Thus, this fierce complaint of maladministration and misgovernment by the medium of a rebellion could have led to the disintegration of Henry VIII’s system of government, creating fragmented security. Moreover the Cornish rebelled as they were funding resistance for a war that offered little threat to them. This threatened Henry VII’s security
As stated in the declaration of independance, King George,throughout his very long reign, exploited his power over the colonies which ultimately caused the colonist to revolt. The Declaration of Independance provides numerous examples of how the King of Great Britain committed "repeated injuries and usurpations". The Declaration states: "He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good." This basically means that King George has refused to pass any laws that were created by the colonist's for the greater good of the colonies. King George didn't allow the colonies to make their own laws, which is an evident sign of him "using" the colonies.
Nicholas II was faced with various issues during his reign from 1894-1917. His ineffectual personality was partly to blame for his ineffectual ruling. He was not able to listen to the needs of his public, and so violent uprisings such as Bloody Sunday occurred. His response was to initiate the October Manifest and the instigation of the Russian Duma, but neither of these pleased the public and so the February revolution of 1917 occurred, which ultimately created the fall of Tsar Nicholas II. Nicholas II attempted to rule Russia as an autocrat as he believed that autocracy was the only was to save Russia from anarchy.
The mainland leaders had no intention of including the lower classes (such as the peasants) in their new system of government. Although the revolt had scared Ferdinand I, the division of the people in the revolt, the lack of popular support, and the limited experience of its leaders meant that the revolution was doomed to failure. In 1871, there was another revolution on Piedmont- Sardinia, after hearing news of a revolution in Naples. Once again, the revolutionaries managed to frighten their ruler (Victor Emmanuel), and they were joined my middle class liberal revolutionaries and nobles.
Richard shows a dangerous capacity for poor judgment and fascination with luxury, which deviate from the expectations of royalty. The servile followers that Richard is surrounded by also play an integral role in his incompetence. Moreover, there is mirrored imagery when Shakespeare discusses Bolingbroke’s determination to depose Richard with the Earl of Essex’s rebellion to overthrow Queen Elizabeth. However, the Earl of Essex’s rebellion was unsuccessful, as his supporters had deserted him before arriving at London whereas Bolingbroke’s uprising was successful due to the support of the nobles. Bolingbroke strives to preserve his family honour and retrieve his rightful land, thus his ambitions prove him to be a competent co-ordinator.
How far was Henry VI to blame for the conflict of 1455? The causation of the first battle of St. Albans is a complex and intricate issue, involving many factors. The king’s weaknesses and incompetence made him an innately unsuitable ruler for the times, and his failures to accumulate the majority of the attributes expected of a king, such as control of the nobles and successful military pursuits, may have contributed substantially to the battle in 1455. However, this can be disputed; given the financial state of the country, it is hardly surprising that Henry was unable to keep a firm control over the avaricious nobles, whilst also lacking a standing army. Additionally, the underlying problem of who had a greater claim to the crown, instigated when Henry IV usurped the throne from Richard II, was still a concern, and inevitably this was bound to result in a bloody battle in order to settle the disagreement.
It can be related to the Haitian Revolution because the masters of the slaves and political figures were scared to get overthrown by the slaves, they also treated them harshly, and they arrested Toussaint L'Ouverture who was the leader of the revolt and freed slaves. This illustrates the political condition that the Haitian slaves had to overcome. In the economic aspect it went tumbling down because of the weapons for the war effort. In contrast to the Brazilian Revolution the Haitian Revolution was not as successful. The Brazilian Revolution was successful
They were also in a country plagued by a financial crisis with the majority of the population automatically having hatred for the government. The treaty of Versailles also posed a serious threat to the government with the country left embarrassed by its ruling and the war guilt that Germany faced. The extreme right in particular were a threat to the republic. The actions of the Spartacists in particular concerned the leaders of the SPD as they knew that they could not rely on the support of the army in the face of a revolt. Thus a deal was done with the right wing (the pre 1918 military, judiciary and civil service).
The fall of the Tsar in Russia in 1917 was the culmination of many factors. It was clear since the beginning of his reign that Nicholas II was not suited to his role as Tsar, mainly due to his character and personality. Although Nicholas II issued the October Manifesto to pacify the discontent of people temporarily, he still had to face some problems after the 1905 Revolution. To regain the support from people, he needed to carry out the reforms in the October Manifesto. His reform included different aspect; such as political, social and economic.
Although finance played a significant role in the deterioration of the relationship between Crown and Parliament, it was not the lone reason, due to the fact that there were other more important factors including foreign policy and Buckingham which caused the collapse in the relationship between Crown and Parliament. Firstly, finance was a critical factor in the breakdown in the relationship. For example, the Forced Loan caused a great amount of tension between Crown and Parliament and therefore, worsened relations. It worsened relations because Charles enforced illegal taxations on his subjects without any form of consent from Parliament. He required that his subjects “loan him the equivalent of five subsidies” and although it was “opposed by significant numbers in the localities,” the taxation still occurred as the government had “employed all its powers to eliminate resistance”.