Shy U.S. Intellectual Created Playbook Used in a Revolution

[alp227]

BOSTON — Halfway around the world from Tahrir Square in Cairo, an aging American intellectual shuffles about his cluttered brick row house in a working-class neighborhood here. His name is Gene Sharp. Stoop-shouldered and white-haired at 83, he grows orchids, has yet to master the Internet and hardly seems like a dangerous man.

But for the world’s despots, his ideas can be fatal.

Few Americans have heard of Mr. Sharp. But for decades, his practical writings on nonviolent revolution — most notably “From Dictatorship to Democracy,” a 93-page guide to toppling autocrats, available for download in 24 languages — have inspired dissidents around the world, including in Burma, Bosnia, Estonia and Zimbabwe, and now Tunisia and Egypt.

Full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/world/middleeast/17sharp.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

[snagglepuss]

1. What a remarkable man. What an excellent piece . Bookmarked. K& R.

Thanks so much for posting it.

[Newest Reality]

2. Looks like a good read here. I am already into it:

“From Dictatorship to Democracy,”
http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf

"Nor should this analysis be interpreted to mean that when a
specific dictatorship is ended, all other problems will also disappear.
The fall of one regime does not bring in a utopia. Rather, it opens the
way for hard work and long efforts to build more just social, economic,
and political relationships and the eradication of other forms
of injustices and oppression. It is my hope that this brief examination
of how a dictatorship can be disintegrated may be found useful
wherever people live under domination and desire to be free."

Gene Sharp

[northoftheborder]

3. Never heard of Sharp, but intriguing

I just love what I read about this man's character traits, intellectual, humble, sort of nerdy in a non-tech context, brilliant in original thinking that can change the world. Thanks for this post.

[dreamnightwind]

4. Great article

Never heard of him. Downloaded the book From Dictatorship to Democracy (http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf), glad to have found this. This guy seems like an amazing story, gave me hope, good to see an actual difference maker like this.

Here in the U.S., we're not (I think) at the point where we need these tactics to overthrow a particular dictator, we are more in need of systemic reform, which in an entrenched system like ours may actually be more resistant to reform than a less legitimate system run by an unpopular and unelected dictator.

I'd love to see D.U. focus less on specific gripes and more on how to leverage real systemic reform. We need a plan.

[fasttense]

5. Thanks for posting this. I have downloaded his guide.

From a quick look I think his ideas with minor modification can be used effectively in the US.

[happyslug]

6. He uses the Term "Democratic" throughout the book for the side for change

But it is clear, that the term "Opposition" (Which he uses in reference to the ruling elite in places in the book, when he is not using the term "Dictator") would be a more accurate term.

Reflects Lenin's comment that you only need 5% of the population to have a revolution, the job of this 5% is to provide the Strategic thinking (Strategic thinking is a important and plan that the other 95% of the population will end up following) and tactics used by the 95% when the time for revolution occurs.

Most of this is old hat (Even the author cites Aristotle comments alone similar lines). While this book is aimed at dictatorships, the same plan can be used against any ruling elite. For example the author cites Serbia for using these same tactics to overthrow Slobodan Milošević, but it is clear that while Slobodan Milošević was a "strong" leader he was NOT a dictator i.e. the elections he won are considered to have been honest, even the last one after which the revolt occurred, seems to have been honest, but the results were NOT accepted by the opposition to Slobodan Milošević, and thus he was replaced by someone TO HIS RIGHT i.e. thought Slobodan Milošević had been to soft and easy as to Kosovo. It is possible the Slobodan Milošević had been cheating as to the votes, but that was never proved even after he was overthrown. We also have to remember he did hold an election and recognize his defeat in that election after the "Revolt". A similar situation occurred in the Ukraine with its "Orange Revolution" and in the other various color revolutions). Just a comment that this book can be used against even popularly elected governments and as the Ukraine shows, the results may NOT be permanent (The people overthrown in the Orange Revolution, are now back in power in the Ukraine based on a fair election).

This can best to viewed as a book on how to overthrow the present government more then just dictators, it does show that dictatorships are inherently weak (Thus even Marx said as Class warfare increases under Capitalism, sooner or later the ruling elite gets so worried about losing power to the working class that they install a dictatorship as the working class gets ready to take power, and it is against the resulting dictatorship any communist revolt would occur. Lenin and other followers of Marx tended to ignore this observation of Marx, and said instead that the overthrow of the Bourgeois even while it still is some sort of popular government is what is needed.

Mostly a comment that is is old hat, for example the attack on independent social organization was a key to the anti-labor movement of the late 1800s (For example the "Molly Maguires" trials in Pennsylvania was NOT aimed at people who were killing coal mine owners and Coal Police (provided such "Molly Maguires" actually existed, recent research indicate they did NOT) but the use of fear of such a group to eliminate the last social organization (The Hibernians) that still had members in the coal regions (i.e. the trial was aimed at the Hibernians NOT any group committing actual violence). After the Homestead Strike of 1892, Carnegie Steel, later US Steel, made so they was no social organizations in Homestead, for the people who would join and form up such social groups would also join and from up a union, thus all had to be destroyed. Churches barely survived, but only as places of worship NOT social activities (which, if occurred in the churches were controlled by US Steel OR suppressed by US Steel or its minions who controlled Homestead after 1892. A good example of this is when the Head of the Department of Labor Under FDR wanted to give a pro union speech in Homestead in the mid 1930s, could NOT find a place to give the speech except on the steps of the US Post Office (and the reason the Post Office was available is that is was US Government Property).