Chapter 482: The Roman Uprising Erupts


    The faith crisis poses significant challenges, but it also presents a golden opportunity. Currently, the Roman Catholic Church is too preupied with its own troubles, providing the government with a perfect chance to interfere in church affairs.


    If the government gains the right to discipline clergy, the church will be forced to submit from now on.


    Otherwise, they’ll be investigated for viting church rules. It’s not an exaggeration to say that seven or eight out of ten clergy members have broken the rules at some point, so finding infractions will be easy.


    As for the remaining two or three? They shouldn’t feel too secure. If they haven’t broken any rules yet, it’s either just a matter of time or a matter of what hasn’t been discovered. The government will eventually find something.


    Franz isn’t the only one taking advantage of the church’s misfortune. The faith crisis has drastically diminished the church’s standing with the public, leading governments across Europe to collectively strip the church of its privileges.


    As this storm subsides, the thousand-year struggle between royal and papal authority on the European continent is finallying to an end. This time, royal authority has emerged victorious, and the church is left with no chance to turn the tables.


    But these are matters for the future. Napoleon III hasn’t had time to savor the fruits of victory yet, as chaotic ideas continue to challenge the people’s worldviews in France.


    Anti-church and pro-church factions are shing violently on the streets of Paris, even resorting to firearms. In the end, Napoleon III had to order the garrison to step in and restore order.


    Meanwhile, hidden revolutionaries saw this chaos as their moment and leaped into action, turning Paris into a scene of bem.While Paris is in turmoil, the situation in Italy is even worse. The chaos there has given revolutionaries a glimmer of hope.


    Giuseppe Mazzini, founder of the Young Italy movement, and Giuseppe Garibaldi, leader of the Italian National Liberation Army, have secretly returned to Italy, preparing to ignite an armed uprising to overthrow French rule.


    However, before they canunch their rebellion, internal strife erupts within the insurgent forces. Ideological shes re up between Mazzini, the visionary leader, and Garibaldi, the military leader.


    Garibaldi spoke passionately, “Napoleon III’s actions have severed his ties with the Church, and the Roman Catholic Church would love nothing more than to see him dead. Now is the perfect opportunity. We can ally with the Church’s forces andunch an uprising to overthrow the French rule in one decisive move.”


    The Italian revolutionary forces were quite limited and divided into more than ten organizations of varying sizes, temporarily united only through British mediation. In reality, they each acted independently.


    To hasten the expulsion of the French, Garibaldi advocated allying with the Church, leveraging its strength to topple French rule.


    Mazzini, however, was adamant, “No, allying with the corrupt Church is not a revolution. It merely reces one ruler with another. Our revolutionary goal is to expel the French, overthrow feudal rule, and establish a unified, free Italy.”


    In the Young Italy movement’s manifesto, feudal rule included the Church. From the start, they stood in opposition.


    This ideology had already spread widely in Italy and garnered the support of most revolutionaries.


    Initially, the goal was to expel the Austrians, but now it was the French, a shift due to practical necessity and variouspromises.


    To lower the difficulty, the revolutionaries decided to target their primary enemy, the French, first. Once the French were expelled, they would address the Austrian issue.


    Ideological differences led to a split among the revolutionaries. This wasn’t just a sh between Garibaldi and Mazzini; it was a broader conflict within the movement. Both viewpoints had strong backing among the revolutionaries. It’s well known that the hardest thing in the world is to get someone to change their beliefs.


    After the brutal French crackdown, the core members of the Italian revolutionary movement were nowposed mainly of impassioned youths and staunch idealists. These individuals were unwavering in their revolutionary stances; oncemitted to a cause, nothing could dissuade them.


    Before their nned uprising could even begin, internal strife had already fractured the revolutionary forces. In truth, they had never been entirely unified. There were over a dozen leaders within the movement, though Giuseppe Garibaldi and Giuseppe Mazzini were the most influential.


    Garibaldi, a seasoned military leader, had previously led armed uprisings and was seen as the revolution’s martial spearhead. Mazzini, the ideologue behind the dream of Italian unification, served as the revolution’s philosophical guide.


    Despite their disagreements, the uprising proceeded because they couldn’t afford to turn down British money. Revolutionaries didn’t produce anything, and without funding from British patrons, they would eventually starve.


    In fact, during this era, many European revolutionary parties were not what they imed to be. They espoused lofty ideals publicly but engaged in unsavory activities behind the scenes.


    Survival necessitatedpromise; everyone needed to eat, and revolutionaries were no exception. They either had to secure a wealthy patron or fend for themselves.


    “Fending for themselves” was no easy task. Revolutionaries, often possessing inted egos and limited practical skills, found sustaining theirrge groups a formidable challenge.


    Reliance on public donations essentially meant courting the wealthy. Revolutionaries were often wanted criminals, unable to appear openly in their homnds.


    Ordinary people had little money to spare. Even if they were willing to donate generously, their contributions would amount to a drop in the bucket and would require reaching out to many, increasing the risk of exposure. With so many people involved, secrecy became impossible.


    In the end, they could only count on wealthy capitalists for funding. These capitalists, with their substantial resources, could be contacted in limited numbers, thereby raising significant funds with a lower risk of exposure.


    However, obtaining money from capitalists was no easy feat. Those willing to support the revolution at great personal risk expected substantial returns.


    Promises of post-revolution returns were imusible. Few capitalists were naive enough to believe in the sess of the revolutionaries. Even if the revolution seeded, it didn’t guarantee the capitalists would gain power. Most capitalists wouldn’t invest without seeing potential returns.


    Thus, revolutionaries often found themselves performing unsavory tasks for their financial backers. Revolutionary parties frequently acted as fronts, doing the dirty work for capitalists.


    In many cases, they also served as convenient scapegoats. It wasmon for unsolved crimes to be med on revolutionary parties.


    Principled revolutionaries did exist, but they were typically poorer and had to work regr jobs to earn money.


    Most revolutionary organizations can’t even raise enough funds for a single uprising. Out of desperation, they are forced to reach out to foreign powers for financial support.


    Even knowing they were making deals with the devil, reality forced the Italian revolutionaries topromise. Facing the French without allies, theycked the confidence to win.


    Franz was partly to me for this. His brutal defeat of the Kingdom of Sardinia had crushed the Italians’ self-confidence, leaving them with a deep fear of the great powers.


    Later, when Garibaldi led the Neapolitan uprising, the French crushed them again, teaching them the harsh lesson of “power disparity.”


    This Italian uprising was the result of British maniption and persuasion. The British government promised the revolutionaries that if the uprising seeded, they would organize European intervention.


    Without British backing, the revolutionaries wouldn’t have dared to act. After all, they had just narrowly escaped French pursuit and fled to Britain from Italy.


    Garibaldi didn’t trust the British promises. If he had a choice, he wouldn’t haveunched the uprising at this time. To increase the chances of sess, he chose to involve the Church.


    “Respected Mr. Mazzini, the most important thing now is to drive out the French and establish an independent Italy. Other issues can be dealt withter. If we seed, we’ll have plenty of time to handle the Church. If we fail, Napoleon III will handle it for us. At this point, the uprising is inevitable. To achieve victory, we mustpromise.”


    There was no w in this reasoning. Napoleon III was already suppressing the Church, and if a convenient excuse was provided, he would certainly seize it.


    Mazzini reluctantly epted this argument, having little choice. The British had invested heavily to secretly return them to Italy. They couldn’t justify this without causing some disturbance.


    However, convincing their followers wouldn’t be easy. The current reasoning wasn’t sufficient, and persuading idealists topromise was incredibly difficult.


    …


    After much internal conflict, the Italians still managed tounch their armed uprising just before Christmas of 1870. With covert support from the Church, the rebels sessfully seized Rome.


    The Italian region was in turmoil, and under the revolutionaries’ influence, uprisings erupted everywhere, sparking a new wave of revolutionary fervor.


    The sudden and massive uprising in Rome was like a p in the face to Napoleon III, casting a shadow over the nascent French Empire.


    At the Pce of Versailles, a furious Napoleon III roared, “The Ministry of War must immediately dispatch troops to suppress the rebellion. Spare no expense. Crush this insurrection as quickly as possible. Execute all revolutionary leaders. Yes, execute them all. Show no mercy.”


    Clearly, Napoleon III was livid. The recent series of troublesome events had pushed him beyond his breaking point.


    The Minister of War, Patrice de MacMahon, promptly responded, “Yes, Your Majesty. We are ready. The suppression forces will march today.”


    The Emperor’s anger demanded swift action. MacMahon understood the gravity of the situation. Mobilizing the troops immediately would at least show the Emperor that the government was taking decisive action.


    Mobilizing the troops to suppress the insurrection on such short notice was challenging. But as long as the army moved out, it would pacify the Emperor.


    This is the art of politics—doing things with finesse. MacMahon didn’t consider the revolutionary forces a real threat. He believed that once the main army arrived, the rebellion could be easily quashed.


    The real challenge was to capture the rebelspletely and leave no future threats.