I fear that this sounds like blaming the victims (i.e. the Libyan people), but
I haven't heard discussion of the difference between how Egypt managed its
overthrow of its dictator versus how Libya has attempted to do so. At least
from just watching the two situations unfold on network TV (CNN & BBC), it
seems that the Egyptian "revolution" was essentially peaceful, with passive
resistance to the status quo by a large number of unarmed people. Perhaps
Mubarak was just that much less of a tyrant than Gadhafi, or maybe it really
does show the power of nonviolent resistance. In any case, the Libyan rebels
took up arms early on, and in a sense empowered Gadhafi by giving him an excuse
for retaliating. I wonder what would have happened if the resistance there had
remained peaceful. Thoughts?
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
