Invoking the king was a logical political strategy against local masters

Evidence

Their tactics were artful, and yet justified by their convictions and by the facts. They offered no fewer than five subsidies, amounting to £300,000, all to be paid within twelve months. Here was enough to carry on the war: but before they would confirm this in a Bill they demanded their price. The following four resolutions were passed unanimously: that no freeman ought to be restrained or imprisoned unless some lawful cause was expressed; that the writ of habeas corpus ought to be granted to every man imprisoned or restrained, even though it might be at the command of the King or of the Privy Council; that if no legal cause for imprisonment were shown the party ought to be set free or bailed; that it was the ancient and undoubted right of every freeman to have a full and absolute property in his goods and estates, and that no tax, loan, or benevolence ought to be levied by the King or his Ministers without common consent by Act of Parliament. — Winston Churchill, A History of the English-Speaking…, 987 (#expands, via linked claim)

People generally choose safety. This is not a trait unique to members of any race or religion. People want safety and security for themselves, but also for their families. And giving people what they want is certainly a route to power. Nations like to have leaders who are strong protectors. And for all of recorded history, opportunists like Trump have understood that they can rise on promises to protect their people from imagined threats just as much as from real ones. — Arsalan Iftikhar, Fear of a Muslim Planet_ Global…, 329 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Insurgent leaders invoked the king’s authority to rally slaves; Parliament’s tactics exemplified a strategic negotiation with the monarchy. — Winston Churchill, A History of the English-Speaking…, 987; Fulfilling Raynal’s prophecy demanded politics, not vengeance (+3 more)

Broader Connections