[colorado tanker]

Thanks for the post. I find the Tudor/Stuart period the most interesting in British history. I rate Elizabeth higher. True, she had a well developed network of spies and secret police, but that was fairly routine in the era and necessary given her enemies.

The Glorious Revolution was the transforming event (IMHO of course) in English politics.

I agree, with a big caveat that the stage for that event was set by the earlier, Cromwellian revolution. IMHO, the English Revolution was the first of the great European revolutions, but was a bit ahead of its time to result in the establishment of a Republic, in contrast to the American and French Revolutions.

a Parliamentary system isn’t really a democracy, it’s merely a single-party state rule without the oppression

True, that system allows the majority party to "get things done" but that can be despite majority opinion. The American system of checks and balances is much more frustrating but tends to result in legislation the majority can live with over a long term. It appears the Obama Party (a rogue wing of the Democrats) is going to illegally repeal the Senate filibuster rule to try to establish parliamentary rule in America. I suspect they have no idea the blowback that may result.

[SunkenCiv]

Actually, I agree that the Tudor/Stuart period is at least one of the most interesting, not least because it was the Renaissance, and we wound up with Shakespeare, Bacon, Newton, etc.