Political turmoil recently swept Kyrgyzstan, a Central Asian nation which has previously benefited from a non-violent struggle or their own version of People Power or the 'Tulip Revolution'.
This from the Economist (including the picture above), [bold emphasis mine]
``The revolution has thus devoured its children. Yet the uprising itself did not come as a surprise, only perhaps its speed and its bloodiness. Discontent had been simmering since the beginning of the year, after a steep increase in energy prices.
``That was painful in itself and made the nepotism of President Bakiyev and the increasing scale of corruption by senior officials—worse than under the previous leadership—much harder to bear. The uprising in Bishkek was triggered by events the day before in the city of Talas, in the north of the country, where unrest has been concentrated (President Bakiyev is from the south and southerners dominated his administration). Several thousand demonstrators stormed the regional government building and took the governor hostage. He was freed by the police, but the demonstrators later retook the building. The protest then swept through the country, reaching Bishkek the next day.
``Mr Bakiyev made two decisive mistakes. First, he had almost all the country’s opposition leaders arrested by the morning of April 7th, which left the protesting crowds without any sense of direction or moderating influence. The leaders were almost all released later in the day but by then it was too late. Second, he miscalculated by using brutal force to hang on to power, which ultimately made it impossible for him to stay. The police were also clearly outnumbered by protesters.
``Mr Bakiyev disappointed many of his supporters by not living up to his promises of democracy and political reform. He failed to curb corruption, mismanaged the economy, placed some of his numerous relatives in important positions and overall, became more authoritarian than the predecessor he helped to oust.
``On the eve of the fifth anniversary of the Tulip revolution, on March 23rd, he declared that Western-style democracy, a system based on elections and individual human rights, might not be suitable for Kyrgyzstan (which once styled itself Central Asia’s Switzerland, a tolerant, mountainous place). He thought “consultative democracy”—ie, talking to local bigwigs—would be more in line with the country’s traditions.
This from the Economist (including the picture above), [bold emphasis mine]
``The revolution has thus devoured its children. Yet the uprising itself did not come as a surprise, only perhaps its speed and its bloodiness. Discontent had been simmering since the beginning of the year, after a steep increase in energy prices.
``That was painful in itself and made the nepotism of President Bakiyev and the increasing scale of corruption by senior officials—worse than under the previous leadership—much harder to bear. The uprising in Bishkek was triggered by events the day before in the city of Talas, in the north of the country, where unrest has been concentrated (President Bakiyev is from the south and southerners dominated his administration). Several thousand demonstrators stormed the regional government building and took the governor hostage. He was freed by the police, but the demonstrators later retook the building. The protest then swept through the country, reaching Bishkek the next day.
``Mr Bakiyev made two decisive mistakes. First, he had almost all the country’s opposition leaders arrested by the morning of April 7th, which left the protesting crowds without any sense of direction or moderating influence. The leaders were almost all released later in the day but by then it was too late. Second, he miscalculated by using brutal force to hang on to power, which ultimately made it impossible for him to stay. The police were also clearly outnumbered by protesters.
``Mr Bakiyev disappointed many of his supporters by not living up to his promises of democracy and political reform. He failed to curb corruption, mismanaged the economy, placed some of his numerous relatives in important positions and overall, became more authoritarian than the predecessor he helped to oust.
``On the eve of the fifth anniversary of the Tulip revolution, on March 23rd, he declared that Western-style democracy, a system based on elections and individual human rights, might not be suitable for Kyrgyzstan (which once styled itself Central Asia’s Switzerland, a tolerant, mountainous place). He thought “consultative democracy”—ie, talking to local bigwigs—would be more in line with the country’s traditions.
More pictures of the mayhem as seen above can be found here and here.
A blog account of the violence here, (pointer for the pictures and the blog from Zero Hedge)
``Looting and arson of retail outlets and VIP homes continues in Bishkek. A neighborhood housing foreign diplomats has been ransacked, as have the homes of the deposed prime minister and the president's son. The national art museum is said to have been looted. City police have successfully defended their headquarters against an angry mob of several thousand. Shots have been heard throughout the city through all of last night and all day long today. As in 2005, the main culprits seem to be poor, recent arrivals to the city as well as village dwellers who traveled into town overnight on buses or other commandeered vehicles, taking advantage of the political chaos and police disorganization to grab whatever they can, including weapons. Some of the looters are said to be moving from neighborhood to neighborhood in organized fashion, on buses, en masse. They are being opposed by several thousand spontaneously organized, partially-armed civilian volunteer militia (identified by red, blue, or white armbands) and shopkeepers defending their property as well as any police willing and able to remain on duty. Firefights between looters and defenders are occurring as frequently as several times per hour."
Some apparent lessons from the above:
-High energy prices can serve as trigger for an upheaval, where political malcontent has already been brewing
-Like most political promises, they have been unfulfilled
-Promises of "change" only meant a "change" of the leadership and not a change in the system.
-The political direction of applied "changes" has been for the worst and only benefited the ruling class.
-The blind addiction to power has made her leaders miscalculate in dealing with the unrest:
one, by arresting political leaders (in order to quell opposition) that left the crowd unruly and without avenues for compromises, which seemed to have sparked the violence, and
two, using brute force to hang onto power which further fueled discontent.
-Peaceful revolutions or people power can turn violent
-A political collapse leads to crowd manipulation by demagogues.
As John (Lord) Acton once said,
“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favorable presumption that they did not wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way against holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority.”
A blog account of the violence here, (pointer for the pictures and the blog from Zero Hedge)
``Looting and arson of retail outlets and VIP homes continues in Bishkek. A neighborhood housing foreign diplomats has been ransacked, as have the homes of the deposed prime minister and the president's son. The national art museum is said to have been looted. City police have successfully defended their headquarters against an angry mob of several thousand. Shots have been heard throughout the city through all of last night and all day long today. As in 2005, the main culprits seem to be poor, recent arrivals to the city as well as village dwellers who traveled into town overnight on buses or other commandeered vehicles, taking advantage of the political chaos and police disorganization to grab whatever they can, including weapons. Some of the looters are said to be moving from neighborhood to neighborhood in organized fashion, on buses, en masse. They are being opposed by several thousand spontaneously organized, partially-armed civilian volunteer militia (identified by red, blue, or white armbands) and shopkeepers defending their property as well as any police willing and able to remain on duty. Firefights between looters and defenders are occurring as frequently as several times per hour."
Some apparent lessons from the above:
-High energy prices can serve as trigger for an upheaval, where political malcontent has already been brewing
-Like most political promises, they have been unfulfilled
-Promises of "change" only meant a "change" of the leadership and not a change in the system.
-The political direction of applied "changes" has been for the worst and only benefited the ruling class.
-The blind addiction to power has made her leaders miscalculate in dealing with the unrest:
one, by arresting political leaders (in order to quell opposition) that left the crowd unruly and without avenues for compromises, which seemed to have sparked the violence, and
two, using brute force to hang onto power which further fueled discontent.
-Peaceful revolutions or people power can turn violent
-A political collapse leads to crowd manipulation by demagogues.
As John (Lord) Acton once said,
“I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favorable presumption that they did not wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way against holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority.”
For Filipinos obsessed or fixated with popularity based "changes" from the upcoming elections. Heed these lessons.
