It's hard to say if the Grand Duchy of Muscovy was shaped more by Mongol politics or by Byzantian ones, to be honest, but they certainly imitated Constantinople (or how they perceived it, anyway) more so than Sarai.
The representative of the government who systematically kills and tortures the population for not having the right believe in Jesus isn't that hard of a target to identify.
Yeah, and you need that backup regime to be able to quench the bloodthirst as quickly as they energized it. Lafayette promoted introducing constitutional monarchism in France, for example.
I think the importance of clemency is the clearest lesson I’ve learnt from history. The American revolution’s tolerance for the tories helped cement the new nation, and in contrast the French revolution’s bloodthirst just led to a century of instability and the death of thousands. The harsh terms on Germany post-WWI all but guaranteed another war, and the coal-and-steel community formed after WWII provided for a peace among its european members that endures to this day (now as the EU). A very oversimplified take, admittedly.
It should be noted that enough British loyalists felt sufficiently oppressed to flee north in the aftermath of the American Revolution to found two new colonies (New Brunswick and what would eventually become Ontario). So it would be more accurate to describe it as more tolerant rather than tolerant in absolute terms.
The US revolution was literally just white land owners wanting more control taxes, native lands and slavery. There was never any question of it being a revolution where the lower classes would take over. A more realistic long term option was Roman Senate like Upper class aristocracy, and that is what actually did happen in the South.
> The harsh terms on Germany post-WWI all but guaranteed another war
This is just false revisionist history. The peace deal was actually not that harsh. And it took a while many, many other things for WW2 to happen as it did. In fact German never even paid any of the debt that was supposedly so horrible.
In fact got more money invested into them and lent to them then they ever paid out, and guess what, the never paid that back either because after WW2 that debt was forgiven.
What actually made the war likely is that the US ended the war before Germany was actually defeated and then was not even remotely willing do literally anything to enforce the treaty that is had just signed. In fact Wilson basically made promises to France, and those promises were vital in a treaty being signed in the first place. And then of course Wilson couldn't actually back up those promises.
So the reality is the whole peace deal collapsed in on it self as soon as it was signed.
What actually made some form WW2 near inevitable was the Soviet Union trying create world revolution and particularly revolution in Germany.
> and the coal-and-steel community formed after WWII provided for a peace among its european members that endures to this day
More revisionist history. More like the cold war gave Europe a common enemy and the US was actually in control of the alliance. France had no realistic option not to align with with the US, and neither did the newly built West Germany. Also nukes exist.
