This statement was made as it regards North Korea. I am moving this over here so as to stop the hijack of that thread.
Basically what the debate is here is regarding the longevity of revolutionary states after the loss of their ideological figurehead.
What examples besides the United States of America are there of a state founded by ideological revolution that has stood the test of time? Using the US as an example, I think one of the strengths of the US is that it wasn’t founded on a personality cult surrounding one individual.
My view on this is that North Korea is in a state of actually rather rapid implosion. As anyone who has debated with me knows I take a long view that views any major shift in a state’s politics that happens within a single generation to be incredibly rapid. So the fact that North Korea has yet to collapse after the loss of Kim Il Sung is not evidence of North Korea’s staying power. I do not think it will survive Kim Jong Il, and if it collapses with Kim Jong Il that will be an incredibly rapid turn around given the pace of nation-states.
Isn’t Vietnam kind of quietly going capitalist in the same way that China has been?
As for France they restored the Monarchy shortly after and I would say it’s hard to argue that Napoleon was an arbiter of a liberal egalitarian state.
I have never read of Washington as being a cult of personality, architect of the state type of person. Yes, he was pretty much universally respected, but he was never the brains of the operation. That was Franklin, Adams, Jefferson and Hamilton by and large.
Your OP seems to ask for examples where the state has survived, but in a later comment you seem to be referring to examples where the revolution has survived. The Chinese state has outlived its revolutionary ideals by quite some time, but Ikm not sure if that’s what you’re asking for.
The Chinese state predated the revolution also. But I’d say China is a good example of a state that HAS survived, and there is no reason to eliminate China from the discussion. Also, in its current incarnation with its current government it’s only about three quarters of a century old as opposed to the almost two and a half centuries of the United States. Also, in the case of China it’s primary ideology is undergoing a nearly 180 degree reversal, something that never occurred in the US.
One of the things I find humorous about Revolutionary governments is how they (since at least the French Revolution) carry the the idea of “viva la revolution!”. Sorry, “revolution” is change. Once a government is changed, the revolutionary government often goes to absurd lengths to ensure that there is no further change. Witness Cuba and North Korea. Their nations are dying from that lack of change, which is absolutely vital.
A good point. I think one of the main reasons that the American Revolution was so successful was because the revolutionaries didn’t try to lock in what they had done. They acknowledged that future generations would need to create new institutions and explicitly made it possible for them to change the government from within.
The cult of personality in the US was for the Founding Fathers (though in his day, George Washington had quite a following…so much so that he COULD have declared himself king without too much protest, had he chosen to go that way).
I’m not sure how this relates to your OP, but by and large I agree…I also think that NK is running out of gas, and that it will most likely fall after lil’ Kimmy snuffles off. And certainly this is due in large part to the cult of personality and autocratic rule first by his father and now by him.
As for the eventual demise of Revolutionary States™ and cults of personality, I’d have to say that all states eventually fail, so I guess it would depend on your time table and what you mean by revolutionary. I think that, in the beginning, most states were formed by some kind of revolution, and in general they were formed by a single person (either as a figure head or an actual ruler). Examples I can think of off the top of my head are Rome (in it’s empire stage), Egypt, Mesopotamia, Germany, France, Russia, the early Chinese empire, the UK…etc. Many of them lasted for a hell of a long time. They have all morphed of course…as has the US.
But all good things come to an end, and eventually even the US will fold and either go quietly into the good night or blow apart to become a bunch of fragmentary political entities. Or space weasels will come down and subjugate us all…
We’re going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. I’ve predicted all along that the United States will be subjugated by a race of froglike aliens and your space weasel theory hasn’t convinced me otherwise.
The reason I still - after, lo – all these years - consider Washington to be the greatest president ever is due to the precedents he set, the most important of which is that he voluntarily stepped down, handing power peacefully to his successor, and retired to his farm. The history of the nation would have been far different had it been Adams or Jefferson, or - heavens forbid - Burr setting the precedents.
His love of the expense account is the only thing I’d quibble with.
Umm, I think your understanding of the PNAC is 180 degrees off. The PNAC was about building a world government. That was the entire point, to dominate the Middle-East.
No in hindsight we made the right decision. The covert war in Afghanistan is one of the few things the American government got right in the cold war. Yes it lead to increased terrorism, but Al Qaeda is a fly on the ass of the Soviet juggernaut.
Taraki was a Soviet puppet who had very little actual control over Afghanistan and was eventually supplanted. After he was supplanted Massoud had to convince the Afghani military NOT to defect because they were more useful to him as spies. Often when a battle would go Massoud’s way the Afghan military would turn its guns on the Soviets and support Massoud.
Communism is evil because it is a faith based ideology with the pretense of being rational. It’s a religion without God. Capitalism is more moral than Communism because it is more honest in its dealings.