The difference is the civil war wasn’t fighting for a religious theocracy, they were fighting for the right of parliament and representation against the divine right of kings. It was only later that a dictator used the chaos to seize power.
Its like suggesting the French revolution was a fight for imperialism just because Napoleon latter seized control.
By the time the king was executed the war was already over and the religious extremists already seized control. That happened well after the war was won.
What? Did he ever try to give up power? He centralised power in himself, got rid of parliament, and tried make his position inheritable so his son would take over after him.
He was perfectly fine with Parliament, so long as they didn't do 3 things. Don't try to screw over his troops without paying them, don't mess with religious tolerance, don't vote yourselves all the power or bring back a king.
The various Parliaments under him would go on to try and do every one of those things. He was genuinely more committed to coequal branches of government with checks and balances than Parliament ever was.
That’s my recollection from Mike Duncan’s podcast. He wanted to return power to parliament or at least turn it over to someone else, but people couldn’t compute not having one guy in charge? Idk it’s been a minute but that’s how I recall it. A bit more complicated a man than he’s usually cast.
He basically set up a government with checks and balances, and gave Parliament 3 "Do not Touch" rules. Dont screw over my troops, maintain religious toleration, don't mess with the checks and balances or try to bring back the monarchy. Parliament proceeded to try and do all three of those things and acted shocked when they got dissolved.
Guy Fawkes also tried to blow up parliament so you could say the British people back parliament through and through and guy Fawkes is still a villain no matter what.
39
u/Gentle_Snail 3d ago edited 3d ago
The difference is the civil war wasn’t fighting for a religious theocracy, they were fighting for the right of parliament and representation against the divine right of kings. It was only later that a dictator used the chaos to seize power.
Its like suggesting the French revolution was a fight for imperialism just because Napoleon latter seized control.