition it had to be. The natural choice for de Caen's new Government was York and his English Nationalists. Economically and Political they were moderate, and York was pragmatic enough to put asides ambitions for independence if it meant obvious gains for England as a whole. On the 12th of July, de Caen and York, with their bigwigs alongside them, would meet at Dover to discuss the terms of the new Coalition. Five days later, both men would storm out of negotiations, cursing each other for their arrogance.
The aforementioned rapscallion, the Duke of York.
To understand this sudden turn of fortunes, one had to look at the wider context of the election. Nationalist violence had been on the rise since the famine and economic recession in England, with notable riots in Bristol, Nottingham, and Livreport taking place since 1843. They were mostly directed at the authorities and were largely spontaneous, motivated by food shortages. In 1845, this changed. Violence became explicitly anti-French in nature, mobbing businesses owned by French families, attacking officials with French names (regardless of whether they were genuinely English), and occasionally driving Anglois farmers off their land. Though firearms were not yet commonplace, it was only a matter of time before organised militias began to form. The Anglois community in England was naturally terrified, as before then they lived side by side with English speakers (and, in fact, considered themselves English until now) without conflict for hundreds of years, yet now became the focus of a sustained campaign of violence. Anglois were certainly unionist before, however they had tasted the ugly side of nationalism and they did not like it. The French electorate, sympathetic for their brothers across the channel, appealed to their leaders to take a definite stand on the issue - and de Caen made it clear (with some pressure from the English Liberals) that the Anglois minority's safety would be the utmost priority in any negociation with the Nationalists.
Simultaneously, the England Nationalists faced an internal power struggle. The Duke of York was the undeniable figurehead of the movement throughout the Dual Monarchy, but realistically he was an entrenched aristocrat with more ties to the Monarchy than he cared to admit. While upper class circles hailed him as the coming English messiah, the bourgeoisie and the the grassroots segments of the English Nationalists merely tolerated his leadership. His position became all the more tenuous with the introduction of political violence - he was personally horrified at the growing attacks on the Anglois, however in order to remain in control of the English Nationalists he was forced into a position of publicly condemning but privately powerless to prevent unofficial English militias arming themselves. York was himself trying to arm the English Gendarme to make it possible to resist should Paris seek the "Copenhagen method" of intervention, but his real gambit was to use his connections with high-ranking English officers to enable mass defection should the Government invade. If they did not find something to shoot at soon, they would begin shooting at eachother. The development of two competing armies within the English Nationalists added powder to a keg ready to burst, and by the summer of '45 it had become clear that there were factions within the English Nationalists that were ready to begin the revolution if they felt York could not reach adequate settlement with Paris. Needless to say partition, or even mere autonomy, for the south coast if England was granted Home Rule was out of the picture.
The meeting at Dover began with amiable resolutions to the matters of the readjustments of seats in the Estates-General to properly reflect demographics, proper relief for the English economic woes, and better investment into English infrastructure. On the third day, the matter of the Anglois was raised. Neither de Caen nor York could afford to back down - de Caen morally could not turn his back on a people he identified with, and York could never return to Livreport with England divided in two. Worse still, the matter of English militias was a sore spot, as de Caen demanded they be disbanded, not knowing they were autonomous factions within the English Nationalists. York had no authority to do so, telling the Liberals candidly that the English Gendarme could be disarmed but the militias were a separate issue. De Caen believed York to be lying, and even further thought that such lying to be evidence that the Nationalist leadership were directing the campaign of violence in southern England. The Liberal informed his counterpart that if York could not guarantee the safety of Crown subjects and continued law and order, then it was in Paris's interest to deploy the Anglo-French military to the south of England to restore order as an occupying force. York claimed this was tantamount to declaring war on English subjects, and that he had no authority to command private English subjects to end attacks on the Anglois. Other agreements began to fall apart, and a dejected de Caen began backchannelling with the remaining Conservatives with the offer of a national government under his own leadership (providing the remaining previous leadership be sentenced to a lifetime on the backbenches).
On the 17th, when negotiations officially fell apart, de Caen took a train to Brittany, the stronghold of French Unionism, and hammered out a deal with a shocked and surprisingly grateful Parti Conserveteur and Royalist Party - offering a strong stance on Unionism in exchange for overall liberal reform. The Grand Coalition had begun.
Last edited:
Much as I love England, I wouldn't mind seeing a strong Union across both Kingdoms.
If the Dual Monarchy is a force for liberty and strong constitutional monarchy then it should stand the test of time. If not, well as long as it's an independent Kingdom of England then it'll be fine.
If the Dual Monarchy is a force for liberty and strong constitutional monarchy then it should stand the test of time. If not, well as long as it's an independent Kingdom of England then it'll be fine.
For now all nationalist elements seem to remain outside the matters of government.
The problem is, it is hard to imagine splitting the country without hurting some of its inhabitants. I mean, look at the Anglois population spread - you cannot build a nation-state with that. If England-France becomes England & France, all the Anglois will basically become nation-less. That is a problem of connecting your identity with a super-national entity.
Especially since Anglois are quite mixed themselves and many of them in England are IMO bilinguals with English as their primary language the norther you go. At least that's how I imagine it.
But both movements have radicalized too much to have the issue resolved in peace.
Do the DoD events mention who becomes King if Monarchy is chosen?
As I'm curious who will become King here, as republics are fascist and disgusting.
But yeah, the Anglois almost feel like European Kurds for an easy parallel to something IOTL. I feel bad for the Anglois in Bordeaux most of all though, as they are the most likely to be overtaken by the Legitimistes or other stripes of French Nats.
As I'm curious who will become King here, as republics are fascist and disgusting.
But yeah, the Anglois almost feel like European Kurds for an easy parallel to something IOTL. I feel bad for the Anglois in Bordeaux most of all though, as they are the most likely to be overtaken by the Legitimistes or other stripes of French Nats.
No they don't, altough I guess it wouldn't be York, he is too close to the royal family being a Plantagenet himself to be accepted by the radical Anglo-Saxons.
I had a feeling it would come down to grand coalition. Heck, I thought that it would work out that way from the start, since both parties want to preserve the union against all these nationalists.
Anarchy must reign. Or, if not that, at least the true Kings of France. Honestly, I am more for the Legitimistes winning out than I necessarily am for the English Nationalists. I just vote E.N. as well because I know the Legitimiste movement will have no chance without both French and English nationalism sparking, as otherwise the government will just go into easy compromise and strengthen the union or give autonomy - neither of which do I want for France.
The IRL precedent I used was the breakup of Yugoslavia. Sure, a rural Serb in Krajina has more in common with a rural Croat than he does with someone from Belgrade, but when you start fighting explicitly nationalist wars of independence who are they going to side with, and who are they going to be fighting? The same is happening here (or at least, that's what I hope I'm getting across)
Sure, annex this damn Lothian.
BTW, I don't get the argument for making everything "GREAT". We're in the miniaturization era God damn it!
But not be be offtopic, I love this AAR. Preserve the Union, Vivre l'Union!