Tell us more. I've been quoting from my reading, but I am sure it's one-sided. Your perspective would be a valuable complement.

The choice is not Cromwell or liberal democracy. The choice is Cromwell or the Spanish Inquisition with Ireland as gateway to England.

> According to modern estimates, around 150,000 were prosecuted for various offenses during the three-century duration of the Spanish Inquisition, out of which between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed (~2.7% of all cases).

> Estimates of the drop in the Irish population resulting from the Parliamentarian campaign range from 15 to 83 percent

> [Cromwellian conquest Irish casualties] Unknown; 15,000–20,000 battlefield casualties, over 200,000–600,000 civilian casualties (from war-related violence, famine or disease)[1] ~50,000 deported as indentured labourers[2][3]

> Wexford was the scene of another infamous atrocity: the Sack of Wexford, when Parliamentarian troops broke into the town while negotiations for its surrender were ongoing, and sacked it, killing about 2,000 soldiers and 1,500 townspeople and burning much of the town

Cromwell was, at the low end, signficantly worse than the Spanish Inquisition at an absolute level, and given the relative populations of Ireland and Spain in those days, looks even worse in a proportional level.

And don't forget, this is comparing 5 years of cromwell to 300 of the inquisition.

I think you missed your citations.

Another point is that GP's claim "it was Cromwell or the inquisition" is a bit overblown. It was Cromwell or a relatively High Church monarchy, and a lot of taxation without representation. I don't think there's a credible argument that Charles I would have reintroduced Catholicism, still less the Inquisition.

Actually copied from Wikipedia, hence the left in citation markers, but Wikipedia's citations are:

1: Mícheál Ó Siochrú/RTÉ ONE, Cromwell in Ireland Part 2. Broadcast 16 September 2008.

2: O'Callaghan, Sean (2000). To Hell or Barbados. Brandon. p. 85. ISBN 978-0-86322-272-6.

3: Higman, B. W. (1997). Knight, Franklin W. (ed.). General History of the Caribbean: The slave societies of the Caribbean. 3 (illustrated ed.). UNESCO. pp. 107, 108]. ISBN 978-0-333-65605-1.

The 15-80% figure sources are:

15–25% Padraig Lenihan, Confederate Catholics at War, p112

50%: The History and Social Influence of the Potato, Redcliffe N. Salaman, Edited by JG Hawkes, 9780521316231, Cambridge University Press How many died during Cromwell’s campaign?

83%: The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland by John Patrick Prendergast

I would suspect perhaps that the 83% figure is probably going so far as to blame Cromwell for The Great Famine of 1845, and definitely his "to hell or to Connacht" campaign of dispossessing native Irish landowners was a contributing factor in the economic structure that led to it, but I think 200 years apart is enough to not directly attribute that as "deaths to Cromwell's invasion".

> out of which between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed (~2.7% of all cases)

ISTR that the percentage who died in prison awaiting trial was was rather higher, no?

From the figures in my previous post, if all 150k people prosecuted by the Spanish Inquisition died in prison or were executed, then the lower bound estimate death toll of 5 years of Cromwell would still be 50% higher than 300 years of the inquisition.

It's absolutely insane that four hundred years later people are still repeating anti-Catholic propaganda from an ancient war.

I personally find this entire post and discussion thread reprehensible.

The Spanish had already been defeated nearly half a century earlier and the Royal Navy supreme. This is completely wrong and the Civil War didn’t start over religion it was over ship money (the King not consenting parliament to raise taxes.)

And what was the king raising money for? Wars waged to enforce high church upon Scotland, while allowing with Spain against the Dutch.