Third Response: Political Change Outside the System (optimistic phase)
If change within the system doesn’t work so well, what about changing it from the outside? Viva la revolution! I learned a lot from my degree in this respect, but I really needed to go outside the traditional education institutions and learn many things on my own as well. But the more I looked, the more I saw there were a lot of problems connected to revolutionary change. There is endless bloodshed in the name a goal you can only hope and dream to attain. And in the end, you become the monster you hated.
Many revolutionaries work together just knowing they’re unhappy with the status-quo. They want change. Period. But the costs are enormous. Oftentimes many revolutionaries are united on their want of change, but not on what that change will actually be. If a revolution is successful, it tends to be fragmented. Once victorious, the strongest leader from the revolution will consolidate his power by killing off his opposition and those who pose a threat to him. Because when the taste of victory is fresh in people’s mouthes, they’re more likely to overthrow their new king.
So more bloodshed ensues. The first enemy is the status-quo, the second enemy becomes your former friends, and the third enemy becomes the masses of people who might question your legitimacy to rule. Many problems for even the most idealistic of revolutionaries. This is a key problem in the Occupy Wall-Street Movement. From everything I’ve read (which I admit isn’t too much), I’ve seen a fragmented movement with different ideas. They only share the opinion to change the norm.
What about peaceful revolutionaries, you ask? Well, they have different problems, mostly, they’re vulnerable. Many of the peaceful revolutionaries fail for a big reason – they leaders get killed. You can look through history at many of the most influential people who could turn peaceful revolutionary. And what happens? In most cases they get killed. From Martin Luther King Jr. to Gandhi, they all die.
You can ask, “Is this coincidence? Conspiracy?” If you read the news, it’s usually some nut-job who hated his life, wanted attention and offed someone. Or maybe they thought the person really destroyed their life somehow (or ideals-related). Why don’t all the other leaders who did really terrible things not get assassinated by random civilians and the good guys do? Well, I won’t get too much into it. But on the other hand, I’m not some conspiracy nut either.
My opinion falls somewhere in the middle. I don’t think there’s some big secret organization, nor do I think these people all just coincidentally get dead. Let’s put it this way – they piss off powerful and wealthy people. When you do this, making enemies with people who are very afraid of losing power or some change that could negatively affect them, they react. You can’t convince someone like Gandhi, who starved himself so people would stop fighting, to go away quietly.
So change from the outside is not so great either. You’re either violent and out of control, or non-violent and vulnerable. I started getting very discouraged with politics in general. I mean, I love the potential of politics. But I hate the realities of it. I needed a new solution.