this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
454 points (99.1% liked)
People Twitter
10057 readers
1225 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is my own personal opinion, which is why this is staying up. But when has a revolution worked in the last 20 years?
Hey, let's fix the old one.
Arab spring? Yeah it had some pretty bad outcomes in some places (Syria) but go look at the list of outcomes, from total overthrow of a despot, to democratisation of some states, and major government concessions and strengthening of people-power precedents in others.
The Madian revolt in Ukraine resulted in the overthrow of a despotic Russian lackey and move towards proper democracy and European alignment.
Interesting time frame.
gotta make the argument work
Yeah, cuts it down to like three.
It worked for Portugal in 1974
There's the Tunisian revolution which worked for a while but they seem to be backsliding now too.
But yeah, more an exception to the rule as every other Arab state that had a revolution recently, turned into a dictatorship or failed state.
Getting the military on your side is sort of necessary for a successful revolution. Look at the Bolsheviks, the October revolution relied on them getting a good chunk of the rank and file of the military on there side with the promise of getting a peace deal so they don't have to go back to the front lines to get mowed down by german machine guns.
I don’t know, but the Taliban won?
I think light revolutions work. Stuff like what France does where they riot and start burning cars when the government tries to raise the retirement age. The kind of stuff that reminds the politicians that they could be dragged out into the streets by an angry mob, but that hasn't happened yet.
Actual revolutions where you do need to go that far, mostly fail as you said. Additionally, foreign meddling is common, so even if you can deal with everything else, outside actors are going to try to screw with you. And they'll typically succeed.
Without any sort of violence at all, you become a non-threat and we get what we currently have in America today. No one cares about the protests because they aren't going to do anything at all to the people they most need to affect.
Basically you need a sweet spot of minor levels of violence without fully going full revolution or being neutered into irrelevancy since they know you'll never fight back.
Renee Good and the other guy who was executed because he had a gun at a protest. I can't find his name. I want to say Matthew Sweet? He was a nurse I think.
The government did raise the retirement age.
Granted, the riots have made this an attractive talking point for candidates for the coming presidential election, but that's about it.
Such riots may look amazingly violent to an outsider, but as a frenchman I don't think we'll get anything nice without going MUCH further than a day of planned (with the police), organised chaos in a designated street of Paris.
This is also mostly how modern geopolitics seems to work. Lots of little 'skirmishes' that aren't actual war alongside more traditional diplomacy. The ideal seems to be mostly peace with a touch of violence here and there to keep people on their toes.
Rojava's immense social revolution has continued to hold on despite everyone and their grandmother trying to bomb the shit out of them.
In Armenia, Nepal, and Ukraine, less all-encompassing revolutions have occurred to successfully change leadership while maintaining the structure of a liberal capitalist republic. Albania may well join this list soon.
In general hicks that are hard to get to with strong beliefs are really hard to stop. This is true in Rojava and Chiapas where I see them as models of a better world and in Afghanistan where I see them as harbingers of a worse one.
Revolution relies on stopping you either being impossible or not worthwhile. Extremists in difficult terrain that they call home are going to take a long fight where they win most of the battles to actually stop. Meanwhile a slight shift towards something most people want and most of the remainder can live with works because the cost of concession for the soldiers and lower officials is small and the cost of fighting is pissing everyone else off and damaging your population and international reputation while increasing the risk to all government involved people if the revolution succeeds.
The worst case scenario for the average soldier and revolutionary is a civil war type situation where neither side can concede, compromise, or decisively control the majority or where they miscalculate those factors
It worked for Ukraine 2014
I wouldn't call it successful yet, but it's definitely getting better:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity
What a shitty victim blaming, kremlin fueled, garbage post.
"Yes we should become slaves because if we fight back the bad person will hit us"
Fix that post.
Wasn't the point to get rid of Yushchenko and have a new election, so they could rely/orient to Europe more?.... Seems like that's happened.
They're in a war because of it though. If that's the best example of it "working," I don't think it's great. They're not a huge country like the US either. A civil war would be bad, I think we can agree on that.
You're arguing in a comments section. Was that the goal of your rebellion? Are you to blame for the others replying to you?
Were the protesters to blame for Russia's response?
No. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. The protest achieved it's goals, and since then Russia has invaded.
Russia's actions are because of Putin, not because the protests failed.
I guess that means the American Revolution didn't work either because we just wound up at war with Britain
You're really calling for a civil war in the US? How do you think the rest of the world will do in that situation? The fucking Strait of Hormuz being shut down is causing a shitshow, what do you think having America in a civil war would do? Either, you're not from here and have no skin in the game, or you're not thinking this through.
Well now you're clearly just putting words in my mouth and making far flung assumptions
Worth it if it stops usa from murdering people in other countries for at least a month
20 years? You think things are only as bad as 2006?
I said 20 years because of the military knowing so much about every citizen and being incredibly strong.