Why do revolutions end in dictatorships

A socialist author examines the organizational model that shaped the practice of the ISO — and looks at what the alternatives might be. A nurse describes what he and his co-workers learned over several years of campaigning for safe staffing at a Chicago public hospital. We encourage all socialists who are not in union jobs to consider the possibility of finding work at a unionized workplace. The author of The Democrats: A Critical History dissects some of the myths and distortions that are already settling in as conventional wisdom.

Every week--sometimes every day--brings a new outrage of the Trump era, but we can respond by building a left united behind solidarity and struggle. Two revolutionary socialists from Greece answer questions about the historic victory of the left and the tests that will come soon for the new government. A New York City socialist speaks out for building a movement that offers hope for a future that finally ends suffering and desperation.

Material on this Web site is licensed by SocialistWorker. Readers are welcome to share and use material belonging to this site for non-commercial purposes, as long as they are attributed to the author and SocialistWorker.

X Close. Search Search. Eric Ruder. June 23, Eric Ruder explains that socialists look to a society based on mass democracy. Further reading David McNally. Further Reading David McNally. From the archives Interview: Lance Selfa. Previously published by the International Socialist Organization. This often happens when there is a sudden change in national leadership, with the new leader unilaterally leading a transition towards democracy.

In this process, the leader uses their authoritarian powers to gradually instate reforms while steadily relinquishing their own power as part of the transition.

What motivates self-democratization? One reason may be mounting popular pressure. This pressure is expressed by protests or vocalized dissatisfaction towards the political regime, even if the discontent is not widespread enough to constitute a full-fledged revolutionary movement. Elites may choose to head off the possibility of a revolution early by preemptively reforming the state towards democracy. Indeed, according to the political scientist Florian Grosser, the democratic revolutionary tradition is based on the idea that gradual political reform, rather than violent revolution, is the more effective method for creating a more democratic government and society.

Another possibility is diplomatic: there can be substantial incentives or pressures to democratize in order to improve relations with the hegemonic powers of the world, such as the United States. Building close ties with democratic world powers can yield lucrative economic agreements or military protection.

On the other hand, countries like the United States have justified military interventions with the pretext of building democracy abroad. For their part, the United States and other democracies have also extensively utilized public diplomacy to help promote democracy across the world since the end of World War I.

The U. One of the most prominent cases of altruistic democratic diplomacy was the Marshall Plan enacted by the United States after World War II; by providing food and other necessary goods to the war-shattered nations of Europe, the American government sought to showcase democracy as an alternative to fascism or socialism that was far more conducive to prosperity.

The Plan was hugely successful in fostering democracy in Western Europe, and was pivotal in helping West Germany, Italy, and Austria democratize away from their recent fascist past. Finally, democratization may be motivated by the desire to boost the level of national economic development.

For example, democracies tend to perform better economically compared to authoritarian regimes; indeed, authoritarian policies such as economic cronyism tend to drag authoritarian economies down.

The democratization of the government and the economy, on the other hand, acts as a check on parasitic economic behaviors by kleptocratic elites; democracy allows for more flexible economic reforms and more economic fairness, thus opening the way for more growth opportunities. Economic disasters often provide the necessary shock to dislodge despotic and corrupt governments, creating widespread political dissatisfaction among the national citizenry and a desire for political reforms such as democratization.

Keen elites, seeking to economically modernize and integrate with the global market while satisfying growing discontent among the public, may trade some of their power for a chance to economically improve the country. Additionally, democracies may come about after economic growth; this growth elevates a number of formerly working-class citizens to elite positions, who use their influence to advocate for a more egalitarian distribution of wealth and power.

The democratization of both Spain and Taiwan during the s and s were accompanied by both rapid economic development prior to democratization, which were then followed by economic reforms. For almost the next 30 years, Chiang Kai-shek governed Taiwan with an iron fist as its dictator, banning all opposition parties and imprisoning anyone suspected of being a political opponent.

The KMT also suppressed the language and culture of the native Taiwanese, while promoting the supposed superiority of the Han Chinese. In , Chiang Kai-shek finally died; three years later, his son Chiang Ching-kuo succeeded his father as the President of the Republic of China in Taiwan.

Chiang Ching-kuo faced significant external and internal pressures. The old guard of KMT exiles from the postwar years were retiring and passing away. At the same time, opposition to KMT rule was developing rapidly, with independent political leaders growing in popularity and starting to promote Taiwanese culture over the KMT-backed Han Chinese culture.

Faced with these seemingly intractable problems, Chiang Ching-Kuo began to democratize Taiwan through several gradual but important steps.

More seriously, there has been a tendency to portray the various interregnum regimes as a steady retreat from the revolutionary peak of According to this view of the English revolution, the hopes of assorted radicals Levellers, Diggers, Ranters, etc , raised by the execution of the king in January and the declaration of an English republic, were just as swiftly dashed. The army leadership restored its authority over the rank and file troops, crushing mutinies in May of the same year.

Recent work, however, is demonstrating the persistence of radical movements and ideas through the s and beyond. The High Court of Justice, erected to try Charles I and employed throughout the s to deal with enemies of the interregnum regimes, was indebted to Leveller ideas concerning legal reform.

Moreover, while historians often portray the Commonwealth and Protectorate as deeply unpopular, research has shown that many contemporaries remembered these regimes positively, when comparing them with a Restoration monarchy that appeared both degenerate and incompetent. Head to Head. A world without revolution would be one where exploitation had no end David Andress, Professor of Modern History, University of Portsmouth The French political class at the end of thought that they had had a revolution, that the new basis of their society was fixed and that the rest was just a matter of tidying up.

The Protectorate was perhaps more popular than once thought Edward Vallance, Professor of History at the University of Roehampton Revolutions certainly do end badly, if you are Charles I and we are talking about the English Revolution. Related Articles. Why do the British know so little about Irish history? The thesis of Hilb: radical equalization of social conditions was made possible by establishing total domination. For her, the real equivalent is not freedom and equality but dictatorship and equality.

Therefore, the missing civic rights as well as the prohibition of leaving the country are less incidental concomitants than a sign of the absolute concentration of power. Dictatorship and equality are inherent components of this form of government itself. Therefore, the dictatorship not only violates certain human rights but also does not recognize human rights as such.

They are incompatible with the establishment of, and control through, radical equality, rendering democracy and plurality null. Hilb describes how Castro from the beginning worked on centralization of power, eliminating revolutionary comrades in the party and armed forces as well as in trade unions and student organizations, elevating only his loyal comrades on unity lists in elections.

Trade union and student movements were subordinated to his party.