Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Revolution in Kyrgyzstan

  1. Mar 26, 2005 #1
    There isn't a thread about this yet? Honestly people...

    http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/civilsociety/articles/pp032605.shtml

    http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=5301
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 26, 2005 #2
    Eh, what with Georgia a year and a half ago, Ukraine during the winter, and Lebanon currently going on, I'm really sick of Democratic Revolutions. When're we gonna have some more interesting popular uprising - seriously, Democracy has been done already, you'd think the peasants of some country out there could think of something more interesting to try.
     
  4. Mar 26, 2005 #3

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I must admit to never having heard of this country (that I can remember). But its great to see people standing up for democracy. It seems democracy is spreading like a virus these days....
     
  5. Mar 26, 2005 #4
    Indeed; I've actually heard some people on Fox re-defining the Domino Theory to relate to the current spread of Democracy throughout Eurasia...

    But wouldn't it be more interesting if there were a popular Plutocratic uprising in Uzbekistan, or if some Democratic country like Belgium had a popular Autocratic uprising?
     
  6. Mar 26, 2005 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Kinda a contradiction in terms, isn't it?
     
  7. Mar 26, 2005 #6
    I'm pretty sure wasteofo2 was just poking fun at the talking heads for their attempt to pat themselves on the back for what is quite clearly the natural evolution of society.
     
  8. Mar 27, 2005 #7
    There have been popular dictatorships and such in the past, why not again? Wasn't there some huge popular movement in favor of the Emperor of Japan at several points in Japanese history? Also, Hitler and Moussolini were pretty popular as well, before their countries started losing WWII...

    Maybe the people of Belgium are just sick of not being confrontational and bellicose, and think their society just isn't tough enough on law-breakers, and are in the mood for an Autocracy, you never know...
     
  9. Mar 27, 2005 #8
    I'm with you wasteofo, if only people would try something new for once. I'd like to see the anarchist communal in barcelona declare sovereignity. ahh the irony.
     
  10. Mar 27, 2005 #9
    A sovereign Anarchist nation? I love it! :rofl:

    But how would they secure Anarchy; what could they do to prevent a Government from coming in?
     
  11. Mar 28, 2005 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'll give you Japan because I'm not sure (though I think you're right) - but not Hitler or Moussolini. Hitler especially controlled via fear and propaganda. That's not real popularity any more than Saddam's 100% elections were.
     
  12. Mar 28, 2005 #11
    As far as Moussolini goes, I would say he actually was pretty popular amongst the Italian people.

    My Grandmother was born in a small mountain village in Italy far prior to Moussolini's rise to power. They had no running water, electricity, roads, and rarely anything more to eat than bread and cheese. Recently, she was talking about growing up there, and said that when Moussolini came, they got all these things that they were missing; running water, electricity, roads, more food, and even said of Moussolini "God bless his heart" and crossed herself.

    And sure, they ruled by fear and propaganda, but that doesn't mean that they weren't popular figures. You can scare people and lie to them in order to make them like you, especially if you can get them to believe there's a huge threat out there (Jews, homosexuals, etc.), and that you're taking care of that threat. Also, for the Germans who weren't being shipped to concentration camps, Hitler did bring up the standard of life (for those who were lucky enough to be permitted to live) compared to what it was prior to him.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2005
  13. Mar 28, 2005 #12
    :rofl: Why not have an anarchist government? Anarchism isn't anti-government, only anti-state, there's a difference. Hense the irony of them declaring sovereignity.

    Ahh well, it was a nice thought. :rolleyes:
     
  14. Mar 28, 2005 #13
    Actually hitler was quite popular.
    He was even time magazines man of the year once.He was popular because he took advantage of anti semitism (and also because he ended the depression).Mussollini was popular because he got things running well.
     
  15. Mar 28, 2005 #14
    Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, Stalin, Franco.

    All of these people were quite popular (at least for a time) with their own people, and quite often with people abroad too. Just because we look at them negatively now doesn't mean they always were. I think we focus too much on the violent sides of these people, rememeber: every single one of them improved their country in numerous ways and many of the people's lives therin.
     
  16. Mar 28, 2005 #15

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Clarification: being Time's man of the year has nothing to do with popularity, its all about impact.

    And I stand-by my belief that tricking someone into liking you isn't the same as them liking you for who you really are.
     
  17. Mar 28, 2005 #16
    well they were popular at the time and for not so good reasons, so i guess i know what u mean.
     
  18. Mar 28, 2005 #17
    Hitler never could get people to appreciate him for what he really was - a simple painter...

    Though what politician or leader doesn't trick people into liking him? You think there's ever been a political leader who presented himself exactly as he was, was totally clear about his motives and plans, and was totally honest with the people? Either way, I can't buy that people like Hitler weren't popular - they may have been popular for identically false reasons (dealing with the "Jewish problem"), but lots of people still liked them.
     
  19. Mar 28, 2005 #18
    Would the Anarchist government punish people for attempting to enforce a set of order upon others? Would there be an anarchist jail for statists? Would the citizens be taxed to pay for all this? How would you make income to be taxed in an Anarchist society?

    Maybe that's the answer to all my problems with Democracy - Anarchy...
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Revolution in Kyrgyzstan
  1. Reform or Revolution? (Replies: 18)

  2. Iranian Revolution (Replies: 0)

Loading...