achieve their goals such as actions in the internet , hacktivism, civil disobedience, occupation of administrative buildings, civil resistance.
Very often Euromaidan is called new euro revolution, some people even compare it to Orange revolution. Obviously, these events have much in common, because it happened in one country with one nation, but still there are huge doubts can we define demonstrations and uprisings in 2013 a revolution, and what results we must expect. The following question arises: What remained the same since Orange revolution? Firstly, sociology and geography of protests : now as well as 9 years ago the majority of protesters came from Western, Central Ukraine and Kiev. The motive power hasn’t changed, students and young people are living in the main square of the country and take participation in everyday’s moves. They are supported by representatives of middle class (local residents in Kiev), which played important role during Orange revolution and became activists on December 2013. Secondly, methods of protests: the technique of putting pressure on authorities doesn’t differ so much. Protesters occupied administrative buildings. Leaders of opposition invoke people to organize actions of civil disobedience and civil resistance, try to gain support abroad and negotiate with current president and government, using Maidan like strong political argument. Lastly, the mode of protests: during both “revolutions” epicenter and fixed place of protestor’s camp is Maidan Nezalezhnosti. This is a very important strategic foothold in the center of capital. Camping in Maidan square, big headquarters, reserves of provisions and warm clothes.
On the other hand, I Would like to define 6 major differences between Orange revo...
... middle of paper ...
...ively short period of time. After two month of activeness the only results are violent reprisals against opposition activists and politicians and imprisonment of protesters. After phased attack on the Presidential Administration and cruel dispersal of Maindan, no one from the state officials did not bare responsible.
To sum it up, Euromaidan is not simply about not signing the Association Agreement, but the development of Ukraine as a country as a whole. It has been hanging on between post-Soviet autocracies in the east and highly democratizing and prosperous neighbors to the west for 22 years.
Unfortunately, there existed too many hopes and disappointments in the past 22 years – to begin with the proclaiming of the national independence and ending with the world-famous Orange Revolution. The inauguration of Viktor Yanukovych as president in 2010, consequently the
International politics as one may imagine includes foreign affairs. This is why the topic and focus of this paper revolves around the current event within Eastern Europe. It will focus on both Russia, Ukraine, and the world, and from it, it will be analyzed by using the resources provided within class. After all it is a International Politics course, and one of the best ways to effectively put the skills and knowledge to use is to focus on an event or current event. The paper will attempt to go over in a chronological order of the events that has happened, and what is happening currently over in Ukraine. Afterwards, an analyzed input will be implemented providing reasoning behind Russia's actions, and actions of the world, and potentially some solutions.
Most popular uprisings in recent history have been characterized by a brief period of incredible potential and hope, only to collapse in failure and despair. Even the supposedly 'successful' Russian Revolution of 1917 followed this pattern. Revolutionaries threw off centuries of imperial rule and oppression in order to create a new world of freedom, peace and equality... only to end up with Stalin, purges, gulags, dekulakization - and ultimately decades of Bolshevik1 rule and oppression. Although it can sometimes be disheartening to review this long history of failure and oppression, valuable insights can be gained by investigating these past revolutions. The achievements and promise of the revolutionaries can be studied and their strengths marked. The weaknesses that led to their eventual defeat and decay must also be understood, so that the same mistakes are not made again. This article will address these themes in the context of the Russian Revolution at the Kronstadt navel base.2
“The story of post-revolutionary America,” writes Rosemarie Zagarri, “is the story of how American women and men sought to define – and ultimately to limit and restrict – the expansive ideals they had so successfully deployed against Britain.” In this excerpt from Revolutionary Backlash, Zagarri depicts the extreme radicalism of the American Revolution, while also suggesting that there were some constraints to its extremism. Unlike the normal way of life in European government and society, Americans desired a nation in which the inherent rights and freedoms of individuals were recognized and respected. While these rights and freedoms were ultimately achieved, many groups of people were still left out. Women of all kinds, people of color, and men of poverty were often unable to enjoy and appreciate America’s newfound rights and freedoms. Despite these limits and restrictions, however, the American Revolution was still extremely radical in the sense that it was able to surpass traditional, European political and social ideology.
They imprisoned the opposition, politicians and started attacking the
The Pro-Democracy Movement of the 1980's Communism took over China soon after the second world war. Mao Zedong, the leader of the communist party who came from the country, remained paramount until his death on the 9th of September 1976. During his rule, he modified Marxist-Lenonism to suit China's population of peasants, and went through many "leaps" to try and revolutionise China's economy as he had done with the political system. But in the end, Millions of Chinese men, women and children died.
The French Revolution evokes many different emotions and controversial issues in that some believe it was worth the cost and some don't. There is no doubt that the French Revolution did have major significance in history. Not only did the French gain their independence, but an industrial revolution also took place. One of the main issues of the Revolution was it's human costs. Two writers, the first, Peter Kropotkin who was a Russian prince, and the other Simon Schama, a history professor, both had very opposing views on whether the wars fought by France during the Revolution were worth it's human costs. Krapotkin believed that the French Revolution was the main turning point for not only France but for most other countries as well. On the other hand, Schama viewed the French Revolution as unproductive and excessively violent.
...e reforms, the revolts of Poland were not a bloody massacre as the first two, but effective displays of rejectment of the government. It was a union setup by a boat dock worker, which union were forbidden, to start strikes on the factories and industrialized areas. They smartly got the world media on them. This put the Soviet Union on the spotlight. The revolt was considered one of the greatest individual feats on the fall of communistic Russia. This in turn brought forth new policies and rights.
Revolution is an ongoing theme that happens throughout history and will happen in the near future. There is no such thing as a perfect government, but there is a way to get there. Society should communicate more with each other, people shouldn’t always try to be sneaky when doing business because that may lead to fraud, etc. which may lead to corruption and a false economy. But as long as there’s some sort of revolution there is going to be change for the
The Russian Revolution was two revolutions. One was in "March of 1917" (Llewellyn, 2012) and the other one was in "October of 1917" (Llewellyn, 2012). The first revolution happened because "the Russian people wanted change" (Llewellyn, 2012). Tsar Nicholas II, the autocratic ruler of Russia. He clung stubbornly to his power and he believed that the power was to be his divine birthright. The people on the other hand would change the future of Russia, not God. The first revolution started as a peaceful march in Russia’s capital city. The march then grew into a torrent of protest. Within a week of the protest, Tsar Nicholas II had been toppled from power and replaced by an interim government. This government was filled with liberals and moderates. The new government lasted barely six months before the government was overthrown and replaced, this time by radical socialists. "This group, known as the Bolsheviks, struggled to keep their power by suppressing dissent and eliminating their opponents" (Llewellyn, 2012) The Bolsheviks also began planning Russia’s transformation which was from a backward economic state organized on medieval principles into a modern industrial and technological superpower. "This transformation alone made the Russian Revolution one of the most significant events in modern history for all countries" (Llewellyn, 2012).
The Revolutions of 1848 have been described as the “greatest revolution of the century”1. From its mild beginnings in Palermo, Sicily in January 1848, it did not take long to spread across the rest of Europe (Britain and Russia were the only countries not to experience such revolutions). “In 1848 more states on the European continent were overcome by revolution than ever before and ever since”2. The Revolutions became more radical but after June 1848 these revolutionary events began to overlap with those of counterrevolutionary actions, thus enabling the old regimes to return to power. 1848 was described as “a sunny spring of the peoples abruptly interrupted by the winter of the princes”3.
In the summer of 1980 Communist Poland was experiencing labor unrest at an unprecedented level. Living standards were still very low, the economy was stagnant, and food shortages and inflation were abundant. The Polish Communist Party was faced with nationwide strikes, and their tactics of buying off workers had failed because there were too many people striking. However, when the strikes spread to the Lenin Shipyard in Gdańsk on August 14th, everything was about to change. The strikers were backed by waves of support from other industrial centers, and the Communist Party was forced to negotiate with them. Under the leadership of Lech Walesa the strikers emerged victorious and the formation of an independent trade union called Solidarity was born.
A revolution is the replacement of a government by a different one. The idea of revolution has been around since the first kingdoms were found. However, the idea was not as developed until the enlightenment. John Locke, one of the greatest philosophers of all time came up with the idea that if a government does not function properly, people can rebel and form a new government. About two hundred years after John Locke, a man named Pierre-Joseph Proudhon officially published the idea in French. This thought has been the roots to all revolutions before and after Locke’s existence. A revolution is not less than a civil war. It builds on the blood of martyrs and usually does not stop until it overthrows the old regime. The basic idea is to sacrifice one or two generations for the possibility that their sons and daughters would live in comfort. Sometimes, everything ends successfully and sometimes a new dictatorship rises. The basic steps of a revolution are rebellion, overthrow of the current government, and installing the new revolutionary government. An uprising is always the last option considered by wise men because in the best scenario, the new government would provide freedom and justice for people and in the worst scenario it would bring complete devastation. The success of a revolution is not always guaranteed. The only thing that would happen for sure is bloodshed. By starting an uprising, different groups with different ideas emerge and this can lead up to a civil war. About thirty-five years ago, in 1979, a massive uprising lead by Ruhollah Khomeini started in Iran. Ruhollah Khomeini rebelled against the monarchy of Iran to bring freedom for his people through Islam.
The sexual revolution of the 1960’s made a big impact on society as a whole, changing and shaping it to much of what it has become today. Although this change has provided progress for the society it has also created new challenges that civilization must now face. Due to the new issues brought on by the previous sexual revolution it can be said that the sexual revolution is not yet over, as it is still revolutionizing society today. We are currently part of our own sexual revolution, one that deals with issues brought on by the previous one as well as issues that have never been tackled before, such as situations brought on by the relatively new media. This revolution seeks to change the opinions on women’s rights, sexuality and gender, and the social media. The sexual revolution is now, and it is affecting the North American society as a whole. It is widely known that society is ever-changing, so it is inevitable that new challenges will cause change; in a society that can never stay the same there can never be only one revolution. The sexual revolution of the 1960’s only served as a starting point for a plethora of sexual revolutions that are to come.
Throughout the time of the Revolution there was never just one individual revolution. There was a series of revolutions that were set in Russia in 1917. Some were crushed in the making and had no result but, others ended up being made a very big deal. These sequences of revolutions ended up dismantling the Tsarist autocracy which also resulted in the creation of the “Russian SFSR”. As a result of these revolutions “the emperor was forced to resign from his post and the old regime was replaced by a provisional government during the first revolution.”2
University students demanding reforms were joined by peasants and workers, and as demonstrations spread across Europe, these rebellions became known as the Revolutions of 1848. These political upheavals set the stage for the series of republican revolts against European monarchies that ensued. The first occurrences began in Italy and quickly spread to other nations including France where the attention of the international community was gained. Although the corruption of government and economic structures which resulted in poor living conditions provoked some of the uprisings, there were many factors contributing to the dissatisfaction of European monarchy’s subjects. In addition to governmental and economic issues, the Revolutions of 1848