Arab Spring? Sorry, don’t make me laugh.
A lot of western idealists liked to believe that this was a grassroots movement in favour of democracy.
In retrospect, it is clear that it was mostly fuelled by forces wishing to enforce islamic theocracy.
I disagree. There are many people who would like to enjoy more rights, the ability to vote or drive, freedom from oppression or to engage in entertainment such as music, dancing, alcohol or other liberties. Some also want democracy, but more would settle for greater freedom.
The Arab Spring did not generally result in more democracy, of course. But there was a change of government in Tunisia. and some other governments relaxed some of the things mentioned above a little, fearful of popular discontent. It was a modest success in some countries.
The question was not whether it resulted in the desired change …
I am often reminded of the song by The Who, Won’t Get Fooled Again.
But it did catalyze a movement across a region.
Different people desire different things, and plenty of people profess to be happy with religious theocracy or authoritarian rule (despite my beliefs or promoters of Western foreign policy). I doubt the modest effects of Arab Spring pleased many people.
Those who wanted democracy did not get it, but did get some reforms in some countries. Those who like strict religious dogma, in some countries, saw a bit of relaxation in some social or economic areas and sometimes more political accountability. There was a bit of a counter reaction towards more control, especially over social media.
This ties in a bit with a recent thread on what obligation one has to improve the bad situation in the country they live in, versus just trying to move out and leave the mess to the less mobile.
ISTM it’s pretty clear that a LOT of people would rather live under political regimes or in societies different than the one they do. And it’s also clear to me that change in any society is largely controlled by the speed of the most change-resistant members of that society. Whether that’s vested interests = the current winners, or more about the preferences of the lumpenproletariat.
Which leads me to conclude that one of the most fundamental human rights is to not only emigrate, but to be allowed to immigrate to the situation of your choice.
We improve total human existence by letting people vote with their feet and letting the bad places become depopulated over time.
I agree. But democracy is not as popular everywhere as Westerners think.
Nice idea, but most countries don’t want most other people. Within a country like the US you have options to move elsewhere, but permanently moving elsewhere (as opposed to a tourist visit) is, for the vast majority of people, difficult to impossible.
I’ve seen some historians question this narrative lately. For a few reasons:
That sort of suicide for faith was at the time more of a virtue in Roman culture than Jewish culture, where it would have been frowned upon
Archeological evidence from Masada does not support a mass suicide
The only source telling us the story is Josephus. Who may have been trying to ingratiate himself with the Romans by telling a story where the Jewish zealots behaved according to Roman conceptions of honor
But this is still a hotly debated open question.
Anyways, even if it WAS true, that line of Jews would have gone extinct without accomplishing anything; our ancestors are the ones who chose to be practical, not those who killed themselves. So looking to them as an example seems foolish to me.
I think it was both.
First, a bunch of younger people who wanted democracy and freedom protest until the regime falls so that free and fair elections can be had.
Then, when it was finally time to use the newly won democracy to elect a leader, the younger people who did the whole “overthrowing the government” thing found themselves divided between lots of different options for the next regime, which meant they were easily defeated by theocratic groups, that had full throated support from older or more reactionary segments of the population.
I assume those Masada zealots were no more representative of Jewish culture than ISIS zealots are representative of Moslem culture. Therefore,
I hope nobody takes them as an inspiring example. If a terrorist commits suicide or immolates themselves to prove how sincere they are, all one can do is be thankful they killed themselves rather than some innocent bystander.
Nitpick: the Zealots weren’t ISIS style fanatics, they were more like tamer uber-religious or fundamentalist groups that don’t necessarily resort to violence. The Sicari were a subgroup of zealots who were violent and much more like ISIS.
According to Josephus (again the only source we have on this tale), the rebels at Masada were Sicarii.
If Josephus is to be believed on this, then before the Romans besieged them, the Sicarii did raid Ein Gedi (a beautiful place to this day, by the way) and killed a bunch of people there.
As I mentioned though, there is a bit of a debate as to how much of what Josephus was saying was true, and how much was his attempt to appeal to the Roman psyche as he understood it. And the mass suicide at Masada is one of the things that has been questioned.
One has to wonder, if the defenders of Masada did all kill themselves, how does Josephus tell us what they were doing and saying right before the act?
Don’t know anything about the historicity of/reliability of Josephus, but, oh man, there is a legendary story that explains everything!
True, although not quite so true depending on where you set the bar for a “vast” majority. I was somewhat surprised to learn that as much as 3-4% of the entire current human population consists of immigrants, i.e., people who have permanently moved away from their country of origin. (I’m not sure whether that’s including or excluding the 1-2% of global population that are currently refugees.)
Sure, >96 out of 100 is still a pretty vast proportion, but it was maybe an order of magnitude less vast than I was ignorantly expecting, so, hmmm.
[ETA: Oh, this site estimates that the total number residing outside their country of origin is lower, between 2 and 3% of all humans, and that includes refugees.]
Yes, this seems to be at best a debatable story. It’s been a few years since I was there and I can’t remember if any of the official signage mentioned it.
The roman siege does seem to be historical though: you can still see the remains of their military camps and the massive ramp they built to get up to the walls. Looks as if they threw an enormous amount of manpower into that campaign.
That sounds like a very plausible narrative. Seems to have been the fate of just about every revolution in history, no matter how idealistically it started. 
Granted. I was talking about what ought to be not what is.
That’s about the only other story of Jews besieged by Romans drawing lots to take turns killing themselves, not Masada. “Coincidentally”, the story also comes to us from Josephus, it’s his origin story as you note. Which is part of why the historicity of the story is suspicious.
The effectiveness of any protest depends on solely how much additional support it recruits to the cause, or prevents loss of support to the cause. And the added supporters have to be people who are somewhat empowered to effect change. A sufficient mass of voters can be enough, but lawmakers and other powerful politicians are ideal.
So self-immolation could be an effective means of protest. Was it in this case? I doubt it. This issue is already at maximal awareness, and the positions are already at extremes (including the position of refusing to take a position). Nobody who supports Israel is going to change their minds because of one American’s suicide. For anyone determined enough to sit this out so far, one suicide isn’t going to change their mind. Bushnell’s act seems mainly to have intensified a sense of justification on the pro-Palestinian side (if somehow there were any remaining unrealized scrap of self-righteousness among them).
There is no other measuring stick, not sincerity nor drama nor audaciousness nor pathos. If all it does is intensify the sentiment of people who are already sympathetic, then it wasn’t effective. I don’t believe anyone’s suicide was going to move the needle on Palestine here. If anyone could, it certainly wasn’t Bushnell, for various reasons that are still emerging and don’t bear mentioning here.
Yes, that bit (and that Ein Gedi was razed, though we don’t necessarily know by whom) are definitely historical.
I don’t think Josephus was completely full of shit or anything, he’s a great source overall. But we should remember, he was writing to ingratiate himself (and to a degree, Romanized Jews in gerneral) among the Romans.
Here’s another data point for you.
I’ll bet none of you ever heard of Kenn Gilchrist before. He had an amazing background. Read the article. Becoming a popular Black man in (nearly all white and very Republican) Casper, Wyoming is an awesome achievement.
" But it remains unclear why a veteran, a patriot, a social justice advocate, and most recently a man opposed to Donald Trump would go to such a dark place and set himself on fire."
Read More: Kenn Gilchrist – Former Casper Resident, Marine, Singer Dies In Ohio | Kenn Gilchrist -- Former Casper Resident, Marine, Singer Dies In Ohio
I keep up with Wyoming news, but I didn’t know anything about the self-immolation until I happened upon the article on his long, slow death, years after it happened.. Did he he not get publicity because he was (very) black?