I'm less in love with the idea of "rebels" in the position of unsatisfied populace. I prefer something closer to "thralls" or "drudges" to depict uninvolved people not enjoying their lives and not contributing more than the absolute minimum.
Although everybody who can read this has been exposed to people "rebels" all their lives, in economic terms, most "rebellions" of the last century were the expensive hobby of rich people. Genuinely poor and uneducated folk keep to themselves and try to get by in the best way they can, while giving up as little as possible to the lords/commisars they distrust and despise. Throughout history there have been notable uprisings, but until fairly recently it was not an activity that occurred on an ongoing basis. When the people in charge use cavalry as their ombudsmen, rebels have short careers.
The advantage of calling unhappy folk "Drudges" is that it changes the economic framework of the game. The oppressive Empire kingdoms will have predominantly "Drudge" populations, but the more enlightened Kingdoms can have more productive happy citizenry. This way you can have folks who are miserable but loyal...or at least too beaten down to overthrow their masters. Contrary to most popular representations of revolutionary transitions, it takes a lot to convert a "Drudge" to a happy citizen, but a lot of that is cultural.While it would be nice if everybody welcomed individual liberty, a distressing number of folks will put the slave collar back on, the first chance they get.
This new title is more in line with the experiences I've observed and discussed with survivors of Franco's Spain, Ceaușescu's Romania, Pinochet's Chile, Mubarek's Egypt, Assad's Syria, and Hussein's Iraq. I hope you will consider it, I give this to you freely.
