Revolutions

Will there be a communist or socialist revolution? I seriously doubt so. Will capitalism last the test of time? I seriously doubt so as well. What then can we thrust the future into having went through capitalism and socialism? Is there no other alternative way to reorganize society other than into these two binary and dichotomous way?

Will there be a revolution like how feudalism was overthrown and replace by organization through representation?

Firstly there are several factors of which to consider before revolution can be even considered and that is the management of nation or society. At heart, there are several important elements before an upset of an order is satisfied 1) Security 2) Resources 3) Nation-hood 4) Economics and Financial security 5) Ideology.

I believe if there are mastery of the above 5 factors, revolution of any kind- other than that of an external intervention- is an impossible task.

1) On Security, security refers to threat from within and from with-out. The presence of strong military and armed forces enables the protection of mortality from external forces. This is an almost given prerequisite since the dawn of time.

But the security landscape is much more different today. Previously we could be self-sufficient which means that any external intervention can be prevented because external trade and relations is much less frequent and interlinked. It essentially means that traders are mostly restricted to the market-place and people have sense a continuity with time- which means people generally have historical experience, or most of us would expect our community to remain the same for the foreseeable future.

But today we are faced with a deluge of unfamiliar faces, information and values, which rather than provide us with consistent set of values but rather thrust us to an experience of confusion and conflicting, and sometimes meaningless and misunderstood world view.

Hence the idea of security has been expanded beyond the realm of the physical but to that of the mind, value systems and worldview. It is therefore that security threats come not just from guns but from ideas that could weaken the mind and resolve of a nation’s people. And given today’s interlocking economies and societies- it would indeed be difficult to discern between what is a threat and what is innovative and creative.

2) Resources. The basic currency before money was crops and previously many cities were built around and beside rivers. Because these are basic requirements for survival before any governments or any leaders can even begin to talk about building a life of over own.

Given the complex nature of our society and economy, securing supplies of these resources are of critical nature: Food, water, energy-oil, clean air. Hence anyone who has a mastery and control over these resources would ensure that the people are properly fed, watered and sanitized. These would include basic public services like water sanitation, waste disposal and food hygiene.

Previous feudal societies thrive on self-sufficiency which means that they grow their own crops and eat their own home-grown food. This is because each cities and societies tend to be relatively isolated. Trade is less infrequent and food is of therefore paramount importance internally before one can even talk about external expansion. But in today’s world linked by counteracting and interlinking economic, security and financial relationship, supplies of these resources are more readily available on the international market. Unless there are major disruptions in global and regional supply chains, resources of these nature are easily procured.

Renegading on any international agreements could mean switching to another buyer and also faced a international community response through sanctions which ultimately would do more harm than good on the unilateral aggressor. This is evidenced in North Korea and Iran.

Therefore the interlocking and interdependent relationship between nations have proven to be one thing- the game is so delicately balanced that it would be foolhardy to play hardball all the time.

3) National Identity and nation-hood used to be a given when we have communities that don’t see each other so often on the internet, on t.v or on the newspaper. It is just much easier to produce a “US vs Others” mentality when we don’t know much about the “Others” anyway. Hence protecting a common concept was much easier back then.

Even the idea of a national identity has become much more fluid and we even have the idea of a “global village” as compared with a local village. But the idea of a national security threat is still very real- even as the idea of globalization spreads across the world, there are many if not all national governments whom will protect or advance their interest both through rather covert and “interventionist” means.

The idea of nation-hood also means a common concept of national identity. If a government masters the idea of nation-hood within the citizens, it is protected against foreign intervention which might spread ideas incompatible with its political and economic system- which otherwise might cause a revolution within the ranks. There is “Power to the People” and there is “Tyranny of the Majority”- therefore the idea “People” must not be allowed to be “tyranny” but rather performed under the auspices of nation-hood then rampant unruly herds baying for blood rather than peace and prosperity.

4) Economic and Financial Security. When we talk about economic and financial security, we refer to the economic health of an economy and it’s fiscal health. In today’s world, it means the ability to provide jobs and opportunities both internally and externally, and how plugged it is into both the trade links and financial markets.

An economy can be destroyed if it is structurally incompatible with it’s strengths and weakness and the needs of the global economy. We can destroy a country economically by snuffling it out of global supply and economic chain and financial markets- much like what has happen in North Korea. The inability to find funding without causing rampant inflation and the immobility of capital meant that funds cannot be reached to areas most needed like infrastructure and communications- hence jobs cannot be created and demand for goods is limited by local consumers.

But likewise, an unwanted market or economy can be sprung up to divert capital into value-destructive areas like drugs and prostitution. Wealth is therefore not circulated into critical areas and might end up into hands of a few with unsavoury motives. The sin economy is something that will exist but if not well-managed- it’s less than desirable traits will seep into the general economy and society which would otherwise destroy a hardworking and value-seeking populace.

5) Ideology. The term ideology is used in the most general terms of which to mean how the nation sees itself and how it wishes to project its ideals and values. It is not used in a narrow political rhetoric sense.

Some nations are formed on the back of political ideals like communism and democracy. It is in fact so sacred that some would argue that it is an ideal that should be defended. And some people would die to protect an assault on these ideals. The ideology is a story and a myth on which we can retell to the people to help them makes sense of the world. Quite simply, it is a myth and a story of which we would tell to galvanize the people. The ideas of equality, justice and diversity and equity would have no meaning insofar that the above factors are not fulfilled.

But much like kids, our life would be quite meaningless if we were not told a story of which we can strive for. The daily toil of work and routine would bear no meaning if we do not have an abstract ideal to protect or to live by.

Therefore an ideology is at the same time the least important and most important factor. It has no bearing on survival but it wraps all the above determinants into one little neat story of which we can live by. Hence a nation with a consistent and salient ideology would succeed as the people would work and seek towards these ideals- both abstract and unachievable at the same time.

Now, one would ask, is revolution possible based on mere ideas alone? It is near impossible, unless the person leading the charge has a mastery over all these above factors. But by definition, a revolution already presumes a lack of control of these factors in the first place- the “underdog” one would say.

The upset of feudalism towards capitalism and representative democracy is the result of changing determinants in the political, economic and societal system. The French Revolution was the result of waning political authority and clash of conflicting ideals- but the ideas of “French-ness” still remain intact.

There are some countries with a much more gradual approach towards the current political system. It is that of UK and certain Arabic countries. UK had gradual approach towards representative democracy as a result of it’s elites retained power in spite of it’s waning salience and changing attitudes. The class system was largely entrenched and the elites occupy the majority of legislative and governmental posts up till half a century ago. It is no wonder that the term “revolution” is seldom held in the same breath with the UK. But in no less, it had evolved from that feudal society to that of a democratic one.

“Revolution” itself is a ra-ra word. It lifts the spirit and gets the adrenalin pumping. It paints a picture of nationalistic and patriotic “revolutionaries” waiting to sacrifice themselves for a better world.

In fact the term “revolution” can be an ideology- it can be a myth used to galvanize and motivate it’s adherents for a better tomorrow. But before we can revolt- everyone should ask themselves this question: “What are we revolting for and is it really that bad?”

*Important*

This is a personal opinion and does not represent any organization. It would therefore be foolhardy to take it upon yourself as an ideal without taking into consideration local and indigenous factors. I would not bear any responsibility for any actions taken as a result of the above thesis