Revolution: An Ageless Hobby

           

            Everyday in the news it seems like Americans hear negative sentiment piled upon negative story coming out of the Middle East. Many here in the U.S. look down upon these radicals and their extremist revolutions. But yet, weren’t we as a country in the very same position once? Weren’t we also the radicals, fighting for a voice in our government? It is easy to hold up the American Revolution as a flawless battle for peace and humanity, a perfect moment in human history when we banded together to throw off the regime of the blind elite. It is easy because it was long ago and we have time behind us proving that we made the right choices. Next to this, we see the violent events of the Arab Spring, in which citizens of countries like Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, attempted to overthrow false democracies and dictatorial regimes. But in reality, we are more alike than we are separate.  Both revolutions were brought about by new forms of mass media, and fought for by people who were tired of being ignored by the few who claimed to govern them. And, though it is easy to forget, Americans have a lot in common with the pictures we see daily in the newspaper; the struggle to reestablish peace and stability was very much an element of both revolts. Just because those photos of rioting in the streets do not resemble our images of men in wigs drafting documents, does not mean that they are any less, at their core, both movements for freedom.
              These two revolutions, thousands of miles and hundreds of years apart were both inspired by the same source. The nations were each ruled by tyrants, and were not heard by their governments. In America, the colonies felt that they had no voice in the “representative” monarchy. Parliament claimed that they could make decisions for Americans, without having a single colonist physically present. Additionally, though it is now the accepted mode of government, at the time, the idea of a democracy and rule by the people was quite radical. Like in the colonies, many Arab countries are ruled by tyrants pretending to be presidents, while really staging elections and results. This was most profound in Egypt, where president Hosni Mubarak governed for over 30 years and was finally ousted by the people after committing human rights abuses and negligence. Today these rebels are often portrayed in international press as extremists, but in their core their ambitions are simply for democracy.

            The unifying element of all revolutions is often media. An uprising is nothing if it does not have the support of the people behind it. Both the American and Middle Eastern Revolutions took advantage of new technologies to connect dissidents. In the 1700’s newspaper publishers were the world’s Web. Across the colonies they were able to distribute pamphlets and newspapers, advertising their radical thoughts. What they were not able to preach they could write. These contraband writings, often censored and blacklisted by the government, were at the heart of the revolution. Pamphlets like Common Sense were able to mobilize support through written word alone by making rational arguments and generating outrage. Next to this, the media of the Arab world is decidedly quite modern, but nonetheless central. These people utilized new platforms, like Facebook and Twitter to organize demonstrations. The reason why these Revolutions happened when they did was because they were suddenly able to connect the commoners, and give a voice to the silent.

            Sadly, looking at the region currently, it is hard to see where the liberty is. At this point the Middle East, even after successfully overthrowing many dictators like Muammar Gaddaffi in Libya, is quite honestly in shambles. The people are fighting to establish a true and lasting democracy, for real presidents, and not real dictators. This turmoil and disruption is what appears to be so different from our own national revolution. But yet, here too are we alike. The American people, even after declaring independence and proclaiming freedom, had to deal with instability and violence, just as any other Middle Eastern country has had to. Violence and riots were as much apart of early American life as was democratic ideals.  Conflicts such as Shay’s Rebellion, and the Whiskey Rebellion, in which Americans took up arms against their own government happened not 5 years after the end of the war. This unrest after the immediate goal is reached, when suddenly the people are charged with building a nation, is emblematic of both movements.

            Hopefully, these similarities are not just superficial. What is important is that, maybe, in the close connection between these two revolutions, we can see into the future. A journalist in 1787 may have found no hope in America’s prospects; they may have torn it down and said that it could never survive as a viable nation and that democracy was dead. But yet, we have thrived as a country for 250 years. Today, the Middle East must seem as bleak as the U.S. appeared to be all those years ago. It is hard to look past the bloody demonstrations and shocking images and see a region at peace. But it has been done before.  Giving a voice to the people is not easy, but it is possible.