The Problem with Populist Uprisings
We must rise up, not through force, but through positive change.
Populist uprisings and revolutions in general are often romanticized, but there is nothing romantic about them. They are generally violent and ineffective. Now believe me, I’m not a fan of oppressive governments. As I’ve written in many posts, I prefer decentralized governments that ensure freedom.
In fact, since I wrote the initial version of this article, I have moved from being a libertarian to being an anarchist, or “natural technoecologist” as I call it. But there has been a string of populist uprisings lately. In fact, no matter how many times I add to this piece, the list just grows and grows. There are however a number of solutions to the problems that we face today.
Egypt
One of the most successful populist uprisings in recent years has been Egypt. Or at least it appeared successful at first. But soon after Egypt’s revolution has weakened. The very military officers that helped support the protesters when Mubarak was in charge refused to let go of the power that they have obtained and so the transition of governments in Egypt was on the brink of collapse. Was this unexpected? Well to many it was shocking, however to those who have studied past populist uprisings, it really wasn’t a surprise at all. Many past uprisings have resulted in a worsening of the situation.
I was rather hopeful that Egypt would turn out better than other populist uprisings, and for a time, the Egyptian government had made some progress in settling matters. But recent events continue to unfold and suggest that we are not going to see freedom in Egypt. Indeed, in November of 2019, one of the last independent media outlets in the region announced that their editor had been arrested (Aljazeera).
Hong Kong
The conditions Egypt, and the other historical examples of failed populist uprisings, makes me gravely concerned about Hong Kong. While Beijing is abusive, and Hong Kong should be free from its rule, the protesters are going insane.
They are destroying their own infrastructure as if it is an attack on Beijing. The idea is similar to cutting off one’s own hand in spite of an abuser. Rather than doing what they can to improve their situation, they are making it worse. Luckily, they don’t seem too interested in using force to overthrow the local power structure as a whole. They’re just angry and lashing out, which is still bad enough.
Past Failures
That things have gone south with the Egyptian revolution, and that things could get very bad if there is a Hong Kong revolution, is not surprising. History has taught us the risk of populist uprisings. France’s revolution resulted in a blood bath, followed by a period of chaotic rule and culminating in one of the best known dictators of recent history: Napoleon. The populist uprisings in Russia and China lead to some of the worst dictators of recent history and the deaths of many innocent people under their tyrannical rule.
Another example is Somalia: a nation that has been under imperial rule many times and only recently has able to kick out that rule through revolution. Unfortunately, the end result was a dictator who created a rule far worse than what was experienced under imperial rule.
The name of that dictator is Siad Barre. He gained power in 1969 and did not lose that hold on the nation until 1991. During his rule he suppressed the people and imprisoned or tortured those who disagreed with him. Unfortunately his rule also came to an end through populist uprisings–the result of those uprisings has been constant civil war since 1991; this is a major reason why Somalia is in such poor shape.
The American Revolution Fallacy
People often argue that because of the American revolution was a success, other revolutions should be successful as well. The issue with this premise is that America did not have a revolution in the common sense of the word–those in power in Europe were still in power after the revolution, and the elitist class that was in power in America before the revolution was still in power afterwards; in fact it was the American elitist class that led the war against Europe and so the war should really be categorized as a war of secession. This is in great contrast to revolutions in France, Russia, China, Cuba, Egypt, Libya, etc where an underclass rose up against the ruling class and overthrew the ruling body.
The Middle Class Solution
Supporting a strong middle class on the other hand results in stable change towards a more free environment. The middle class acts as a buffer between the elites and everyone else. This is why kings gave way to parliament in most of Europe over time: first the noble class started the process demanding more freedom from the king, thus the Magna Carta was created; over time a merchant class started to form and from this came increasing freedom from the king–the authority of the king soon waned and a new form of government was created.
The power of the middle class is one of the reasons why the elites in this country have been consistently attacking the middle class for decades. The higher the taxation on the middle class and the more animosity towards the middle class the poor feel, the more likely that the middle class will be destroyed and a revolution will take place firmly establishing a new rule of elites–it’s important to note that the attacks against the middle class are often labelled as attacks against the rich, as is the case with tax hikes. Because of this we must remember that the middle class, even the upper middle class such as small business owners are a benefit to society rather than a deterrent and must be supported.
The Second Amendment Solution
One of the primary purposes of the second amendment was to create a militia as to reduce the need for a powerful, long term standing army. Only with a powerful army can a corrupt government permanently suppress its people to the point of the people rising up. In that way, the militia, something most people consider to be an instigator of populist uprisings, is actually a deterrent.
This argument isn’t a suggestion that everyone should be carrying around a gun, or that a militia can necessarily, or should necessarily, overthrow a powerful military, although Vietnam is an example where even a powerful military like the US had little chance of winning. Instead, it is a call to reduce the power and scope of all military.
Involution not Revolution
While revolution and violent populist uprisings are not the answer, grassroots movements can result in massive change for the better. I’m a big fan of change through involution, where the massive and oppressive government is degraded as we move towards better options. The more we can do on a local level, the more we do to support ourselves, the better. Obviously it’s difficult in a region of extreme oppression, but it needs to start somewhere.
While a lot of people are skeptical about blockchain, the technology really is going to be crucial for eliminating a lot of the excuses for government and for creating a decentralized currency system that is free from the control of government. Honestly, governments are terrified of not being able to control, or take, our money. And that’s a good thing. But whatever path we choose, it must not be one of violence. We must at most use force in self defense. Revolution through violence will only lead to more carnage.
Originally posted as “Populist Uprisings: Do They Work?” on Politicoid.
