By Ibrahim Hiba Revolutions Introduction When Mohammed Bouazizi sets himself on fire on December 17, 2010, in extraordinary act of demonstration against the expropriation of his cart, he could have little idea that his story would not only lead to the ouster of Tunisia’s long ruling dictator but would also motivate a wave of demonstrations that would reform the entire Middle East. Bouazizi’s way of demonstration was the straw that broke the camels back, and no one expected that the revolutions in the Middle East will start and breaks out from Tunisia (Maloney 2011). This is an example misty and the inability to accurately predict the occurrence of revolutions. It is not true that people under the same circumstances must act in the same way because in human affairs a causal generalization derived entirely from a set of analogous events is undependable. The fact that sometimes even though the current environments are similar to past conditions may lead to the different result. On the other hand, it is also possible that apparently similar causes may lead to similar result. It is difficult to forecast when the revolution is going occur because there are many elements that might not be visible on the time of observation. All that is claimed is that, if this set of causes should occur again, one of the possible results that may be anticipated is revolution, but not necessary (Gottschalk 1971). However, understanding the circumstances that surrounding societies and countries before the revolutions escalate are important in order to be able to forecast such important consequences. These arguments lead us to the questions of what motivate people in some countries to revolt? And to what degree external factors play roles on break out revolutions? (Boesche 2006). Revolution has many social, economic, political, and intellectual implications and it can hardly come from a single reason. In order to understand the causations of revolution, and why revolutions occurred in some countries and why revolutions do not occurred in other countries, this study focuses on internal and external causations of revolutions. This study claims that understanding the internal and external causations of revolutions will help us understanding the probabilities of revolution to occur in certain country and region (Gottschalk 1971). The internal causations for revolutions: There are numbers of internal factors that are important on increasing the probability of revolution to occur. Revolution starts with Societies’ demands; these demands are generated from social, economic, and political problems. For example, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, the Arab spring Revolutions, East Europe Revolutions, and Latin America Revolutions, come from such things as “unfair land distribution and hunger; taxation, high fees for services rendered or for services not rendered; exclusion from certain commercial restrictions; corruption; military or diplomatic defeat; famine; high prices; low wages and unemployment. Such things and provocations are to be found antecedent to every revolution” (Gottschalk 1971). There is a direct relationship between economic pressure and popular rebellion. In most revolution, there is clear evidence that economic circumstance and discontent and dissatisfaction heavily lead into the outbreak protests and the consequent developments that might lead to overthrown political systems (Maloney 2011). Way (2008) claims that political systems are collapsed more because of the authoritarian weakness than opposition strength (Way 2008). For example, internal economic collapses and slowdown, popular dissatisfaction over increasing food prices and inflation, anger over perceived corruption, and the lack of employment prospects among the region’s disproportionately might lead to revolution in some countries and overthrown regimes (Maloney 2011). The failure for states to build and maintain legitimate right to rule and to generate resources to increase economic development will increases the probability of revolutions (Eckstein 1976). Also, the lack of political reform and move toward democratic states sometimes lead to revolution. Because a patrimonial regimes and dictators depends on personalized support such tribes, party, and security and military forces; in most of the time, these dictators try to keep any segment of society from getting too powerful, as it might challenge their power (Schraeder 2012; Inwegen 2011). States failure of moving toward a system of rule of law that guarantees basic individual rights, such as, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and beliefs, and protect from arrest and torture increase the probability of revolutions to occur (Pollack 2011). Marxists claim that revolutionary change is due to the conflict between the systems of production, and that conflict leads to class struggles, which in turn lead to transfer of power between the classes hence revolution (Gottschalk 1971). The usefulness of analyzing classes is based on the Marxist statement that people typically behave according to their socioeconomic status (Inwegen 2011). The theory of revolution process in Marx’s own thought is built from political rationalism approach. Marx’s thought of egalitarianism comes from the shared experience of the proletariat and the rational of their social situation. The inequality between rich and poor is seen as one of the causes fro the revolutions (Gutfreund-Walmsley 2012), this simplification is useful for understanding the element of struggle between classes in societies; however, there are no Marxists or class-oriented analysts who suggest that there are only two classes and that everyone fits into these two classes, therefore, Marx’s theory about the revolution has wrong assessment and distribution about the social classes and how the struggle between classes might lead to revolution (Inwegen 2011). In addition, monistic theory claims that the outbreak of revolution due to ability of some groups for reasons of their own to convince people to follow along paths in order to change political system. Sorokin believes that all social change results from epistemological and ethical causes, and this changes come from conflicts of social, economic, and political values (Gottschalk 1971). Barrington Moore argues that the class arguments that lead up to the modernization process determine the type of revolution and regime that fallow. Moore claims that no bourgeoisie, no democracy, and bourgeoisie are the main element for revolution. Moore claims that the there are different elements that need to exist for revolution to occur. “The first element is that revolutions are only likely when the state is highly authoritarian. Second, the peasant revolutions only occur in newly capitalizing societies, in which societies’ economy is shifting toward the commodification of the land, labor, and wealth. The third element, result in workers becoming alienated from the products of their labor, from themselves, and from others. It also results in an ecological crisis, the fourth element, because land becomes privatized for production of cash crops at the same time that the population grows. This change in economic structures impacts three classes in particular, the aristocracy new intellectuals, and peasants. Therefore, peasant revolutions are increasingly likely when the rural, landed aristocracy become increasingly parasitic. Moore claims that as more countries become modern, the likelihood of revolution will gradually recede”(Inwegen 2011). Inwegen (2011) argues that Weber’s grand view of history was that societies commonly moved from tradition to modernism, and this is the foundational idea of modernization. The author claims that Weber looks at the change from traditional to modern societies as a structure that encourages revolutions. The existence of a conventional society means that revolution is likely because all conventional society societies are in the process of moving toward modernity, and revolution is one tool to make change. Inwegen (2011) argues that Samuel Huntington claims that revolutions arise in developing societies when there is incoherence between the scope and peace of sociopolitical change and economic change. Huntington assesses revolution as the fast and violent extension of political participation outside of recent political institutions. As new groups in society arise in the course of modernization, they will need to be brought into the scope of the country’s authority so that they can exercise power in relation to their growing status. If a regime is able to make the required changes, it avoids revolution. If not, the revolution is the outcome. Huntington indicates that revolution is thus a feature of modernization, and it is not something, which can occur at any period of in the history and in any type of society. It is not a universal category, but rather it is a historically limited phenomenon. Huntington argues that modernization is a structural obstacle to the possibility of revolution (Inwegen 2011). Boesche (2006) argues that Tocqueville climes that people alone cannot make a revolution because revolution does not needs only the passionate energy of the people, but also the clarifying wisdom of the open-minded and enlightened classes, and the material interests and passionate ideals. According to Tocqueville, the key elements in revolution are the materials of classes and the human passions derived from ideals (Boesche 2006). Gottschalk (1971) argues that there are several elements that create demand for revolution; these elements are generated from political, economic, and social desire of changes. The first cause of revolution called provocation, this results from dissatisfaction sufficiently general to create slough of subjective misery, which motivate people and make desire for action to make change. The second factor is solidified public opinion, this happen when individuals are willing to participate if others are ready to participate. General awareness of resentment against the provocations, these provocations from the regimes create that kind of demand for change, which become effective in making revolutions. The author argues that in order to have revolution, there must be not merely a demand for revolution, but also a certain hopefulness of success. According to Gottschalk leadership is also important factor in creating that kind of hopefulness for successful revolution (Gottschalk 1971). The external causations for revolutions: There are numbers of external factors that motivate people to revolt; these factors have different impact on political systems level and societies. States are not isolated units from their external environments. The action and reaction of the states has an effect on internal and external of state itself and other countries. Therefore the foreign policies of states sometimes have impacts on other states of internal events (Halliday 1990). Revolutions emerge not only from the internal effects, but also from outside. International conflicts, economic crises, and political-coercive crisis are some of the important factors that might make pressure on regimes to make changes. These factors also sometimes make pressure on people to revolt, and they sometimes cause revolutions ( Lawson 2011). Deep international economic crisis might cause revolutions in some countries when thy affected deeply. For example, Third World countries are usually exposed to political changes because the Third World very dependent upon larger powers economically. When something changes in economic system, the relationship, even temporarily, revolutions are most likely. The revolution in the Third World might result from the distraction in the core economic by depression or wars, rivalries between major powers. These changes lead sometimes make pressure on some countries in the Third World to make political and economic changes because they are so dependable on the major powers economically and sometimes politically. As countries weak and dependent upon foreign goodwill, the revolutions are most likely to occur when economic crisis occur if the countries fail to make political and economic reform and move toward democratic states (Inwegen 2011). For example, because of Europe’s economic crisis, Tunisia experienced an economic recession from 2008 until 2011. This led later to worsened the Tunisia’ economic because European market demand for Tunisian products decreased the exports, which led to a contraction in the industrial sector, and slower the expansion in services. This globule economic crisis was one of the most important causes of Tunisian revolution in 2011 (El-Khawas 2012). In addition, World War I affected most of Latin America countries because of the interruption of European demand for their products. After the war, the economy slowed caused increasing political unrest and increased social problems. This situation opened the door for increasing the demand for political and economic changes, and led to revolutions in some countries in the Latin America ( Latin America: Revolution and Reaction in the 20th Century). Foreign influence is critical in shaping the outcomes of disturbances; however, foreign influence varies according to the defined political concerns of world powers (Eckstein 1976). Major powers sometimes create obstacles to authoritarian regimes by increasing the extent economic pressure on them in order to invest in regime change. Therefore, understanding the changes in globule economic changes and crisis helps us to understand the effect of this factor on causing revolution in some part of the world. Moreover, understanding the ways of how states sometimes use their economic powers to influence internal events like revolutions is important because it might explain why revolution occur in some part of the world( Way 2008). In addition regional effect is one of the most important factors that might explain why revolutions occur in some countries and region. Spreading democracy in one country sometimes inspire other states in the same region to follow the same path. Language and culture some of the important factors that play an important role to motivate people and countries to behave the same. When one country overthrows a dictator, citizens in other countries that share a common language or and culture are more likely to behave the same. People view the example of neighbor as an applicable to their own condition, and feel empowered to take the same action because they have similar circumstance (Grand 2011). During the cold war era, the success of Marxist-Leninist revolution led to install communist political system in several East European states and North Korea. In addition, indigenous revolutions led to alliance switches from West to East in numerous countries in East Europe sates (Katz 2014). Changes in the Soviet Union following Mikhail Gorbachev’s accession to the leadership of the Communist Party in 1985 provided the crucial precondition for the subsequent revolutions in Eastern Europe. These changes led both to a enquiring of several aspects of communist rule, and to a sending sense that the Soviet Union might not intervene to protect unpopular socialist political systems by armed forces (Roberts 1991). The collapse of communism led to revolutions in Bulgaria and Romania at the beginning of 1989, these revolutions led to other revolutions in Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine and Color revolutions in Georgia 2003, Ukraine 2004, Kyrgyzstan 2005 even though the absence of successful opposition movements in the neighboring countries (Way 2008). Similarly, the seven successful Arab nationalist revolutions of the 1950s and 1960s that took place are an example of how one revolution inspires people on other countries to revolt. The first revolution was the Egyptians revolution in 1952 follows by Syria and Iraq in 1958, Algeria and North Yemen in 1962, and Sudan and Libya in 1969 (Katz 2014). Arab spring in 2011 is also an example of how revolution in one country spreads to another. The revolution in Tunisia in 2011 inspire people in Egypt and than Libya and than to Bahrain and than to Syria and than to Yemen. Once revolution is happened in one part of the region, the path from breakthrough to anther revolution has huge chance (Pollack and Telhami 2011). In addition, adopting democracy promotion by major democratic powers as a foreign policy against nondemocratic states is an important factor that might cause revolution. Also international organizations play important roles on imposing democracy in nondemocratic states, these roles and pressures sometimes lead to revolutions ( Pevehouse 2002). Liberalists believe that increasing the number of democratic regimes in the international system will result to a more peaceful international system, also democracy means free markets and increase trade between countries, which lead to develop the economy. Therefore, some democratic major powers adopt democracy as part of their foreign policies when they dealing with nondemocratic states. Given that the spread of democracy has been the (at least spoken) foundation of modern Western countries’ foreign policies (Kadera, Crescenzi and Shannon 2003). In additional, external pressure from regional international organizations also a great impact on authoritarian regimes that are undertaking liberalization, these pressures lead sometimes to revolution. Once a regime has begun to open political space, pressure by an IO of which the regime is a member can push authoritarians to liberalize more and make political and economic reform; however; if the regime failed to make essential political and economic reform, it might face revolution over time. IOs can also create economic pressures on the regime if part of the pressure by the international organization is the suspension of trade and financial benefits. This can extend worsen economic crises that can undermine the regime. IOs can also make political pressures and difficulties, which result international isolation, this kind of pressure can help to further de-legitimize a regime at home. During these times of crisis, a regime’s international partners might treat the regime as a pariah state, this can influence public and elite perception of the regime within the state and lead to political and economic crisis, which lead to revolution. (Pevehouse 2002). The United States and Western Europe played important roles in many post-Soviet Countries, they provide important aid to civil society organizations, and mad pressure on the authoritarian regimes in order to make political and economic changes (Way 2008), In addition, international organizations including the World Bank and the European Union, played also important roles in Eastern Europe after the fall of communism; these pressures and aids war important factors that led to revolutions in these countries (Grand 2011). In addition, communication and technology plays an important role in many revolutions. As a result of the many technological developments that have revolutionized in how people connect each other, an abundance of information has become accessible to everybody. On 17 December 2010, Mohamed Bouazizi, a street vendor, set himself on fire in front of Sidi Bouzid’s city building to protest his humiliation at the hands of a police officer that removed his fruit cart and hit him. This episode would have gone normally if his cousin and friend were not shot a video of Bouazizi’s mother’s demonstration on the spot where he had committed suicide. Their video was posted on Facebook and broadcast by Al Jazeera, reaching hundreds of thousands of people overseas and Tunisian people. It becomes a symbol of the Tunisia’s regime corruption and its incapability to produce jobs for young people who were struggling to support their families in many cities in Tunisia (El-Khawas 2012). With the growing number of international, self-described organizations such as Facebook, Wikipedia, Wikileaks and more, much of the information becomes available to everyone. Ultimately, public information supplied by social networking websites has played an important role during modern-day activism. Authoritarian states can no longer hide the repressive practices as in the past, the can no longer hide their corruptions, they can no longer prevent people from communicate each other. In Eastern Bloc two decades ago the changes began with televised images of the fall of the Berlin Wall, these images had a great influence on people in Eastern Europe revolution latter on. The technology’s changes gradually weaken the regime’s control on the flow of information. These changes allow people to see for themselves, more vividly than they ever had before, how their society and lives compared with that of others. At the same time, a new generation came of age that was better educated, and has higher expectations of new life, through new experience and learning from errors; the new generation began to learn how collectively to challenge the regime and to have their voices finally heard (Grand 2011). In Arab countries, many activists who played crucial roles in different part of the world used social networking as a key tool in expressing their thoughts and ideas concerning, and unjust actions committed by the governments. Being capable of sharing an immense amount of uncensored and accurate information throughout social networking sites has contributed to bring many activists together in order to work as groups. For example, through social networking sites, Arab Spring activists have not only gained the power to overthrow powerful dictatorships, but also helped civilians to become aware of their communities. In countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen, Libya, Syria, and Bahrain, people were capable to create plans such as demonstrations made up of thousands. These demonstrations organized and schedule through social media such Facebook and Twitter. In addition, activist from different countries announce and coordinate on Twitter, and YouTube to tell the world about their revolutions. The role that technology has taken in allowing the distribution of public information such as the kinds stated by the aforementioned activist, had been essential in establishing the democratic movement that has helped guide abused civilians to overthrow their oppressor. Social networks have broken the psychological barrier of fear by helping many to connect and share information (Gutfreund-Walmsley 2012; El-Khawas 2012; and Schraeder 2012). Conclusion In order to understand why revolutions occur on some countries, it is important to highlights on the internal and external causations. It is difficult to rely on only the internal or external causations because states and people are not isolated, and both external and internal causations play important roles to motivate people to revolt. It difficult also measure the amount of impact of the internal and external causation without employing statistical model and understand the relationship between all dependent and independent variables. This might be the next step of further research in future. This study focuses on the most important external and internal factors that play important role to motivate people to revolt and make political, economic, and social changes. Reference Boesche, R. (2006). Tocquevilles road map: Methodology, liberalism, revolution, and despotism. Lanham: Lexington Books. Eckstein, S. (1976). The Impact of Revolution: A comparative analysis of Mexico and Bolivia. London: Sage Publications. Gutfreund-Walmsley, E. (2012). The 2011 Egyptian revolution. Inwegen, P. (2011). Understanding revolution. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner. Katz, M. N. (2014). The international relations of the arab spring. Middle East Policy, 21(2), 76-84. Kelly M. Kadera, Mark J. C. Crescenzi and Megan L. Shannon (2003) democracy survival, peace, and war in the international system. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 234-247. Lucan Way. (2008). The real causes of the color revolutions. Journal of Democracy, 19(3), 55-69. Lawson, G. (2011). Hallidays revenge: Revolutions and international relations. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), 87(5), 1067-1085. Mohamed A. El-Khawas. (2012). Tunisia’s jasmine revolution: Causes and impact. Mediterranean Quarterly, 23(4), 1-23. Peter J Schraeder. (2012). Tunisias jasmine revolution, international intervention, and popular sovereignty. The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, 13(1), 75. Pevehouse, J. C. (2002). Democracy from the outside-in? international organizations and democratization. International Organization, 56(3), 515-549. Paynton, C., & Blackey, R. (1971). Why revolution? Theories and analyses. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Pub.; distributed by General Learning Press, Morristown, N.J. Pollack, K. (2011). The Arab awakening America and the transformation of the Middle East. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Roberts, A. (1991). Civil resistance in the East European and Soviet revolutions. Cambridge, MA: Albert Einstein Institution. Like
Posted on: Mon, 01 Dec 2014 19:42:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015