The 1989 Romanian Revolution

1. A protest began in Timisoara on December 16. A protest broke out because the government attempted to kick out a protester who was a Hungarian pastor from the country, Laszlo Tokes. Tokes had made negative comments toward the regime in the international media. The government suspected and declared that he was spreading racial hatred there for he should be exiled. The government took his bishop from his post, striping Tokes of the right to use the apartment he was allowed to use when he was a pastor. For some time, his churchgoers gathered around his home to protect him. The people that past by were told by the churchgoers to join them and that it was an attempt by the communist regime to not let people decide what religion they wanted. When mayor Petre Moţ saw that the protesters were not going to give up he suggested that he not charge Tokes for charges put against him, but when Mot failed to confirm his statement in writing, the people got angrier. The crowed tried to burn down the building where the District Committee stayed in. In result of this the police responded violently and beat the riot with sticks; they also used teargas, and water jets. A lot of people were arrested. Finally the On December 21, Ceausescu addressed a mass assembly to talk about the uprising that happened in Timisoara.  As he continued to talk to the crowd, there were sudden gunshots and bombes coming from outside the mass assembly. Bullhorns were sounded to let people know a revolution has started, and then the mass assembly turned into fighting and a large protest.  
2. The 1989 Romanian revolution is very different from the Philippine revolution. First of all, the Romanian revolution was incredibly violent and bloody. Many people lost their lives for this revolution to happen, while in the Philippine revolution, the people united and successfully overthrew their dictator non-violently. The dictator of the Philippines first ordered his army to attack the protesters but luckily, the army ended up going to the side of the protesters. This is very different to what happened in Romania because, there, the people working for the government did not lose their loyalty to them and continued to serve the communist leader. The army of the communist leader in Romania continued to oppress the citizens that wished to go against the dictator and protest. In the Philippines, neither the police nor the army violently attacked the citizens. The Philippine revolution was not very violent. Another difference between these two revolutions is that, while the people of Romania overthrew a communist leader, the citizens of the Philippines overthrew a dictator. When the communist leader was finally executed, different groups fought with each other, all groups wanting to take over the new Romania. This did not happen in the Philippines, many people had already agreed to a new president when the dictator was close to falling. Although these two revolutions are very different, both happened for the same reason. The citizens of both countries were frustrated with the governments because both leaders increased the poverty in the country. The protesters for both countries protested in landmarks, important places, and after these protests happened, both leaders declared martial law.
3.After the revolution, many gangs and groups fought with each other, struggling to get the power in the country. The group that was almost in power when Nicolae Ceaucescu was about to be executed, used to be a communist party. This made the other groups fighting for power protest and say that they were going to make Romania a communist place again, but when elections happened, the leader of the formerly communist group won 90% of the people that voted. After this, Romania became a better country than when Nicolae Ceaucescu was in control, with much poverty.
4. Yes, Romanian Revolution was justified. If you look at today there are no more big fights about the new regime. Although, I strongly believe that the people could have used different methods do express there anger and frustration towards the government. The methods they used were violent and unnecessary. I think that if the people had a problem with the government they could handle the situation in a non-violent manner. For example, instead of burning cars, attempting to burn a important building, destroying important documents, and using violence, the common people could have protested peacefully, or could have written anonymous letters to the government regarding there concerns. I think many people in the Romanian Revolution acted too abruptly with violence and aggression and think that many other methods would have worked to get the governments attention.        
 5. Before the Romanian revolution, the middle class were frustrated with economic problems in the country. In Brinton Crane’s theory, he says that in stage 1, the “middle class loudly expresses its anger over economic restraints placed upon it by the government.” His sentence completely matches what happened before the Romanian revolution. In stage 2, Brinton Crane says that “This is the escalation of the anger felt by the middle class. The people rise up against the government.” The people of Romania started to protest, angry with the way Nicolae Ceaucescu was controlling the country, and this shows how they rose up against the government. Brinton Crane states that in the 3rd phase of the revolution, “There is a lot of violence and efforts to spread the ideals of the revolution.” This is exactly what happened in this revolution. Hundreds of protestors disagreed with Nicolae Ceaucescu and many of them died from the oppression of Nicolae Ceaucescu. Lastly, Brinton states that the revolution ends and the country enters a period of recovery. After Nicolae Ceaucescu was executed, war was still in Romania because many groups were fighting for the power of the country. Brinton Crane’s theory of revolution matches what happened in the Romanian revolution.    
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Communist Romania." Communist Romania - Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 3 Feb 2008 . 
"Romania's bloody revolution ." BBC News|EUROUPE|Romania's Bloody Revolution. 30 January. BBC News. 30 Jan 2008 .
 "Romanian Revolution of 1989." Romanian Revolution. 30 January. Wikipedia. 30 Jan 2008 .
"Romania The revolution of 1989." Romania :: The revolution of 1989. Britannica. 3 Feb 2008 http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-253522/Romania#477027.hook.
 

The 2001 EDSA Revolution

1. In 2001 the people gathered once more in EDSA highway, but this time they asked President Joseph Estrada to resign. The people were frustrated because he was accused of plunder and yet he remained in power. The revolution was started by some top officials of the government and some politicians. They encouraged the people to join them and soon the people came. Later on, they were joined by the army.   
 
2. In most revolutions, a lot of people die, but EDSA Revolution 2 is different because it was bloodless; nobody died. The purpose of the revolution was to ask President Estrada to resign because the people believed that he was guilty of plunder and therefore not fit to be president. In EDSA revolution 1, the people came out to protect the revolutionaries from President Marcos. The Philippines at that time was under dictatorship and the people fought for their freedom. In EDSA 2, the Philippines was under democracy, so the people were not fighting for their freedom. The people were just unsatisfied with their president because they thought he was corrupt and inept and so they wanted to remove him from power.  
3. Because of EDSA 2, President Estrada was forced to step down. He was succeeded by his vice-president Gloria M. Arroyo. Some people thought that the nation became better and the economy improved when Arroyo became the president. Estrada’s supporters, on the other hand, were angered because they were thinking that the majority of Filipinos wanted Estrada to remain president.  
4. The revolution was not justified because the people forced a legitimate president who won the elections by a landslide to resign. It is not good to elect a president and then have a revolution if the people do not feel unsatisfied with his presidency. President Estrada was accused of plunder, but the people should have waited for the impeachment process to finish and let the law decide what to do with him. If the people decide to have a revolution every time they are unsatisfied with their president, the nation will never have stability.  

5. EDSA revolution 2 like the first EDSA revolution was bloodless. According to Brinton Crane, a revolution involves violence, but since EDSA 2 was bloodless, it cannot be considered as a real revolution. In most revolutions, the fight is between the rich and the poor, but in Edsa revolution, the people were against the president; it was not really a fight between the rich and the poor. According to Brinton Crane, people revolt because the government is ineffective and cannot effectively manage the country due to an inept leader. In EDSA 2, the people decided to oust the president because they thought he was incompetent. The revolution was also led by intellectuals.  The president was forcibly asked to resign, but not violently removed from power. Edsa revolution 2 has some differences with Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution, but the purpose was the same.


Bibliography
http://blog.daum.net/sayit/13541384
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20080116-112641/Edsa-II-still-rocks

2006 Nepal Democracy Movement

 1. What methods did the group(s) use to express their frustrations and ultimately lead to a revolution?                             
              The target of the frustrations were to the king, this is because the king declared martial law and consolidated power to himself (just like Marcos did), plus appointed a government led by himself, the Nepalese people started seeking a new form of government which led to democracy. In May 2002, King Gyanendra supported the popularly elected Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba when he dismissed the parliament elected in 1999. In October 2002 he dismissed Deuba and consolidated his power for the first time. During the years 2002 to 2005 he chose and subsequently dismissed three prime ministers, finally dismissing Deuba for the second time and taking over as absolute ruler on 1st February 2005. The Nepali rebels blockaded roads for some period of time and called for a nationwide strike, and eventually, the people held a two day nationwide strike. Also, during the nationwide strike, the king of Nepal imposed a curfew in Kathmandu from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m., stating that whoever defies the curfew will be shot on the spot. Besides this, the people of Nepal have held weeks of protests prior to the nationwide strike (some were organized and some were disorganized). During the protests and strikes, some of the Nepalese people were either hurt and injured in any way or killed.   
 2. How is your revolution similar and/ or different to one of the revolutions previously studied?                             
               The Philippine revolution has many similarities with the Nepal movement. Marcos and King Gyanendra of Nepal wanted to rule forever and not be overthrown so they sought martial law and bribed to have a government of their own and as the same result both countries ended up with a democracy. Both revolutions had many supporters and similar to the Pilippines’ revolution had a nationwide strike. One difference is that the Philippine revolution was non-violent while the Nepal movement had many injured, arrested and killed. Another difference is that Nepal was a monarchy from the start and the Philippines was a democracy on hold at the start.   
3. What was the eventual outcome of the revoltution, and did the nation/people become better due to the revoltution?           
                 Well, the change is kind of edgy, there is no more martial law and monarchy but some of the people are not new to this and some are still protesting for the king to come back. They also made an act, the 18 may act, which overrides the constitution of 1990. Some changes were that they scrapped the king’s position as the supreme commander of the army, scrapping the old national anthem until a new one is created, etc. I would say that the people became better due to the revolution because they successfully removed the power of the king and they were also successful in changing the form of government. Right now, Nepal has a constitutional monarchy with parliamentary democracy government, in other words they have a bit of democracy in their country, which is what the people want.   
 
4. Was the revolution justified? Would other methods of worked?               The revolution was justified because people power, just like the Philippines is the best way to go, although there were some casualties, they did it for a good cause knowing the penalties and consequences. They could have rebelled violently and a lot of them would have been killed and might have not worked. The movement they did was successful in changing the form of government. Before they were a monarchy and became an autocracy after king Gyanendra made it, but because of the movement, now they have a constitutional monarchy with parliamentary democracy government. In other words, Nepal is starting to have democracy in their country, which is what the people wanted and needed, so, I would say that the revolution was justified and some other methods would not be as successful as people power.
 
5. Breifly state whether or not your revolution follows Crane Brinton's stages of revolution.
               The Nepal democracy movement (Revolution) does follow Crane Brinton’s anatomy of a revolution, starting from the symptoms up to the convalescence. The symptoms were the people of Nepal protesting on the streets. The rising fever, Maoists rebels use violence against the government, killing some security personnel. The Nepalese people continue to hold weeks of protests. Crisis, the rebels call for a two day nationwide strike and blockaded roads for a period of time, which the people did do. The king imposes a curfew in Kathmandu from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m., but still people protested, demonstrators defy the curfew imposed by the king. The king also orders his men to shoot protesters violating the curfew to be “shot on site”. Convalescence, a new prime minister is appointed ( Prime Minister Girijia Prasad Koirala). Nepal’s new cabinet declares a ceasefire, they also announce that Maoist rebels are no longer considered a terrorist group.
 
 
 
Bibliography (Nepal Revolution) 


Sharma, Gopal. "Nepal Maoists call nationwide strike over envoys." Reuters Alertnet. 19 December 2006. 16 Jan 2008 . 
 Paramendra, "Nepal Revolution: Victory." Global Voices. 25 April 2006. 19 Jan 2008 . 

"Nepal: revolution at the crossroads." Socialist Worker Online. April 29 2006. 19 Jan 2008 . 

"People Power in Nepal." The Nation. 05 May 2006. 19 Jan 2008 . 





   
 
 
 
  
   
 

Iranian revolution

Iranian revolution
 
1. METHODS:
The citizens and residences of Iran, wanted to spark a movement dedicated to changing the Iranian government due to errors and actions executed by the Shah under a monarchy rule, and the mistakes and successes of the different political forces. Methods used by Iranians were demonstrating, destroying western symbols, rallying and massive protesting all of which were completed in a violent, rough and destructive manner. Anti-Shah groups worked outside of Tehran, in various other countries, using the media to spread ideals and ideas to the public by smuggling cassettes with speeches done by leaders of these organizations.Early on, the opposition was mostly consisting of the urban middle class, similar to Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution, a sector of the population that wanted the Shah to abide by the Iranian Constitution of 1906.  

The first major demonstration against the shah was held in January 1978 lead by Islamic groups. Students and Religious leaders rebelled in the city of Qom. The army was sent in to minimize conflict but instead ended up killing several students. Because of these deaths, on February 18 groups marched in honor of these students and also protested against the rule of the Shah. History repeated itself, killing 100’s of demonstrators. Again this continued on March 29 and May 10. Symbols which represented the Shah were destroyed. In May, there was a shooting of one of a leading political moderate’s followers. Shariatmadari, the political moderate, abandoned his stance and joined the opposition. By summer 1978, these workers, often from traditional rural backgrounds, joined the street protests in massive numbers. Other workers went on strike and by November the economy crumbled. Violence continued killing 400 civilians at a movie theater. 10,000 relatives and sympathizers gathered for a mass funeral and march.
By September, the nation was rapidly destabilizing, with major protests becoming a regular occurrence. The Shah introduced martial law, and banned all demonstrations. A massive protest broke out in Tehran, in what became known as Black Friday. Rumors started and violence killed 700 people, but in the meantime the appearance of government brutality alienated much of the rest of the Iranian people and the Shah’s allies abroad. A general strike in October resulted in the paralysis of the economy, with vital industries being shut down.
 Basically methods used to impeach the shah were done in a very violent manner and protests, demonstrations and public awareness were main methods that the Iranians used.
2. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES

The 1979 Iranian revolution is both similar and different to many other previous revolutions in different corners and locations in the globe. This revolution is similar to the French revolution in many aspects, for one, the first people to arise and complain about the political system was the middle/working class. In the eventual out come the king in the French revolution, and the Shah and the Iranian revolution were eventually executed. Anti-Shah organizations outside of Tehran smuggled speeches of leaders and officials stating facts and ideals concerning the revolution, similar to the American Revolution where in Thomas Paine wrote “Thomas Paine’s Common Sense” also stating facts and ideas of the events happening; they both used the distribution of media to get ideas and thoughts across to the people of their nation. Concerning the Philippine revolution, when General Fidel Ramos joined the people or opposition of the government, the revolution took a turn and was at its climax, similar to Shariatmadari, who abandoned the Shah for the opposition. Also similar to the Philippine revolution, when the military detached it’s self from Pres. Marcos the rule of Marcos collapsed also like the crumble of the Pahlavi dynasty which occurred shortly after Iran’s military declared itself “neutral”, on February 11.  

Unlike the Philippine revolution the protests, demonstrations and methods used in the Iranian Revolution were done violently, while in the Philippines it was done peacefully. The execution of the Shah is different from the Philippine revolution and the American Revolution considering the leaders weren’t killed in those two revolutions. Different from all the other revolutions, French, American and Philippines, all countries were aiming for a democratic government while the people of Iran wanted a theocratic government to emerge.
3. OUTCOME AND POST REVOLUTIONARY IMAPCT:
The Iranian Revolution, which has been called “the third greatest revolution in history,” transformed the former monarchy under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Phalvi, to a theocratic run government or Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the revolution and founder of the Islamic Republic. Internally, some goals of the revolution have been fulfilled such as broadening education and health care for the poor, particularly government promotion of Islam and elimination of American influence in the government. Another post-revolutionary impact due to the 1979 revolution is that Iran now has one of the most effective and useful family planning programs. Plus, Iranians experience more political freedom and both male and female above the age of 15, are legal registered voters, and vote for members of the government at national, provincial and local levels. But generally, un-happiness and dis-satisfaction is wide spread. Because of this revolution many changes have occurred affecting all citizens and residences of Iran.
After the success of the Revolution, the new theocratic government created a movement called “Literacy Movement Organization” which primary focus is to provide literary courses for the illiterate population through a vast mobilization program. The illiterate population in Iran was previously 52.5% and now has decreased dramatically to only 24% as of 2002. This movement established over 2,000 community learning centers across the country, employed 55,000 instructors, distributed 300 easy-to-read books and manuals, and provided literacy classes, based on Iranian religious principals, to both men and women. 
Although the government is based on religious principals, the minority of the country still has some seat in parliament, such as; Christians, Jewish and Zoroastrian communities. Despite the fact that the government has made an effort to change Iran for the better, minority groups complain of discrimination, particularly those members of the Bahá’í Faith. Large quantities of members in the Bahá’í faith have been executed, imprisoned, deprived of jobs, restricted from being involved in the government and are offered minimal or no educational opportunities.
Despite the fact that the government has made improvements in certain aspects in Iran, political repression, revolutionary guards, and other religious enforcers are problems facing the citizens of this country. Disrespect and violation of Human rights by the theocratic regime are even worst than during the monarchy era.
For woman, the impact of the revolution has been both good and bad. The rate of females enrolling in universities has increase to 66%, plus there are larger numbers of woman in civil service and receive higher education and lastly, woman are a part of the Islamic Consultative Assembly or the Iranian political system. Although the women are entitled to a better education and rights concerned with schooling, the theocratic government practices muslin ideology and according to this, women are treated inferior to men and separation of the sexes is strictly practiced. Women must be dressed conservatively; otherwise one may receive up to 70 lashes or imprisonment for showing anything other than hands and face. To women the Islamic revolution has impacted them in many good ways but has also affected their lives in a very negative manner.
Economy wise, the people still depend on exports on petroleum to support their country and them selves. The price of oil has fallen ¼ since the monarchy. The people of Iran, particularly the young have experienced problems of unemployment as job creation is moving at a slow rate.
Broadening education and health care for the poor, government promotion of Islam and elimination of American influence in the government, effective family planning, political freedom, decreasing numbers of illiteracy are outcomes which have affected and benefited minority groups such as the youth, women, Christians, Jewish and Zoroastrian communities. But inequality to those who practice the Baha’i faith and women, plus political repression, revolutionary guards and other religious enforcers, disrespect and violation of Human rights, and an unsteady and unreliable economy are problems that have affected the people of Iran in negative aspects due to the result of the 1979 Revolution. Overall the 1979 revolution has made a significant impact on certain aspects in the lives of citizens and residences in Iran.
4. JUSTIFICATION OF THE REVOLUTION
Yes, the Islamic revolution was justified. The Iranian rulers today wanted to chase everybody who is a worker that left in the revolution, making them justify to their own authority. The U.S and other Western governments want to take the Iranian revolution one step backward, thus justifying their own opposition to the revolution. As we know the 1979 revolution brought an Islamic republic to power, instead by the clergy and Ayatollah Khomeini, it was the urban poor that lived up the revolution and organized the protests. And Iran’s workers brought the Shah’s regime to its knees. Some methods the Iranians used to impeach the shah was done by very violent manner and protests among the people. Also demonstrations and public awareness were main methods the Iranians used. I don’t think they should have protested in a violent manner by killing innocent people.
5. BRINTON CRANES ANATOMY OF A REVOLUTION:
The Iranian revolution fits into Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution in certain aspects. In stage 1: symptoms; In the Iranian revolution, the middle or working class is the initial members of society that express it’s concerns with the government, specifically concerns dealing with economic restraints. The government is also ineffective and unable to deal with the problems of the people and is also very inept and corrupt. Intellectuals such as Anti-Shah groups, students and religious leaders joined the opposition against the government. All of these are symptoms in Brinton Crane’ anatomy of a revolution, meaning that stage 1 fits into his anatomy.
For Stage 2 the middle class rise up against the government and have violent out breaks and continue to protest and demonstrate aggressively. At this stage many climactic battles begin to take place such as the black Friday, the first major demonstration and the Abadan Arson attack. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his party could be considered the new government although they run under theocratic principals, and of course, the government is overwhelmed with problems both financially and drafting the new constitution instead of the 1906 constitution of Iran is also a difficult task. Indeed this stage fits into Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a Revolution.
In stage 3, there is no political left and the moderates are still in power. There is still violence as the shah is not yet completely thrown out of the government. Currently the revolution and country is fragile since not all people agree with the theocratic government plus the fact that economic conditions are poor. Basically, most of stage 3 fits into Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution.
The convalescence stage of the revolution, or stage 4, is not quite complete and although the country of Iran does have a ruler; the Iranian government and Iran has not yet completely recovered and returned to normal. Generally, stage 1 and 2 and a bit of stage 3 and 4 fit into Brinton Crane’s anatomy of a revolution while most of stage 3 and 4 do not.
 
BIBLIORAPHY
Web:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Iran
http://www.marxist.com/MiddleEast/iran79.html
 

Saffron Revolution

1. Saffron Revolution was led by saffron robed Buddhist monks with about 100,000 unarmed Burmese protesters filling out the streets of the capital Rangoon. They marched thorough the Rangoon streets demanding freedom for Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel laureate. Monks were out to the streets barefoot; people supported them with water, flowers and balm for their feet.
2. This revolution is similar to other revolutions because it is also a cry for more freedom, and a change towards a democratic system. Out of all the revolutions studied, it is probably closest to the Philippines’s People Power revolution. In fact, it was influenced by that very revolution. It is closer to the People Power Revolution as opposed to the American Revolution or the French Revolution because both People Power and the Saffron Revolution have handled things with a more ‘modern’ approach. Also they were both under some sort of a dictatorship government. The people of Burma also try to use non violent protests to change the government. Unlike some countries, pressures from the western world to not hammer Burma as did with the Philippines. No matter how much the western world tries to make sanctions against Burma, they always have close allies in the Asian region (especially China and India). Therefore it makes this revolution a harder puzzle to solve than most of the other revolutions.
3. The Saffron rev. is an on-going revolution. The protests still go on but many have resulted in injury, deaths and imprisonment caused by the military police shooting unarmed protesters. This could mean that many may have to pay the price in order for Burma to become a democratic nation. Also, the junta seems to be in strong command, while the democracy movement is weak. This could mean that democracy might not be established in the immediate future. And even if it is there are no certain signs of a good leader that can lead the democratic Burma well, nor any political leaders that can help lead Burma to that state.
4. For the people of Burma the Saffron Revolution was a very necessary event. The military government have been limiting and hurting the Burmese people and have been violating their human rights, as seen in the 1989 massacre. Non-violence is a better method than violent revolutions but it is not enough to change the current government. Continuation of these protests may cause more tensions with the government as the government does not allow protests against their government. What needs to be done in order for this revolution to succeed is that more foreign help needs to be gained. China and other allies must realize what the Burmese government is doing and they must, along with the rest of the world, help aid Burma in order for it to become a free country.
5. Yes, the Saffron Revolution fits Brinton Crane’s Anatomy of revolutions. The phase ‘symptoms’ is clearly shown when the Burmese started to get mad over the sudden rise of fuel prices. The government has been showing clear violations of human rights and the intellectuals (political activists, students, monks etc.) start to speak out against the government. For ‘the rising fever’ the people of Burma have established a Democratic movement but it is shown to be weak and unsuccessful. The Saffron Revolution is still in the stage of ‘crisis’. A lot of violence has been displayed in recent protests. Economic conditions of Burma are poor and the government is not run properly.
Bibliography
“2007 Burmese anti-government protests” 25 Jan 2008 29 Jan 2008
"The Saffron Revolution." The Economist 27 Sep 2007 18 Jan 2008 <
“The Saffron Revolution” The Washington Times 25 Jan 2008 29 Jan 2008

Tiananmen Square Protests of 1989

What methods did the group(s) use to express their frustrations and ultimately lead to a revolution?
The people of China at first held in their frustrations until the death of Secretary general Hu Yaobang, the students believed their government to be corrupted, the students wanted to end the Communist reign, and they wanted democracy, more personal freedoms. Because of Hu Yaobang’s death and the frustrations, the students gathered at Tiananmen square to mourn for Hu Yaobang and to demonstrate against the government. This was how the Chinese students held in and expressed their frustrations to the Communist government. This would ultimately lead to the Tiananmen protests. This was a bold act demonstrating against the strict and violent Communist government.
 
 How is your revolution similar and/or different to one of the revolutions previously studied?
 
 The similarities between People Power revolution and the Tiananmen square protests is the fact that both were demonstrated peacefully with no violence from the protesters and that both revolutions received a lot of media attention. It is different from People Power because the government reacted violently to the protesters, deaths occurred and the people failed to change the government’s policy. The protestors themselves were violent by destroying government property and by blocking roads with buses to stop the advance of Chinese soldiers. They failed to put an influence on the world, they failed to change what they hated.
 
What was the eventual outcome of the revolution, and did the nation/people become better due to the revolution?
 
The outcome of the revolution was that nothing changed in the government’s policy, people were killed. Damaged the reputation of the PRC in the West, protests continued on large scale around the country. The country became under the rule of Martial Law on May 20th. The Chinese government also equipped its police and armed forces with more adequate riot control weapons so that if a riot such as Tiananmen is to happen again, there will be fewer casualties for both sides. The European Union and the US both announced an arms embargo on China to prevent the government from committing violent acts again such as the incident at Tian Anmen Square. Also now in the country, there is a lot of censorship involving Tiananmen. As the years passed though, the people were given more personal freedoms, but not as much as the protestors at Tiananmen had fought for.
Was the revolution justified? Would other methods would have worked?
The revolution was not justified, the people protested nonviolently and the governments reacted violently. Eventually though the people did start destroying government property such as public buses to block the military’s path. So both sides of the conflict did not use the justified methods to solve the issue. The protestors could of simply did as the did in People Power and protect themselves by forming a human wall. The soldiers wouldn’t have dared attacked or shoot any of them, though in the real situation, the protestors did destroy government property which gave the soldiers the slightest reason to fire at the crowd.


Briefly state whether or not your revolution follows Crane Brinton’s stages of revolution?  
The revolution briefly follows the anatomy because the symptoms of the revolution, the problems and inequality the people face isn’t over bearing but is enough to cause anger amongst the common people. It follows the anatomy of Rising Fever because the protests start to begin and escalates. Though no new government was formed, there was a call for democracy. Phase 3, crisis, fits in because of the amount of violence that erupts when soldiers start firing upon the crowd of protestors. The revolution became fragile and was broken apart. For Convalescence, the protests still continued through the country and in Chinese communities around the world supporting the protestors, but the life in the country beings to returns to normal and several student leaders were arrested or killed after the protests. It took several years for China to resume to normal life.
        "Tiananmen Square." 18:40, 15 January 2008 29 january 2008 .   "Tiananmen Square." 18:40, 15 January 2008 29 january 2008 . 
   
    
    
     
       
   
 

The Singing Revolution

1.) In this revolution, the people from the Baltic States used non-violent methods to express their frustrations. It started in Estonia at summer time on summer 1987, when over 10,000 Estonians gathered in the Tallinn Song Festival Grounds each night and sang national songs of their country which were forbidden by the rules in the Soviet. Why they only sang songs to protest was because in the Baltic States singing was a strong uniting force, after World War II when the Soviet Russians invasion. When the People from Lithuania and Latvia joined forces, around two million people joined their hands together and formed a long human chain which was over 600 kilometers long. This occurred in August 23 1989, called the Baltic way which became the peak of the Singing Revolution. 2.) Not only the Singing Revolution is similar to the People Power Revolution by being a non-violent revolution, there are other parts of the events that are similar. In the People Power Revolution, there was an event where there was army tanks sent to stop the revolution, although it was stopped from the people protesting against the government but without any blood shed. Same in the Singing Revolution, there were tanks sent from Soviet Russia to stop the people of the Baltic States but was also stopped like in the People Power revolution.
3.) The eventual outcome of the Singing revolution was that on 20th August 1991 Estonian politicians declared the nation’s independence even as Soviet tanks were rolling through the countryside to quell the movement. Estonia became better due to the revolution because they became free from Soviet Union.
4.) I believe that this revolution was justified, because the people from the Baltic States had the right to be free. They didn’t have to be conquered by Russia forever, and they have their own pride for their country. They already suffered from World War II when they were first invaded by the Russians. I do not think there are other methods that would have worked to make this revolution better than it already was. Songs already kept the Baltic States united, and because of that in the end it made the success to the Singing Revolution.
5.) The Singing Revolution doesn’t follow Crane Brinton’s Stages of Revolution because in Symptoms it says the middle class loudly expresses its anger but in the Singing Revolution, they were more of a peace-loving people. In the Rising Fever, it says that the uprising culminates in a climatic battle, and the moderates, or political center then forms a new government but there weren’t any climatic battles and no new government was formed in the Singing Revolution. In Crisis, it says that there is a lot of violence and the revolution is fragile but the Singing revolution was a bloodless and peaceful revolution and it wasn’t fragile because nearly 300,000 of people had joined and supported it. Lastly, in Convalescence, it says that the moderates are generally granted amnesty while the radicals are punished but in the Singing Revolution, there weren’t any moderates and radicals.
 
Bilbliography
 
Web Page:
"Singing Revolution." Wikipedia. 28 Jan 2008 .  
 "The Sound of Freedom...." Estonian Singing Revolution/ Tallinn Life . 28 Jan 2008 .

Russian Revolution

1. What methods did the groups use to express their frustrations and ultimately lead to a revolution?
The Russian people, as a whole, wanted change and unity from the Tsarists’ government. At the beginning of the first Great War (World War I), the Russian people felt united for one common cause (to attack the Germans). Later this patriotic feeling turned to be mutiny and eventually led to defection. Before the February and October revolution, protests, strikes, public disorder, labour riots, violence that targeted Tsarists regimes, Mutinies during WWI, and crime were happening all around the country, especially in St. Petersburg (newly named Petrograd). In Petrograd during February 23, 1917 ordinary women and men from the food queues started a demonstration. Thousands of female textile workers walked out of their factories to protest about the shortage of bread. Insurgent soldiers and police officers soon abandoned the Tsar and joined the demonstrators. Because of this mass scale act of defiance in the capital, Tsar Nicholas surrendered on March 2nd 1917. That is what the Russians did to express their anger.
2. How is your revolution similar and/or different to one of the revolutions you studied?
The Russian Revolution (1917) was very similar to the French Revolution (1789) in various ways. The Russian Revolution was also incredibly different from the French Revolution. Some of the similarities consisted of; the over throwing of the king, the bankruptcy of the government, and the over throwing of the new moderate government. Differences between these revolutions were things like; the types of government at the end of the revolution and causes that sparked the government’s bankruptcy. One of the similarities between these revolutions was the kings being overthrown by the citizens of the country. In France, King Louis XVI was overthrown by the citizens of France. In Russia, Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown by the citizens of Russia. They are similar because both kings got over thrown by the citizens of the country. King Louis XVI was over thrown because masses on the street started taking place. In Russia, violent demonstrations and riots on the roads also took place, overthrowing Tsar Nicholas II. The second similarity between these two revolutions is what started to anger the majority of the people. In France, the government started to become bankrupt, causing the citizens to riot against King Louis XVI. In Russia, the government also became bankrupt, angering the public. This caused them to take action against Tsar Nicholas II. The similarity here is that both revolutions started because both governments became bankrupt. Russia became bankrupt because of expenses on World War I and the Russo-Japan war. France became bankrupt because Louis XVI spent the governments money carelessly. The last similarity between the French and Russian revolution is that both county’s revolt had the new moderate government, the people that over threw the king, over thrown. In France, the national assembly came to power but then was over thrown by the Jacobins (a French party). In Russia, this also happened except for that when Russia over threw the King, they created a provisional government. When the provisional government was in place, the Bolshevik (a Russian party lead by Lenin) over threw that government and established the Soviet Union. These revolts are similar because both countries’ new moderate government was overthrown by a party.A difference between these revolts was the type of government that was established when the revolution was finished. In France, democracy was the new type of government whilst Russia had a dictator like leader. These types of governments are different because democracy is when masses vote on a decision that is to be made. Dictatorship is when a leader makes all the decisions for the people. The last difference between these two revolutions was what created bankruptcy in the monarchy government. As I said before, the French government’s bankruptcy ignited because of King Louis XVI’s carless spending. In Russia, the bankruptcy started because of the money used to pay for World War I’s expenses. These revolutions are different because one government spent the money carelessly and one over spent on World War I.
Those are just some of the similarities and differences between the Russian and French revolutions.

3. What was the eventual outcome of the revolution, and did the nation/people become better due to the revolution?
In this Russian revolution, it was spilt in to two parts. The February Revolution (the deposition of Tsar Nicholas II) and the October revolution (the expulsion of the Provisional government).
February Revolution
The eventual outcome of this revolution was that Tsar Nicholas II was overthrown and the Provisional government was established. Alexander Kerensky was the leader of the Provisional government. He promoted freedom of speech, allowed the return of some political parties, released thousands of political prisoners, and tried to muster up a new offensive. But the soldiers, workers, and peasants who favoured the Petrograd Soviets (Russian Party) say that they achieved nothing from the revolution. Citizens did not feel so comfortable about the revolt because World War I was still on-going. This revolution was not going well for the people. Soldiers were defecting, food was short, and supplies were scarce because of the low economy. Because of this February revolution, freedom was achieved, although not much was done about the workers. Political parties were allowed to return. This paved the way for the next revolution between the Bolsheviks (a socialist Russian party) and Kerensky. The nation was not better due to this revolution.
October Revolution
After the October revolution, the short lived Provisional government was soon replaced by the Soviets (or the Bolsheviks). The Soviets achieved power in Russia, although they had many enemies as well. After the revolution, Russia went into civil war against the Whites, or the Green army. The war brought death and suffering to millions of Russians regardless of their political background. I do not believe that the nation/people became better immediately because Russia was now facing to major wars. But after the civil and the World War I, Russia’s union benefited the workers, and peasants of Russia. In conclusion, the nation did become better after this October revolution.

4. Was the revolution justified? Would other methods have worked?
I believe that the revolution was justified because Czar Nicholas II was inept of his imperial duties to his country. He led Russia to lose a major war at the time the Russo-Japan war. During World War I, millions of Russian soldiers and people died. People hated Nicholas’s autocratic way of rule and a countless of Russians believed in social change. People knew the Tsar’s new offensives would not work. Food and supplies were already scarce when the Tsar was in place. Other methods wouldn’t have worked because peaceful attempts already have been crushed, just like the 1905 bloody Sunday massacre. Imperial Guards have killed peaceful protesters petitioning the resignation of Tsar Nicholas II. Force was needed to change how things worked in Russia.
5. Briefly state whether or not your revolution follows Crane Brinton’s Stages of Revolution.
After analyzing the Russian revolution in great detail, I have noticed that this revolution fits in Brinton Crane’s Framework of a Revolution. This fits into the framework for various reasons. Most stages of Brinton’s Anatomy can relate several events from the Russian revolution. In the beginning of the revolution, the Russian middle class rioted on the streets. Further into the revolution, the people over threw Tsar Nicholas II and create a provisional government. Near to the end of the revolution, the moderate government (the provisional government) was overthrown by a Russian party, called the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks then established a new dictatorship. At the end of the revolution, Vladimir Lenin (leader of the Bolshevik party) came to power.
Stage 1: Symptoms
“The middle class loudly expresses its anger over economic restraints placed upon it by the government. While these restrictions are not overbearing, they are enough to cause extreme anger.”
This relates to the Russian revolution because the middle class citizens of Russia started to riot on the streets, expressing their anger. This happened because of the economic restraints that they were receiving from the government (ex. increased taxes). This was because Nicholas II’s government had very little money due to the expenses spent on World War I.
“The government is ineffective and is unable to effectively manage the country. This could be due to an inept leader or a chronic money shortage within the government.”
As I mentioned before, the government of Russia had a chronic money shortage because they had to pay for all the bills for World War I. Because of this, the government became ineffective on managing the country. Thus, they increased the taxes which angered the citizens of Russia.
“Eventually, the ruling party is deserted by the intellectuals, who also speak out against the government.”
Since the increased taxes took place, it not only taxed the middle class but, also the wealthy intellectuals. This angered the intellectuals, causing them to also speak out against the government.
Stage 2: Rising Fever
“This is the escalation of the anger felt by the middle class. The people rise up against the government.”
This relates to the Russian revolt because when the citizens of Russia got more angry, they over threw the Tsar Nicholas II.
“The moderates, or political center, then form a new government.”
After the moderates over threw the Tsar of Russia, they created a new provisional government.
Stage 3: Crisis
“The revolution reaches a head when the moderates, inept at the job of ruling a country, are forcibly and violently removed from power by the radicals or the political left”
When the moderates had the provisional government in place, which was ineffective at the job of ruling the country, the Bolsheviks (a Russian party lead by Vladamir Lenin) overthrew them and created the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was a dictatorship like leadership.
“The revolution is fragile because popular support is needed and economic conditions are poor”
The Bolshevik party was the majority compared to the Mensheviks but they were still pretty small compared to the whole Russian population. Failed attempts at power have driven people to disbelief in the Bolshevik faith.
Stage 4: Convalescence
“A strong ruler comes to power and the new moderate government begins the process of stabilizing the county”
Vladamir Lenin, leader of the Bolsheviks, was the strong ruler that came to power. He and his party made a dictatorship like leadership that ruled the entire country of Russia.
“Life in the country begins to return to normal”
After the civil war in Russia, Lenin came to power and the country was on its way to recovery. Because several of the events of the Russian revolution fits into Crane's anatomy, I strongly believe that this revolution fits very well into Brinton Crane's anatomy of a revolution.
Bibliography
Allan, Tony. The Russian Revolution. London: Heinemann, 2002. Jones, Andrew. "Russian Revolution (1917)."
Spark notes. 30 January, 2008. Spark note. 30 Jan 2008 http://www.sparknotes.com/history/european/russianrev/.
Strickler, James. Russia of the Tsars. San Diego: Lucent Books, 1998.

Sharpeville Massacre

1.) On March 21, approximately 7000 people met in the town of Sharpeville at a local police station to rebel against the pass laws which limited the movement of non white humans (African Americans). The people who rebelled used many different methods to express their frustration. One of the important methods used was when they all offered themselves to be arrested for not carrying their passbooks at the present moment. The PAC used different types of methods to attract other African Americans to rebel. Some of these methods include cutting the telephone lines, distribution of pamphlets informing the on goers about not going to work, and the coercion of bus drivers.
2.) This revolution is not similar to an entire revolution but only to a part of the American Revolution, the Boston Massacre. The Boston Massacre occurred when a group of civilians threw snowballs at a group of soldiers to protest against the stamp act, and a few other acts that were declared at that time. More and more people joined and after an approximate crowd of 350 surrounding the soldiers they loaded their muskets. The soldiers fired and three civilians were killed during the firing and 2 died after the event. The captain claimed that he did not yell fire because he was standing in front of the guns, and claimed that the audience where the ones who shouted “Fire”. At the massacre of Sharpeville once again the protesting crowd grew over time but instead of throwing snowballs at the soldiers they threw rocks at the policemen. The “inexperienced” policeman opened fire. Just like the captain at The Boston Massacre, the captain at The Sharpeville massacre claimed that he did not tell his troops to “Fire” and that he would not have done so.
3.) During the Sharpeville massacre 69 people were killed including 10 children, 8 women along with more than 180 people being injured including 19 children, and 31 women. The massacre created riots, protests, marches, and strikes during the following week. The United Nation followed the protests and marches with international protest including condemnation. On 1960 the UN passed Resolution 134. Africa took a turning point and found that it became isolated from the rest of the world. The PAC and the ANC were banned, as they changed from a passive resistance to an armed resistance.
4.) I believe that the people who rebelled against the pass laws, in the Sharpeville massacre had the right to act against what they didn’t believe in because the pass laws were limiting who they were since berth. If the people of Africa had not rebelled they would probably be suffering a lot more than they are now. I think that they should not have resorted to throwing rocks at the policemen but they should have resorted to more peaceful manners by just marching through the streets even if to succeed they had had to march for more than a day without stopping.
5.) The Sharpeville massacre did follow the basic outline that Briton Crane had made. The African Americans who were rebelling “Loudly expressed its anger over economic restraints placed upon by the government” by doing small things like refusing to go to work, and cutting the telephone lines. The government in Africa was not able to handle the people and more and more African American start to gather. During “The Rising Fever” the people start to march in a group of 5000 to 7000 people down the streets, and start throwing rocks at the policemen. During “Crisis” the policemen opened fire and shot over 60 people, where most were shot at the back while running away. I believe that there was no Covalence period because things got a lot worse after the revolution.
Bibliography:
"Sharpeville massacre." Wikipedia. 18 Jan 2008. Wikipedia Foundation Inc.. 27 Jan 2008 . " Boston Massacre." Wikipedia. 27 Jan 2008. Wikipedia Foundation Inc.. 27 Jan 2008 . 
Corporation, British Broadcasting. "On This Day 21 March." BBC. 12 March 1960. British Broadcasting Corporation. 27 Jan 2008 .