On this day in 1573, the Croatian-Slovene Peasant Revolt began with an attack on the fortress of Cesargrad, near the town of Klanjec. Peasants formed their own government, planning to abolish feudalism and establish self-rule.
Amidst growing incursions by Ottoman forces into the region, local feudal lords ramped up economic demands on the local peasantry. One powerful noble, Franjo (or Ferenc) Tahy was particularly notorious for his cruel and violent treatment of the local populace.
Complaints made by peasants to the central government were ignored, so popular resistance efforts began to develop. The local peasantry refused to pay taxes to Tahy, who responded by sending armed mercenaries to attack them, however they were defeated by armed peasants.
On the night of January 27-28, rebels seized the fortress of Cesargrad, marking the start of the revolt. The peasants formed an alternative government, with serf Matija Gubec elected as leader.
The rebels made long term plans of systemic reform, including replacing feudal lords with peasant officials, abolishing feudal land holdings and provincial borders, canceling obligations to the Roman Catholic Church, opening of highways for trade, and establishing self-rule by the peasants.
News of the uprising quickly spread through the discontented lower classes of the region, who followed suit by fighting back against their oppressors, taking further territory throughout Carniola, Croatia and Styria.
The Croatian Parliament declared the revolutionary peasants traitors. After their initial wave of success, peasant forces suffered a major defeat at Krško on February 5th, which precipitated a further wave of defeats over the coming days.
The rebels made their final stand at Stubičke Toplice on the 9th, where the uprising was crushed for good. Matija Gubec was captured, and Ivan Mogaić, another important revolutionary leader, was killed on the battlefield.
Captives were maimed and tortured by authorities, and Gubec was publicly tortured and executed on the 15th. Although the revolt was unsuccessful, its memory has persisted in the region in the centuries since, with Gubec attaining legendary status in local folklore.
A detachment of Yugoslav volunteers for the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War named themselves the "Grupo Matija Gubec". In 1975, a film based on the events entitled "Anno Domini 1573" was released, and historical re-enactments of the Revolt are held in Croatia every year.
Hexbear links
- 🐻Link to all Hexbear comms
- 📀 Come listen to music and Watch movies with your fellow Hexbears nerd, in Cy.tube
- 🔥 Read and talk about a current topics in the News Megathread
- ⚔ Come talk in the New Weekly PoC thread
- ✨ Talk with fellow Trans comrades in the New Weekly Trans thread
- 👊 Share your gains and goals with your comrades in the New Weekly Improvement thread
- 🧡 Disabled comm megathread
reminders:
- 💚 You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
- 💙 Hexbear’s algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
- 💜 Sorting by new you nerd
- 🌈 If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
- 🐶 Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog
Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):
Aid:
Theory:
lib thought but i've always wondered why construction companies don't lobby for mixed use, denser development. like, surely they can make more money by putting more properties in a smaller area? maybe i'm wrong
They do, Yimby groups and think tanks are the lobbying arm of developers. AFAIK their main concern is that regulations don’t get in the way of min-maxing condo layouts (often to the detriment of residents), but they do lobby for mixed use and denser developments.
that makes sense. just would have thought it'd translate into a stronger push and less suburb development
I imagine many of them* like the cheap land so they probably wouldn’t be anti-suburb. Like building on cheap land near suburban commuter rail, or making a little walkable enclave within suburbia seem to be common strategies.
* the developers, the lobbying arm tends to be anti-suburb, but I think that’s more coincidental alignment between urbanism and the goals of developers
Their favourite thing is building a new suburb development, tons of cheap land, put up mcmansions for $400k+ a pop that you cheap out on materials and stuff for, and then don't even have to cover utilities following and neither does the city/town because an HOA will be set up to mismanage it. I think the profit margins on these are gonna be way higher than densifying residential neighborhoods would ever be - there you have to deal with much more narrow roads, take out old houses (sometimes which need abatements), longer lead times, and ultimately you can't charge out the same margin. Building walk ups in single family home neighborhoods is just not gonna be as popular.
Also part of it is parking requirements and lawn requirements. The lawn stuff is whatever, who cares if you have a front lawn/garden no one is using, but people are so dependent on cars it gets hard to find buyers for these places. No municipality wants to spend money on public transit even if some are willing to slash parking regulations, so it leads to just parking and car hell where you can't really walk anywhere or cycle or take a bus or LRT because there's just nothing.