revolution english version

Revolution implies the rupture, the abrupt change of paradigm with the above to establish a different system generally more ethical or in conformity with reality. It can be economic, political, scientific, philosophical…
But who decides the revolution? Are there natural revolutions or is it a totally artificial phenomenon?

If we concentrate on the political-economic revolutions, in France the revolutions of 1789 or 1848 were led by leaders of the bourgeoisie, the enlightened elite and it is admitted today that the French Revolution is not originally proletarian but that it was supported and would have been impossible without the subjugated classes.

The bourgeois elite, having invested in it in its own interest, with the aim of annihilating the nobility and imposing the system that would be most advantageous to them: the capitalist republic.

But today it seems that Gavroche has changed his face. For example, the French Yellow Jackets have gone on the street to protest against a rise in the price of gas -which they need if only to go to work- and received virtually no support from the right or left intellectual elite. Are we to see that our intellectual elites have moved to the conservative side or are they afraid to associate with the people? Yet these elites seem necessary to carry out the revolution… But can we really say that Yellow Jackets are revolutionary? Yes and no. The statistics showed that the majority of them had never demonstrated, a large part of them are apolitical and their claim seems at first sight far from revolutionary… But didn’t the people demand bread when Marie-Antoinette told them to eat buns, a few years before the fall of the monarchy? And how can we fail to associate the police repression -denounced by the UN- terrible that fell on the Yellow Jackets and traumatized many of them physically or mentally with the Commune? When systems are in danger and nearing their end, there is almost always a hardening in their doctrine and repression. Isn’t that precisely what’s happening?

Moreover, the Yellow Jackets show a real and deep social frustration and it was this additional tax that served as a spark, as it could have been the previous one or the next. And when they refuse taxes it is not to reduce the weight of the State already badly damaged but to demand a real tax policy that does not suffocate the poorest… However, even if they use the symbols of the revolution, few want a real break, a total change of system.Likewise when young people for the climate mobilize on Fridays they all demand real actions from the politicians and some a change of system but it would be wrong to generalize this will to all the participants.

Change is necessary, however. Social problems such as refugees, famines, war, and deregulated taxation are no longer counted. And especially environmental with air pollution, climate change, melting of the ice -in particular permafrost releasing unknown diseases-, the annihilation of biodiversity…

Faced with all these evils a cause seems to be out of the lot: neoliberalism. It would therefore be a matter of getting out of a political-philosophical-economic system.
In fact, how to deal in such a short time with such great problems without changing the system. Today, globalized neoliberalism leaves no room for humans or any other species. Everything is done to maximize the profits of large multinationals.

Since the 18th century, with the work of Quenay in particular, we know that growth is a finite phenomenon. However, our former capitalist societies are seeing their growth extinguished and are trying by all their means to extricate the last bits of what hardens liberalism and removes social and environmental concerns for more profit. But it is these multinationals that rule the world because neoliberalism has destroyed the role of the state. In addition, their philosophy poisons society in all fields: education, health, transport, culture, research tends to be privatized for lack of means of States when food or information is in the hands of a few powerful people. Certainly remain some independent media and its ethical initiatives in a few areas but how to deal with giants like Amazon who save himself the rights of his employees and the environment when one is a small bookstore for example? So it seems obvious that if we don’t want to sink with this failed economic-political system, we have to get out of it and as soon as possible. But how to deal with a system that encompasses everything? From our everyday life to the way we live our lives and our individual philosophy? To say that time is money is not to admit that we are trapped in this system which tends to make everything profitable? So what other solution than revolution?
But if we agree on the need for a revolution, the question of the afterlife arises. To emerge from neoliberalism, yes but for what then? At the time of globalization it seems necessary to think of the revolution on a global scale… But is it really possible? Even if we agreed on the need for a revolution at the same time political, economic and mentality, which seems difficult to imagine, how can we agree on what should come next, on the dream system? Does it really exist? Should we really ask ourselves these questions? Rousseau had it in mind precisely what the Republic would look like? We can imagine that not.

It is therefore a matter of attacking this system by taking the risk that what comes next may be worse. Keeping in mind that it will not be easy, that perhaps some will lose their lives… But with the hope of a better future.

And how is it possible to take over the economy? So asked this question seems insoluble. But the Bastille insurgents also did not have a specific plan of attack and improvised when the time came…
At first, however, the revolution seems to have to take place on an individual scale. If everyone starts radically changing their habits, acting in harmony with the environment, questioning and questioning the system, perhaps we can hope for an uprising from below, from the basic consumer, from the fifty-year-old housewife. However, this must not make some people say that if the planet goes badly, it is only about individuals. That would be wilfully veiling reality. Blaming a child who buys candy is unfair when you consider the advertisements he eats all the time and plays on cognitive biases. Nor should it lead to a depoliticization of individuals since the system has been in place for so long, we might as well not help it by not going to vote and demand more and more from the state and multinationals. Another extreme would be to adopt the survivalist posture and wait for the system to spit itself out without really knowing what it means and leave the future of humanity in the hands of those who want to enjoy it…

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *