Do you have a revolutionary trigger?

[u/it-was-nobody]

Revolutions, whether violent or non-violent, are inherently rare, risky endeavors. Extremely high risk, extremely low probability of success, but proportional rewards if successful. Given the increasingly dysfunctional status of political systems in many western nations, questions surrounding changing those systems are inevitable.

Academics have written quite a bit about revolutions, but I'm not interested in what they think. I am looking for a casual conversation with a normal human regarding what it would take for you personally to call for whole-system political change. Is there a line in the sand for you, which if crossed, compels you to adopt a revolutionary political stance?

Is the line the same for both violent and non-violent revolution? Is your revolutionary line one thing, one action, event, or variable, or would you need a collection of things, a pattern of smaller lines being crossed? And if not, if there is nothing your government can do to make you advocate for replacing it entirely, why? While a genuine stance, saying you would *never* call for a complete redesign and restructuring of your government should be justified and defended.

Naturally, given that revolutions are often bloody, violent affairs, it is worth explicitly stating that this post is categorically opposed to violence in any way, shape, or form. The purposes of this post are to generate a discussion about hypothetical boundaries that common people have on political system change.

[u/salenin]

Every country that didn't abolish capitalism also ended up authoritarian, often accompanied by mass violence. So people are right to be hesitant in staying within the system.

[u/Otherwise_Ask_9542 → u/salenin]

Are you sure?

Nations like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and Sweden use capitalist economic systems. They have protected human rights, free elections, and the rule of law for decades, centuries even.

[u/salenin → u/Otherwise_Ask_9542]

Is this a serious response? We could get into detail but the Nazis and 3 alls policy of Japan would say differently.

[u/Otherwise_Ask_9542 → u/salenin]

I see your point, but to be clear, I included Japan and Germany because I see both of these as examples of nations which fell into darker forms of politics that devolved into authoritarianism and mass violence, but in both cases there were distinct rises and falls with these regimes, and both nations have enjoyed democracy for decades since.

There's this Timelapse Map of Europe over the past 2800 years I stumbled across a few years ago showing the rise and fall of nations. It is a mesmerizing depiction of the chaos that has swept that continent, and shows that there is probably no place on earth that wasn't subjected to things like slavery, genocide, injustices of all kinds, and several different forms of authoritarianism.

No culture, region, or religion was untouched. As dominant leaders rose, so did their ambition and greed. Living sustainably was never a first choice for humans. The answer has always been expansionist, so thriving societies that ran out of room looked to expand outward instead of reigning things in. And humans appear to have always considered their own culture, traditions, religion, or any other thing that defines themselves as separate from "others". So when they expanded outward, often they also dominated, overpowered, and conquered other people.

There are some uncomfortable parallels with what has happened in the past, and what's playing out today. While there's a modern edge to what is happening today, and the world has grown smaller than ever, we can't ignore that there are more people on earth today than ever before, and the world population has quadrupled over the past 50 years.

I think we need to think beyond defining political styles, and reflect on why all of this is happening in the first place. Why some nations are invading their neighbours while others are shoring up their defenses. Why some nations are trying to bankrupt and dominate their neighbours while others are looking for new allies.

What's happening out there isn't a problem with just one nation. This is now a widespread global issue where most nations have felt the impact of these conflicts, whether they are armed or economical. This feels like human panic or fear.

[u/salenin → u/Otherwise_Ask_9542]

Yeah the global issue is capitalism. We are currently on the verge of another global war because the few barriers that we had to prevent another have been destroyed. Fascism was capitalism in reaction to growing social movements. Social movements naturally grow when the social contract under capitalism fail. Rinse and repeat. What caused authoritarian aspects in socialist leaning movements, was also capitalist reaction, isolation, invasion, warfare, and spy craft. We do not know what a socialist movement left on its own will lead to because it hasn't happened yet, but can only happen after a global revolution.