I may have misunderstood Paul's comments at the panel. He says he was not arguing that freedom is a gift from the oppressor, and he knows his own mind. It's true that one cannot make major historical changes through sheer force of will, and successful revolutions do not come out of nowhere, but are the result of many factors, including the oppressor's ability to keep oppressing. The Russian Revolution of 1917 was preceded by the Revolution of 1906. The Chinese Revolution of 1949 was preceded by the Boxer Rebellion and the Revolution of 1911. The struggle for African American rights in the US began with slave rebellions, went through the Abolition Movement and the Civil War, continued in the Civil Rights Movement and is not yet over. As Paul says, there was a long history of struggle against the Raj in India. I guess you could say that people keep trying until they get revolution right. Obviously there are immediate conditions that make a revolution successful. It helps if the oppressor is exhausted or preoccupied (by a war, for example). The Paris Commune came out of the Franco-Prussian War -- and also came out of a long struggle that included three previous revolutions (1789, 1830 and 1848). The Russian Revolution of 1917 came out of WWI, but was preceded by decades of struggle. The Chinese Revolution of 1949 followed WWII and decades of struggle. It's like the old joke about how you get to Carnegie Hall. Practice, practice, practice. Eleanor A.
Paul's comments on the comments here
Tue, Jun. 5th, 2007 02:53 pm (UTC)