I could not see communist rule being accepted in Ireland, but Ireland was about to have a war of independence anyway.
One idea for a revolution would be for the CP victory to be blamed on "subversive" elements and start interning Communists, follow that up with radical socialists and trade unionists, and then follow it with people who even criticise the internments and you get the core but then you need an incident to cause disruption. A General Strike could be done, some radical printers for the Daily Mail could stop the anti-strike headline as they did IOTL and then an even more heavy-handed response led by Neville Chamberlain or Churchill who both weren't fans of the labour movement (although the former sympathised with the miners conditions) and then you have a start to the revolution, have the interned gain freedom and then things get heated up.
A heavy hand might be particularly dangerous if the seamen supported the revolution.
A merchant seamen's strike, cutting off imports, means utter disaster, and if the sailors in the RN mutiny as well - -
The National Sailors' and Firemen's Union was actually one of the strongest opponents to the General Strike and managed to keep the Tower Hill branch from joining the strike in what was the death-knell for the movement, the court decision to give an injunction in the union's favour is what gave the TUC a good excuse to back down.
You mean in 1926?
1918 could be a different kettle of fish. Thousands of seaman have died in the u-boat war, and they've just been told that it was all for nothing. In such a situation I coiuld imagine them getting very Bolshie indeed.
I don't think you could get a revolution in 1918 since most of the prospective leaders are in prison or are being watched, having it the 20s works better because they are out and there is more chance of extremism while people sort of accepted that things would get worse before they got better after the War IOTL and that was when it was victory and "home for heroes" was promised.
There were plenty of potential leaders not in jail - imprisoning "leaders" has very little effect - removing one only clears the way for another. Difference is that in 1918 the country is hysterical. We've been psyched up into believing that defeat will be the end of the world - and now it's happened. People will go slightly (and some not so slightly) crazy.
As for the postwar period, the thirties were far worse than the twenties but we never even looked like having a revolution. My guess is it's 1918 or never.
Really? There were many more helpful dates for that sort of thing, 1918 is when the government will be the most prepared for a revolution if defeat is the case. In my opinion, 1920-1933 is the best time for a revolution as you could get a "back-stab" mentality followed by excessive anti-socialist laws before the mark is overstepped and the revolution happens.