Citation needed.

According to Wikipedia:

Between June 1793 and the end of July 1794, there were 16,594 official death sentences in France, of which 2,639 were in Paris.[2][4]

His numbers are generally fucked up.
His numbers on USSR deathtoll, for example, are twice that of Black Book of Communism - and those in that book were, by accounts of many people including some of the coauthors (who made an effort to distance themselves from the book due to this), overinflated anyway.

And generally the same logic would mean that liberalism is the reason for genocide of natives and Irish Famine, so overall ascribing every single fuck-up within a movement to the ideology of movement is rarely warranted.

I don't really want to get into it, as it's not N&P, but this comes with the territory when quest enters the era of ideologies and revolutions, so....
 
[X] [War] Offered support to the Hespranxer Republicans (no major allies, UPM currently making supportive noises but has no capacity to interfere) (0.1x)
[X] [Rounds] Begin Industrial Age play
 
[X] [War] Offered support to the Hespranxer Republicans (no major allies, UPM currently making supportive noises but has no capacity to interfere) (0.1x)
 
That Republicans are going to win in the end and cripple anyone who tries to stand apart, and that not getting involved means that we miss out on the tactical innovations that are about to render warfare up to this point obsolete?

The army has been involved in various conflicts along border regions and in the east, and your mercenaries serve in numerous conflicts. By the estimate of your generals you are the equal of anyone in the world.
 
The army has been involved in various conflicts along border regions and in the east, and your mercenaries serve in numerous conflicts. By the estimate of your generals you are the equal of anyone in the world.

What about estimates of not our generals though?
Our generals thought this way (actually thought we were superior) in Khan era, and look what happened.
 
Last edited:
That Republicans are going to win in the end and cripple anyone who tries to stand apart, and that not getting involved means that we miss out on the tactical innovations that are about to render warfare up to this point obsolete?
It is a massive assertion to suppose that the Republicans are going to win at all, much less win and then be able to counterattack, much less win and then defeat all of its direct opponents and then defeat everyone who was neutral.
 
The army has been involved in various conflicts along border regions and in the east, and your mercenaries serve in numerous conflicts. By the estimate of your generals you are the equal of anyone in the world.
Hey academia nut, would our people go and join the revolutionaries as a sort of foreign legion? Or is that not really a concept yet?
 
if we get involved, we can influence the new country some. But also, there are the benefits of neutrality.... OBVIOUSLY the revolutionary option isnt going to win, but neutrality does let us express approval of the concept of a republic.
 
The army has been involved in various conflicts along border regions and in the east, and your mercenaries serve in numerous conflicts. By the estimate of your generals you are the equal of anyone in the world.
...

On one hand, I'm happy to see that we've got pretty good military tech and that I might just be paranoid.

On the other, I notice that you didn't address the actual problem of new tactics and tech making our army obsolete.
 
His numbers are generally fucked up.
His numbers on USSR deathtoll, for example, are twice that of Black Book of Communism - and those in that book were, by accounts of many people including some of the coauthors (who made an effort to distance themselves from the book due to this), overinflated anyway.

And generally the same logic would mean that liberalism is the reason for genocide of natives and Irish Famine, so overall ascribing every single fuck-up within a movement to the ideology of movement is rarely warranted.

I don't really want to get into it, as it's not N&P, but this comes with the territory when quest enters the era of ideologies and revolutions, so....

Because I added the deaths which happened in the first world war and the civil war, which are not tracked by the Black Book of Communism.
 
It boggles the mind that there are still people voting to help the monarchists after it has been made clear that it would alienate basically everyone else on the continent. What are people even thinking?
Because advancing the cause of republicanism and egalitarianism is worth the immediate political backlash, in my opinion.
 
That Republicans are going to win in the end
Not necessarily. Political history doesn't run on tracks.

Speaking as someone that has seen a Titan brought low by "democracy" and how politics can ruin a nation, I will say straight up that I'd take crowning a competent emperor today, as in right now, over the wonders of a republican government.

[X] [War] Joined in on the Alliance to Restore the Monarchy (major participants: Vortuga, Sketch, Tortun, Etal, Halvyni) (1x)
[X] [Rounds] Begin Industrial Age play
 
Last edited:
I really feel we should get participate in some way. We have ignored the world before and it didn't turn out well.

Let's get our troops out there so that they can start bringing back new ideas. Like that ship tech we are woefully behind in.
 
It is a massive assertion to suppose that the Republicans are going to win at all, much less win and then be able to counterattack, much less win and then defeat all of its direct opponents and then defeat everyone who was neutral.

They lack an officer corp, and my impression that they did not have time to form an actual professional military.

if we get involved, we can influence the new country some. But also, there are the benefits of neutrality.... OBVIOUSLY the revolutionary option isnt going to win, but neutrality does let us express approval of the concept of a republic.

We are a monarchy, not a republic, and our King so far fulfilled his contractual obligation.
 
[X] [War] Stayed neutral (2x)

I decided to revote for neutral. Even if our generals are wrong, odds are that that the west is going to pound itself flat. While the political goodwill would be nice, I think we are better served being opportunists and making a coalition of the neutral powers (including the not!Swedes and Stormyn) and expand the navy to assert control over the Monsoon Sea while their overlords are busy. Then we take them by the balls with rebuilding loans.
 
Hrm? You mean that Hespanxerites are going to keep throwing bodies into the grinder until the bitter end, like Romans vs everyone else back in the day?
The Hespanxerites are in an interesting position. On one hand, there is no partition of not!poland to distract the eastern powers. On the other hand, recent events have pretty much wrecked their rivals. If they manage to pull off a Levée en Masse and hold out until they've rebuild their officer corps they're pretty much going to conquer not!europe (excluding not!britain).
 
Last edited:
It is a massive assertion to suppose that the Republicans are going to win at all, much less win and then be able to counterattack, much less win and then defeat all of its direct opponents and then defeat everyone who was neutral.
The republicans as an ideology, not the fighters themselves.
Yeah but we aren't talking about our philosophers; we are talking about dumbfuck peasants with pitchforks that think nobles = bad.
Who would be lead and organized by our lowest nobility, who were noted to think in it that way.

Peasants have to have someone to organize and arm them in order for them to be a threat, and in this case it would be the people like our lower nobility who think in that way.
 
It's one or the other. Either we'll end up in a war with the Republicans or we'll miss out on war techs. Not both.

Well, there is also a third option, that we miss out on techs, then Teutons, now united and with nationalism "invented", eat us.

It is a massive assertion to suppose that the Republicans are going to win at all, much less win and then be able to counterattack, much less win and then defeat all of its direct opponents and then defeat everyone who was neutral.

Thing is, they are the only ones insane enough to fight to the death instead of some concession and shit.
It's basically "Rome vs Greeks" problem, where Pyrrhus won victories but Romans had manpower and will to use it until they won the war.

Others are not prepared for such mass warfare. So, well...

Because I added the deaths which happened in the first world war and the civil war, which are not tracked by the Black Book of Communism.


Mmm. This is...problematic too, as ascribing losses of war to the ideology of movement would mean that all the blood of 30 years war (aka "some regions of Germany lost 75% of population" just to have a taste of the horrors of World War 0) is on hands of Protestants.

I mean, "Martin Luther and Jan Hus are guilty of genocide of millions Europeans in decades of war" is an interesting hot take, but it has some problems.
 
Back
Top