http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\03\01\story_1-3-2011_pg3_5
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
VIEW: Winds of change or revolution -Mohammad Jamil
At the time of their respective revolutions, Russia and China were at
different stages of development - the former relatively industrialised and the
latter an agricultural economy - yet communist parties were able to bring about
successful revolutions in their societies by formulating strategies based on
the ground realities
The formidable people's power in the Middle East and North Africa has
forced the despots in Tunisia and Egypt to step down, and the ripple effect is
also being felt in Yemen, Algeria and elsewhere. The royalty of Bahrain, the US
fifth fleet's base, is also threatened by people's power. Except Libya, the
citadels that have fallen to people's power or are at great risk of a fall are
mostly the ones that western powers had meticulously fortified. Zine el-Abidine
Ben Ali of Tunisia was a long-time favourite of its erstwhile colonial ruler,
France. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak was admittedly a US sidekick. When he was
visibly wobbling precariously, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came on
camera to pronounce that his government was secure and stable. Anyhow, the
region is not what it was a few months ago, and in the driving seat are now the
region's youth, mostly educated. Though secularist in their outlook and views
predominantly, they are religious-minded and practicing Muslims; they are
moderates who do not wear their faith on their sleeves. Of course, religious
groups have jumped into the fray to draw political mileage from the popular
movements.
However, to call these movements as revolutions is a misnomer, as the
term revolution generally refers to a fundamental change in the character of a
country's system of governance and economy, which may or may not be violent.
The expulsion of James II from the British throne in 1688 was considered as a
revolutionary step, as it had a great bearing on the future course of action in
England. The Reformation marked the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of
modern times. Earlier, the Renaissance had paved the way for the Reformation.
Nevertheless, it was the French Revolution that overthrew monarchy and broke
the chains of feudalism and absolutism. Since there was no organised party that
could have led the revolution, the country faced anarchy and civil war. Before
the French Revolution in 1789, France practiced feudalism; the nobles, feudal
lords and the ruling elite enjoyed special privileges and were not obliged to
pay taxes. France's economy was in dire straits, and it was difficult for the
majority of the people to keep body and soul together. The common people hated
the privileged classes and were revengeful.
The hungry Parisians, who had suffered from a bad harvest, attacked the
Bastille prison for political prisoners. And this was the beginning of the
French Revolution that spread out to other parts of France, overthrowing the
monarchy and absolutism. It was indeed a step forward, as Napoleon had learned
a lot from the revolution. The Napoleonic Code was established under Napoleon I
in 1804, which did not allow privileges based on birth, ensured social welfare
of the people, allowed freedom of religion, and stood for giving government
jobs on merit. In 1917, the world witnessed the October Revolution under the
leadership of the Communist Party, which replaced the monarchy and the economic
system in Soviet Russia. Fredrick Engels, co-author of many works with his
friend Karl Marx, said: "Three great battles mark decisive stages in the
prolonged struggle against feudalism: the Protestant Reformation in Germany,
the English Revolution (1640, 1688) and the French Revolution of 1789." There
were conformities in the French, Russian and Chinese revolutions - class
antagonism, inefficient government, an inept and corrupt ruling class - and
last but not the least, financial failure of the government.
At the time of their respective revolutions, Russia and China were at
different stages of development - the former relatively industrialised and the
latter an agricultural economy - yet communist parties were able to bring about
successful revolutions in their societies by formulating strategies based on
the ground realities. However, after 74 years of its existence, Soviet Russia
disintegrated and 30 years after its revolution, China took the capitalist
road. In the late 1980s, when the Soviet forces were defeated in Afghanistan,
and the Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse, Francis Fukuyama in his
treatise, The End of History, declared: "The dark forces, epitomised by fascism
and communism, have lost, whereas liberal democracy has won." He believed that
there will be no resistance to ruthless exploitation, but there have been
turmoil, unrest, violent uprisings and upheavals emblematic of the failure of
the capitalist system. In fact, throughout recorded history, there has always
been resistance against exploitation, and communism or no communism, the
struggle continued and would continue in future in one form or another.
Capitalism has indeed evolved new strategies to counter uprisings and
revolutions, but those on the 'receiving end' have also been thinking of new
methods to resist the onslaught of imperialism, neo-colonialism and
globalisation. Though a revolution in any single country looks like an
impossibility, yet the possibility of revolution in the global village cannot
be ruled out, as globalisation has hit the workers of developing and developed
countries alike. It has caused unemployment in the US and the west, as
multinational corporations dismantle factories in European countries or Japan
to shift to the regions where they find cheap labour. And they continue with
their exploitation. Marx and Engels had most succinctly presented their theory
of revolution and exhorted the proletariat of all nations to unite in
revolution, because they had nothing to lose but their chains. They reckoned
that the progressive degradation of the working class could finally reach the
point of despair and inevitable revolt. But there is consensus among
revolutionaries that an ideological party with dedicated leaders and cadres is
a pre-requisite to bring about a successful revolution, otherwise there would
be anarchy, bloodshed and destruction.
Nobody can fairly accurately predict revolutions. In January 1917, when
Russia was ready for revolution, Lenin had made a statement: "Whether we, the
old will live to see the decisive battles of the coming revolution." In Russia,
there were frequent strikes since 1905, but in February 1917 there was a
general strike, and seeing the situation favourable for revolution, Lenin came
back to Moscow in April 1917 to complete the revolution in October 1917. After
the end of the Cold War, globalisation is the buzzword and the world is said to
have become a global village. Now the question is whether in the event of
another world recession or great depression, it would be possible for the US
and the west to ensure full employment and the present living standards for
their people or a time will come when the proletariat of the world would unite
to bring about revolution in the global village or at least wage a struggle to
replace the New World Order with a just world economic order.
The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at
[email protected]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : [email protected]
List owner : [email protected]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
