People's Revolutions

People around the world have become quite familiar with “people's revolutions”; some successful and some not successful. But are they what they appear to be? The world witnessed many “Color Revolutions” from Lebanon to Georgia and the Ukraine and far away Kyrgyzstan. These were beacons of hope for the rest of the world. All these countries were labouring under self-interested, corrupt and often brutal political leadership (you might ask, “Who isn't?”!). But as time went by the colours started to fade and what became apparent was that these “people's revolutions” weren't what they appeared to be at all. They were, in fact, products of foreign intelligence services' manipulations. The CIA being the principal offender (link to GlobalResearch via Twelfth Bough). And the hoped for reforms, in particular the economic reforms, when they eventuated were worse than what preceded them by a large margin.

These 'color revolutions' were successful in overthrowing governments. There was a whole string of them. Until Moldova's turn came. The 'color revolution' juggernaut stumbled and then fell flat on its face when it reached Iran. The people were starting to wake up to what they were and their governments were prepared with counter measures.

The powers behind the UK, US and Israeli governments, principally the bankers, still had their ambitions to rule the world (see previous article, World War111 - underway) and there were still many countries to pull into the NATO military colossus; still many countries to separate from China as trading partners and still more countries to impoverish or impoverish further. What to do? Let's rework the idea. Let's have 'flower revolutions'! Target countries became those identified by trading with China and being resistant to integrating their military forces with NATO.

So Tunisia, a peaceful and prosperous country, (trades with China and resisted NATO) was recently subjected to the 'Jasmin Revolution' and now Egypt (that also trades with China and refused troops to NATO for its wars) has been saddled with the 'Lotus Revolution'. These quaintly named 'revolutions' are still in flux as I write. Though, as far as 'revolutions' go, they appear to be fairing better for their foreign sponsors than the Moldovan and Iranian ones did. What's changed? Certainly not the give-away labels (not too bright these CIA dudes sometimes). What's changed is the lack of immediate public support by the US government and the CIA's front organisations. It has become “the kiss of death”.

When the latest upheavals first hit the headlines, seasoned political observers were hopeful that they were the 'genuine article' at first. Then the more astute observers realised that despite genuine protesters (especially in Egypt), it was the 'same old, same old' just disguised a little better. But can 'peoples' revolutions' actually work or is the term no more meaningful than 'a people's government'?

The mass of people can protest. And people can demonstrate. And people can riot. But they can't overthrow a government very easily. They can stop it from operating but it takes huge organisational resources to do so effectively for any length of time. Also, a leadership must come into being or must move in and take over to do this and then negotiate with the incumbent powers which may include military and civil forces such as police. This leadership is by its nature separated from its constituents and are no longer 'the people' themselves. This leadership is then vulnerable to elimination through murder or is corruptible, if it is not corrupted already.

Often it is easier to corrupt or deceive this leadership through treachery. An example of deceit by the incumbent power would be the deal struck between Nelson Mandela and the South African Government of the time. Mandela did a marvellous job after he took over but because the economic power was retained in the hands of the bankers, nothing changed economically. In fact, things got worse, as they always do. The lesson is to know your enemy and their systems and sources of power. To know what is not discussed.

An example of treachery on the part of an opposition team is Poland. Solidarity turned to the Vatican for moral, economic and political support. Along with the Vatican came the CIA and its money. After the downfall of the communist government, Poland found itself ruled by the agents of the Vatican and the CIA and not by Solidarity and the people who supported it. And, of course, Poland is the worse for it. The lesson here is to choose your allies exceedingly carefully. (The courageous Poles of Solidarity have other worthwhile lessons to teach us which I will endeavour to come back to)

Can a mass of people overcome an army? In the past we have seen pictures of pretty girls putting flower stems down the barrels of soldiers' rifles (no doubt dreamed up by a Freudian) but in these situations, the soldiers are under orders to not engage. Just as is happening in Egypt, . . . . so far. We would like to believe that soldiers would not fire on their own people; that it is possible to prevail on their consciences or their hearts to refuse orders to kill the protesters. But history does not support this. Tiananmen Square and Kent State University to name just two examples.

The purpose of so called Defence Forces is to protect the incumbent power structure and its leaders from attack from both outside its borders and from inside its borders as in large scale insurrection and when necessary to back up the police forces (who can be overwhelmed with enough numbers).

There can be people's protests but the incumbent power elite will remain in power so long as the army responds to its political leader's orders. Or the army decides to back another leadership for whatever reason or even itself as a leadership. An army can impose its will because it has trained and organised personnel and they have weapons and force. Mao Tze-Tung famously once said that, “political power comes out of the end of a gun”. Though questionable philosophically, it's immediate and practical truth is unassailable and has to be borne in mind at all times. Who controls the guns?

A people need leadership to bring their aspirations together into a movement to bring about change. Leadership brings together a people's aspirations and focuses them on a particular issue or person to effect change. In this way, leadership functions like a lens that focuses the rays of the sun to burn away what might otherwise rest in the sun unperturbed all day just as a despot may rule forever a people who have no social and political leaders. Remove genuine leaders, like Archbishop Oscar Romero, and there is no problem. . . . until next time. Rinse and repeat.

After the invasion of Iraq, squads of killers went around Iraq kidnapping and killing academics, teachers and doctors, anyone who could provide a focal point and leadership to the rest of their community. Judge John Roll may well have been an example of someone who showed principled opposition to the ruling powers in America and would likely have gone on to become an important leader. He was shot in the head; the preferred shot for military trained snipers these days.

History is replete with examples of the incumbent king or despot agreeing to the demands of the leaders of a mass protest only to renege on the deal after the protesters have dispersed and then kill the leaders. The people do not respond to this outrage because they are leaderless. These days, not only do the elite eliminate problematic leaders, they also provide their own in-house trained faux leaders in their stead; like swapping John Lennon for Bono.

Leadership is also offered directly and indirectly by religions or religious movements like the Vatican or the Muslim Brotherhood. But these bodies are hooked into the elite power brokers one way or another and you know things aren't going to end well. The question then is who is providing the leadership and are they controlled by anyone else? Who controls the minds?

So these 'people's revolutions' cannot be what they are presented as by our news media. The protests are largely real but the leadership is a different thing. Genuine leaders who represent the interests of the poor do not last long leaving those provided or corrupted by the elite they purport to be against. Currently, there are people on the streets in Cairo but their presence is being tolerated by the army and whoever is controlling it for their own reasons. There are numerous incidents apparently, where protesters are overwhelming the police and there are instances of torching police stations. But it all hinges on the army and what they will do.

I hope it ends relatively peacefully, but fear it won't because there are far greater forces involved who set this uprising in motion for their own psychopathic purposes.

Comments

McJ's picture

Another great job of

Another great job of connecting the dots and giving us an overall picture of what is going on in Egypt and with the people's revolutions.

There can be peoples' protests but the incumbent power elite will remain in power so long as the army responds to its political leader's orders. Or the army decides to back another leadership for whatever reason or even itself as a leadership. An army can impose its will because it has trained and organised personnel and they have weapons and force. Mao Tze-Tung famously once said that, “political power comes out of the end of a gun”. Though questionable philosophically, it's immediate and practical truth is unassailable and has to be borne in mind at all times. Who controls the guns?

This is the crux of the matter then. What will the army do? Will they back the Islamists? I am leaning towards thinking this may be the way it will be allowed to play out.
I was just reading Chris's Hedges latest on this. Although I can't quibble with most of what he says, he draws some conclusions I question: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/what_corruption_and_force_have_wroug...

"What is happening in Egypt will damage and perhaps unravel the fragile peace treaty between Egypt and Jordan with Israel. It is likely to end Washington’s alliance with these Arab intelligence services, including the use of prisons to torture those we have disappeared into our vast network of black sites. The economic ties between Israel and these Arab countries will suffer. The current antagonism between Cairo and the Hamas government in Gaza will be replaced by more overt cooperation. The Egyptian government’s collaboration with Israel, which includes demolishing tunnels into Gaza, the sharing of intelligence and the passage of Israeli warship and submarines through the Suez Canal, will be in serious jeopardy. Any government—even a transition government that is headed by a pro-Western secularist such as Mohamed ElBaradei—will have to make these changes in the relationship with Israel and Washington if it wants to have any credibility and support. We are seeing the rise of a new Middle East, one that will not be as pliable to Washington or as cowed by Israel."
...
"The fraternization between the soldiers and the crowds, along with the presence of tanks adorned with graffiti such as “Mubarak will fall,” does not bode well for Washington, Israel and the Egyptian regime. The army has not been immune to the creeping Islamization of Egypt..."

Isn't he missing the bigger picture here that this is what Israel and the PTB are aiming to create - Islamisation (ie in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood 'takeover') leading to the inevitable culture wars and balkanization? Or maybe I am reading this wrong. (I am buoyed by that fact that the people on the street appear not to be buying the culture wars BS.)

"Israeli and American intelligence services did not foresee the popular uprising in Tunisia or Egypt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi, Israel’s new intelligence chief, told Knesset members last Tuesday that “there is no concern at the moment about the stability of the Egyptian government.” Tuesday, it turned out, was the day hundreds of thousands of Egyptians poured into the streets to begin their nationwide protests."

I am thinking Kochavi is not at all concerned with the stability of the Egyptian government if instability was the goal.

Ok, so maybe I am quibbling with a little more than I first thought. smiling

"they also provide their own in-house trained faux leaders in their stead; like swapping John Lennon for Bono."

You're going to be dashing the cherished myths of the die hard John Lennon fans. Careful, them could be fighting words. smiling I will admit to liking U2's music but I wish Bono would just STFU and sing. laughing out loud

Oh, oh - didn't some one say that to the Dixie Chicks. Shame on me....

Hedges and Lennon

I entirely agree with you, McJ, about Chris Hedges and with what you are saying.

I think I will have to reword my comment regarding John Lennon. I did no mean to imply he was in the same camp as Bono. Quite the opposite. What I meant was that TPTB took Lennon from us and gave us Bono (the faux opponent) in his place.

I have left some comments at Penny's which sums up much of my thinking -
http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2011/01/israel-allows-egyptian...

I'll be back with more later (hopefully!) smiling

McJ's picture

Got it!

"I think I will have to reword my comment regarding John Lennon. I did no mean to imply he was in the same camp as Bono. Quite the opposite. What I meant was that TPTB took Lennon from us and gave us Bono (the faux opponent) in his place."

I get that now. I misread that part. My excuse is that I was making supper and reading your post in bits and pieces. I'm just all confused about who's replacing whom and why. I'm just glad i got the important parts right. laughing out loud Heading over to Penny's now to read your comments.

McJ's picture

Read your comments at Penny's

Read your comments at Penny's and I think you are spot on. I was thinking the same thing. They are setting Egypt up to be attacked/invaded. Those nasty Egyptian Muslims are threatening our security. We have to attack them in our self defense. Then we can steal all their resources of course. It will also further tighten the noose around the back door problem of Gaza.
(I officially think I am starting to think like you laughing out loud).
Now I see you have up a new post so I am off to read that. Sheesh, it's getting late over here, ya know.

"james griffon said...
James, that thought crossed my mind.
Could this be the excuse for Israel to invade Egypt?

Yes that's the play. THe twin prizes are control of the Suez canal and water from the Nile and they have been from before the beginning.

I've written some broader background stuff at WinterPatriot dot com
http://www.winterpatriot.com/node/508
http://www.winterpatriot.com/node/507

and hope to have more on those two goals I mentioned just above and my thoughts below up on the blog in a few hours

(that the Egyptian troops are not controlling the riots and Israel needs to guarantee it's security)

Yes, basically. Though it will get more complicated than that with israel claiming it is threatened by the new government in Egypt which will involve the two players apparently standing by the sidelines - the army and the Muslim Brotherhood.

I believe the protesters are very genuinely angry after thirty years of repression. I also believe they are being deliberately further enraged by the police and the looters and not to mention the snipers (who could well be israelis) to provide the excuse for a violent crackdown which will usher in an "extreme" government.

So in this sense, the people, the protesters, are being set up as patsies. The more violently they react, the better as far as the psychopaths (MB, the Egyptian Army and the israeli armed forces) are concerned. And just in case they don't, there will be plenty of agent provocateurs on hand, I'm sure.

The new "extreme" government (with strings leading back to the israelis and CIA) will provide a cassus beli for war with israel who will plead 'self defence' as they always do. So the army and MB are being set up as patsies, in turn. This is the set up I mentioned; drawing Egyptian troops into the Sinai (with israel's aproval - read 'request') to become a 'threat' along with armed protesters - all fabricated of course.

My hope is that the Egyptian people can see what is coming and take whatever measures they can to head off this scenario and somehow grab victory for themselves out of this; that through their local leaders,they actually get in control of it.

I think it will take close to a miracle and I'm praying for one and I urge other readers to do the same.

egypt

Hey James, that is very good, very good indeed.

"In the past we have seen pictures of pretty girls putting flower stems down the barrels of soldiers' rifles (no doubt dreamed up by a Freudian) "

this comment made me chuckle.
Because you are correct the sexual suggestion is there and I never caught it until reading that...

I have been thinking more on Egypt today and the more I think of it, the more I think this is something long cooked up.

Coincidentally I am reading, a very good book, that i highly recommend.
The Global Economic Crisis-The great depression of the XXI century.
Put out by the Global Research gang, it is worth buying.
In the book Michelle Chossuodovsky makes mention of some NATO agreements involving Israel and some of the surrounding nations, that might be very relevant.
Plus there is news of some "secret backing of Egyptian dissidents" on the part of America.
I am going to put this information into today's post, hopefully tying up some loose ends? Or enlightening readers more.

Nato agreements

Thanks Pen. And thanks for the book tip. Yes NATO has various regional agreements, the "Mediterranean Dialogue" being one of them, which are affiliated with NATO and that is how it has spread its influence (authority) around the globe

oh. sorry that is Michel

oh. sorry that is Michel Chossudovsky

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.