Modern Reformations

Sometimes the ruled could overwhelm the ruling class and it could itself create the new ruling class. But, in many cases, the ruled in general could not overthrow the old ruling class completely and conclusively so that the new ruling class must be formed by means of sharing power with the old ruling class and the ruled. Examples of the classical revolutions in world history are the 1789 French Revolution, the 1848-50 European Revolutions, the first abortive Russian Revolution of 1905, and the Russian Revolution of 1917 which had created socialist centralization economy and a single party system that had attempted to abolish capitalism and freedom from the world. The political consequences of the above said classical revolutions had shown the proof that the feudal society could not be transformed into capitalist society without having been both politically and economically formed its class structure to have the full strength to be born as the capitalist society. Apparently the history had revealed that all those classical revolutions in examples were ended up in coups d'état and the autocratic feudalism only went forward onto the stage of the political power of the society concerned. There was no exception for the Lenin’s Soviet Russia. The proletariat dictatorship of V.I Lenin’s totally wrong theoretical outlook to Marx’s political ideology in general and in essence, and Marx’s political lessons taken from French society and French revolutions were also negated and neglected by Lenin. Thus, instead of democracy and capitalism, Lenin’s Russia went backward to Feudalism and autocracy in the name of socialism. That is to be called the restoration of the autocratic feudal society or the slipping back to the feudal autocratic society. Lenin had

dragged back Russia into the dark age by coup d'état as Napoleon Bonaparte and his nephew, Napoleon the III of French and Czar Nicholas II of Russia in 1905 had done, though there might be differences in historical and economical values in each of the cases. The point is that all the revolutions themselves failed and ended in coups d'état, and the societies went into the hands of the new feudal landlords. In short, after Lenin, there were Stalin to Gorbachev in Russia and Mao Zedong to Deng Xiaoping in China. Many mini Stalins and Maos had appeared in various parts of the world both in power and not in power. The twentieth century was put into motion mostly under the ideological influences of Marxism-Leninism or Communism-Socialism. It was but just a so-called Marxism-Leninism. In fact, merely the Leninism had been taken the major role to make political influence by force in that century. Marx was only an academician and one of the greatest historians, for that case, Lenin or Mao could never be matched. In the years approached toward the twenty first century, such a name known as Modern Reformations came out to the front line of our global society. Gorbachev of Russia and Deng Xiaoping of China, the two great reformists, had attempted to change their societies by means of reformation. They had both attempted to extricate their societies from the hell like ocean of complete darkness in socialist economy together with totalitarianism. However, Deng selected the economic reform as his first and basic priority when Gorbachev chose the path in favor of political reform. It was because Russia had more problems than China and Russia at that time was also a super power rivaling with USA. In addition, Russia had its eastern bloc and its own socialist empire. In my view, modern reformations are how the reformers had taken the lessons from history especially over such classical revolutions of the past. The lessons are not only

political but also economical indeed. Eventually, what Karl Marx said was correctly and pragmatically interpreted by those two leading reformers in this modern time. Only because of the economic crisis, there became mass-uprisings, can be called them as revolutions. So, how to prevent or how to cure the economic crisis is the key point of how to evade the evils of such a type of classical revolution reincarnating into our modern societies.

YE KYAW SWA Sunday, July 10, 2011 mahathuriya.yks@gmail.com

Refs: - A History of Modern France – Volume 1: 1715-1799 by Alfred Cobban - V.I.Lenin Biography by David Shub (1948) - Selected Works Volume 1 by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels - A History of Europe by H.A.L. Fisher 1936 - Deng Xiaoping - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping - Mikhail Gorbachev - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachev …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… N.B., This article was originally published as Prologue in No. 2 of the selected news, views & opinions by the same author on Wednesday, July 27, 2011.

Spontaneous mass-uprisings and civil rights movements
(a) Spontaneous mass-uprisings would be occurred when people wanted to blame someone and came into the streets as a result of the economic collapse of the society. Any existing government would be the victim of the crisis to be blamed even though its predecessor was a real prodigal mismanaged administrator of the regime. The Guillotine of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette in France and the execution of Czar Nicholas II’s entire family in Russia were the noticeable examples of how their own people had bitterly hatred, even to take terrible revenge over, their own monarchy and called for the republic and freedom. The republic was demanded by the people, with the slogan of “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”, who wanted democracy and freedom also in 1848 revolution. However, eventually those revolutions ended up in coups d'état, and instead of democracies, only the totalitarianisms were the conclusions. The abolition of the monarchies was done but the real freedom was none. Only the massacres, class vendettas, personal revenges, revolutionary tribunals, the Guillotine, the executions, the monarch and the aristocrats, the citizens, constitutional republic, national assembly and the coups d'état were the true symbolisms and the genuine spirits of the revolution in itself. Street corner orators, pamphlet writers, street agitators, revolutionary artists, musicians and poets, protesters, marchers, demonstrators, campaigners, pacific activists, legal activists were all of those symbolisms too. But, in fact, workers, farmers, soldiers, government staffs and students of the general mass were the spirits of the revolution.

But, revolution cannot be created and also it shall not be happened by the ones’ awakening wishes. Revolution cannot be made by a single group or political party or revolutionary front. It is just a spontaneous outburst of the people under one sovereign. It is also not an armed-insurrection or not the rebellion in any form. Revolution means spontaneous mass-uprising which occurs only because of the economic crisis. This passage is taken from the Encyclopedia Americana Vol. 18 p.386 2nd column.* It is about how Karl Marx changed his mind in understanding over revolution and devoted himself to the study of political economy. “Work In London. On setting in London, Marx grew optimistic about the imminence of

a fresh revolutionary outbreak in Europe, and he rejoined the rejuvenated Communist League. He wrote two lengthy pamphlets on the 1848 revolution in France and its aftermath, entitled “The Class Struggles in France” and “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonarparte”. But he soon became convinced that “a new revolution is possible only in consequence of a new crisis,” and devoted himself to the study of political economy to determine the causes and conditions of this crisis.” * The crisis, outstanding in this modern time, was the one occurred in USA. It was the great depression of 1929-30. It echoed to all over the world. It was because of deflation. Deflation is a correlation of depression. *** However, that crisis didn’t intend to topple the government, the Roosevelt administration. And there were certain major paradigms of the past about the crisis in world history. Most were because of inflation and the nearly all of them concluded in the historical result as regime change. Douglas R. Casey wrote some important examples of the crises and their results in his book named “Crisis Investing” in 1979. “There has never been a runaway inflation that has not been followed by a change in government.

The first recorded example is that of the Roman Empire. There is little doubt that debasement of its currency contributed to its fall. Government, then as now, acted in predictable patterns in response to the consequences of its inflation. A notable precedent was set with the imposition of wage and price controls by the Emperor Diocletian in the early fourth century. A more modern example is provided by the French Revolution. It was only when the currency inflation, taxation, and general extravagance of their government reached unbearable levels that French people replaced their old rulers with new ones. The new rulers proved even less desirable, which led in them to the accession of Napoleon. The German inflation of the early 1920s provided the environment for the rise of Hitler. The Inflation in China under Chiang Kai-shek contributed to the rise of Mao.”** Only one name, V.I. Lenin, should be added to join up the club of above rising dictators. There was also a recorded history of being under inflationary crisis in Russia before the revolutionary days of 1917. “The Great War of 1914 to 1918 was to prove the death knell of the Tsarist regime. After initial public fervour, alliance and support collapsed due to military failures. The Tsar took personal command, but all this meant was that he became closely associated with the disasters. The Russian infrastructure proved inadequate for Total War, leading to widespread food shortages, inflation and the collapse of the transport system, exacerbated by the failure of central government to manage anything.”(World War 1: The Catalyst: The Causes of the Russian Revolution in more depth)# The great historian and author, Alan Bullock also said that the real revolution in Germany ( 1920s ) was the inflation in his book named “Hitler : A Study in Tyranny”. It was published in 1952.##

(b) Both civil disorders and civil disobediences can also be witnessed where spontaneous mass-uprising is existed. As Douglas R. Casey said: Civil disorders are “Riots, protests,

and crime in the streets (all violent, convulsive nature) will occur as people try to find someone to blame for the problems besetting them.” ** However, civil disobedience is mostly for civil rights movements and used as nonviolent resistance to achieve the social change under constitutional way and its basic objective is not to overthrow the existing government though it is very sometime linked as a portion of the characteristics of the revolution. Henry David Thoreau was an outstanding theorist of how to use nonviolent resistance to achieve the social change. The nonviolent civil disobedience campaign that Mahatma Gandhi used successfully against British rule in India was not civil disorder or chaos. Dr. Martin Luther King was influenced by the ideas of Gandhi and by the theories of Thoreau. And he eventually became convinced that the same methods could be employed by blacks to obtain civil rights in America. King always stressed the importance of the ballot. He argued that once all African Americans had the vote they would become an important political force. Although they were a minority, once the vote was organized, they could determine the result of presidential and state elections. The 1964 Civil Rights Act made racial discrimination in public places, such as theaters, restaurants and hotels, illegal. King then concentrated on achieving a federal VotingRights Law that was also passed into legislation. ### After the passing of these two important pieces of legislation, King concentrated on helping those suffering from poverty. King argued that African Americans and poor whites were natural allies and if they worked together they could help change society. King’s strategy of linking poverty, civil rights and protest against the Vietnam War seemed to be mirroring the presidential campaign of Robert F. Kennedy, and later made both of them assassinated.###

By learning about Martin Luther King and his civil rights movement using civil disobedience method, some historical and political lessons are obtained. They are: (1) The society or the country where King did that nonviolent civil disobedience method for civil rights movement had been grown up in democracy (2) The economic development of the nation had been strong and concrete by modern industrial capitalism (3) His movements were in legal bounds and under constitutional way (4) His movements were intended to make legislations ; not to overthrow the government (5) His movements were national politics not power politics ; he never asked for political power but the civil rights Let us continue studying comparatively with Mahatma Gandhi’s nonviolent civil disobedience campaign and the other mass movements to attain more compact lessons from the history. Ladies and Gentlemen please be thinkers as thyselves! YE KYAW SWA Tuesday, August 02, 2011 - Saturday, August 20, 2011 mahathuriya.yks@gmail.com References : The Encyclopedia Americana Vol. 18*( from my notes on 02/26/92) “Crisis Investing” by Douglas R. Casey (1979)** http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/depression/overview.htm*** http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/russiaandukraine/a/The-RussianRevolution-Of-1917.htm # Hitler : A Study in Tyranny by Alan Bullock (1952)## http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkingML.htm(KING)### ……………………………………………………………………………………… N.B., This article was originally published as Prologue in No. 3 of the selected news, views & opinions by the same author on Wednesday, August 24, 2011.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful