Now that the dust has settled, was the Arab Spring a mistake?

>>53967488
No.

>>53967488
no, not that it changed much for the better (for the arabs).

>>53967488
Wasn't a lot of that stuff in some countries muslims wanting to establish themselves as the rulers of an area? Like Egypt, those Muslim Brotherhood guys. The guy they elected was crazy and eventually arrested.

yes
secular dictatorship is the best system for MENA

>>53967563
Hello Jamal.

>>53967732
In was a failure for Egypt
It was a failure for Libya
It was a failure for Syria
It was a success for Tunisia
It was a success for Saudi Arabia
It was a success in Kuwait
It was a success in Oman

You have to look at the big picture

>kick out autocratic rulers
>vote in party that worships book that says they should be autocratic rulers

The middle east literally can't into democracy. Every time they have free elections they end up voting in a party that then bans free elections

>>53967851
>It was a success for Saudi Arabia
>It was a success in Kuwait
>It was a success in Oman
???

>>53967851
>success for Saudi Arabia
there was no revolution/protests were cracked down in Saudia Arabia
>success in Kuwait
there was no revolution/protests were cracked down in Kuwait
>success in Oman
there was no revolution/protests were cracked down in Oman
u wot nigga

>>53968269
>>53968445
He is right tho, they have less competition in oil exports now.

>>53967851
Yeah but look at Europe. You're taking the point of view of a middle easterner, hence, Jamal.

>>53967712

Egyptians are retarded though, they literally don't know how to have a democracy.

>>53967488
It failed, by the idea was right

>>53967488
Probably the worst idea the USA ever had. They condemned the middle east and Europe

>>53970382
>He is right tho, they have less competition in oil exports now.

Saudi Arabia is bankrupting itself in an attempt to drive unconventional oil production out of business.

>>53967488
>was the Arab Spring a mistake?

Yes
e
s

>>53967488
Anything with Arabs is a mistake

>>53968027
that is democracy. It is undemocratic to restrict the people from achieving what they want.

If the West could stay out of rest of the world, everyone would fix their problems one way or another.

I didn't really get the "Arab Spring". Middle East still seems like a shithole to me. As far as I can tell, Arab Spring was just Occupy Wall Street for the middle east and nothing changed, Arabs are still miserable 3rd world.

Is the USA the only nation in history with a truly successful revolution?

>>53977445
It's also technically democratic if 51% decide to kill the other 49%, but it's not "state of law"

>>53967488
Absolutely

>>53967488
no
letting in a bunch of refugees was a mistake. Killing/deposing dictators is never a mistake though

File: 1451691587081.png (150KB, 426x407px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 426x407px

>>53977594
>Is the USA the only nation in history with a truly successful revolution?

>>53977724
well, not necessarily. Majority's will isn't always people's will.
People's will means, in a democratic system, the will of the group that holds "power politique".
So %40 of the people can direct "people's will", while %49,5 might not.
If people's will dictates Sharia, then "let it be", you must say, if you believe yourself to be democratic.

>>53977594
>"the American Revolution is the only revolution that still resonates."
- Christopher Hitchens

>>53977862
he has a point though

who else is there? france? russia?

>>53977940
That's why it's important to have a separation of church and state as one of the first things established in a democratic state. The Middle East is too stupid to do this however

>>53977862

Its a real question. I can't think of one. Europeans like to talk about the "French Revolution" but ultimately that was just a few decades of horribly bloody shit followed by....another monarch. It kind of defeats the purpose of having a revolution if you take shit and replace it with some other shit. Arabs may have changed their government but if the Middle East is still a shithole.

By truly successful I mean an oppressed people forcibly throwing off an oppressive government (monarch, dictator etc) and establishing a successful and prosperous Republic that manages to stand for at least another 200 years afterward. Or even 100 years. USA did this, but I can't think of any other nation that has. Then again I am not up on more ancient history.

>>53978034
>islam
>church
pick one

>>53978130
You know what I mean. A wall between religion and government

>>53978034
You jumped into the conclusion that the church and state must be seperate. That is just your own version of ideal state.
A state/government might very well be democratic without being secular/laic. Besides, Islam itself dictates the choosing of the leader to be elected, however for lifetime. So sharia=!undemocratic

>>53978187
yeah well that won't happen
everything belongs to allah

>>53977805
Killing dictator who had bringed his country to highest HDI in Africa was mistake from humanitarian point of view. Not mistake from point of view of USA worldwide politics ofc.

I actually kinda like the whole ISIS thing. Sure it has ruined a bunch of history and caused a refugee and humanitarian crisis and killed hundreds of thousands of people, but they're inevitably going to lose. Better that we should rip the band aid off now and kill these fuckers than let them fester into the future and end up in a worse spot.

>>53978244
>Besides, Islam itself dictates the choosing of the leader to be elected, however for lifetime.
fuck, I fucked up, tried to form two sentences that meant the same thing:D
I meant, Islam dictates that the ruler must be elected. For life time.

>>53978385
>tips make america great hat

>>53977104
>in an attempt to drive unconventional oil production out of business.

This is what /pol/'s hivemind believes.

Btw, hang tight there Canada, it's all gonna be ok.

>>53978066
>I have no knowledge of something yet i feel the need to speak

america in a sentence.

also , your criterias are shit. Even if some revolutions doesn't match the it doesn't mean they 'failed'.

>>53978244
>>53978495

>still doesn't understand the fundamental requirement of a stable, healthy society to have a separation of religion and state
No wonder why you people have incredibly weak state institutions and can never get on your feet. We should have let the British/Ottomans/French keep you.

>>53978304
Despotic regime apologist. Libya was breaking apart under Gaddafi and unemployment was at 30%. The government opened fire on protesters. But this oil rich country had a high HDI so I should be sad this dictator scum is dead. No thanks.

>>53978385
Well isis are targetting Yazidis, who are often blonde and blue eye.
So it's kind of a race war too and ur supporting arabs u americuck

File: 1446559416014.png (327KB, 495x498px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 495x498px

>>53977594
>Is the USA the only nation in history with a truly successful revolution?

>>53978669
Ah, you are making assumptions, nice.
I defend laicism myself, but that doesn't mean to be democratic you also have to be laic. It isn't contradictory.

>>53978715
>So it's kind of a race war
is this a meme or do you believe that?

>>53978715
of course Argentina has to make everything about race. ISIS is going to lose, everybody realizes this because they've united the world against them. Hopefully their example will pose as an example of religious extremism in the ME and ultimate lead to more stability.

>>53978757
prove him wrong

>>53978646

Tell me what you think a successful criteria should be.

Because what France and Russia and countless African/Arab "revolutions" did is take one shit system...and replace it with more shit. That's not a "revolution" that is a "regime change".

The USA overthrew a monarchy and replaced it with a stable Republic. Not a fragile shit republic that then fell to the next monarch lined up. A real Republic that would become one of the most prosperous nations on Earth. I am sure other revolutions fit the bill but it seems that far far far more just fall flat on their face.

>>53978916
France is now a Republic. Who cares that they turned into a monarchy again at some point between the French Revolution and now?

>>53978669

UK, Liechtenstein, Norway, and many other successful nations don't have a separation of religion and state. How are you defining healthy and stable? Vatican City is pretty stable and they are an outright pure theocracy.

File: 1451451821290.jpg (20KB, 262x312px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 262x312px

>>53978816
sure you can have people vote in a religious nation. It's just never going to be as healthy or stable as a secular country.

>>53979093
stability is for cucks

>>53978916
The objective of a revolution is not to simply depose a shit monarch to instore a grorius republic. Revolutions have ideals behind them and/or economic objectives

id consider a revolution successful if:

The ideals motivating it are applied in the country afterward (directly or not)

The forces in presence managed a better standard of living then pre revolution wise

The pre revolution government was forced to change it's law/constitution/ government in favor of the revs


By those criterias, the french, the blosheviks, the post 1989 revolutions and all the revolts in america were successful and im sure i forgot many more

>>53978990

Because it meant their actual revolution failed. Like, maybe one day the Middle East won't be a shithole. Doesn't mean we should credit the Arab spring.

French "revolution" took down the monarchy, yes. It also caused untold amounts of genocide and murder of men, women, and children and cultural destruction for anyone who didn't support them (look up War in the Vendee for example). The "republic" founded lasted 12 years. Then there was 65 years of monarchs. That is a "regime change", no different than what has happened in countless other dictatorships and monarchies throughout history. Even now the current French Republic dates til 1958.

Not like the US Revolution at all. The US Revolution simply has never been replicated. I don't know how we did it but we did.

>>53979075
Youre correct, our state and state religion are heavily interwined. The ruling monarch is the head of the faith and the archbishops have seats in our upper parliament

>>53979502
Your government is stupid though. You have a make believe constitution you only pretend exists

>>53967488
Yes. So far, the biggest mistake of 21st century so far.

>>53968269
exactly my thoughts. the wahhabites in saudi arabia laugh at the thought of a revolution.

>>53978066
things sometimes have to get worse before they can get better again.

the french revolution was to europe like a fever is to the body.

yes, you may feel worse at the beginning but its still better than letting the virus work undisturbed.

File: 1389798910285.jpg (11KB, 250x247px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 250x247px

>>53967488
at least that guy is white now

>>53978896
>in the ME and ultimate lead to more stability

you are mistaking the symptom for the cause. the cause for the instability in the middle east is the massive overpopulation, which wont be fixed anytime soon.

>>53979491
Well according to scripture, only the Antichrist will be able to bring peace in the Middle East.

Supposing that it is all true, it would be quite the moral conundrum. Should one support the son the Satan if he is the one bringing peace and prosperity? Or is it better to ensure complete nutjobs of power so that a perpetual conflict is guaranteed, therefore bringing security to the rest of the world?