Why Revolutions Fail

by Ian Hughes Dr Ian Hughes’ career has spanned scientist, government science policy advisor, and writer. His curiosity and passion for knowledge cross the boundaries of the natural, social and political sciences.Having graduated with a PhD in atomic physics, Ian worked in some of the top research laboratories in Europe and the United States where he researched the exotic properties of matter on the smallest scale. As an academic he established a Department of Creative Technologies to explore the synergies between art and technology, and co-founded a programme to bring together scientists and journalists to make science more accessible to the public. His current job as advisor in science, technology and innovation policy for the Irish government explores how research in science can result in economic and social benefits for society.Ian has also trained in psychoanalysis, and has previously authored a major study on the effectiveness of democracy in Ireland. In his new book Imperfect Design. Ian brings together his training in science, psychology and political science to demonstrate how a small proportion of people with dangerous personality disorders cause most of the suffering in our world. Ian’s website www.disorderedworld.com was recently been shortlisted in the Top 10 Political Blogs in Ireland. You can also follow Ian on Twitter at @disorderedworld 07.10.2014

During Richard Nixon’s visit to Beijing in 1972, the Chinese premier, Zhou Enlai, was asked about the impact of the French Revolution. He famously replied that he thought it was too early to say. Although it appears that Zhou may have misunderstood the question, it was as one diplomat remarked, a misunderstanding that was ‘too delicious to invite correction’.

As is well known, the French revolution, like the Chinese revolution in which Zhou played a leading role, resulted in a prolonged period of death and destruction. Here are 8 reasons why revolutions often fail.

1. All uprisings begin with multiple and often contradictory aims.

The sight of hundreds of thousands of citizens taking to the streets in protest against injustice inspires a sense of unity of purpose amongst those taking part. In reality such unity of purpose seldom exists. In the Arab uprisings, for example, protestors were united in calling for the overthrow of corrupt leaders, but differed widely on issues as fundamental as democracy versus a single party state, secular versus religious government, and the status of women. Such divisions characterise most mass demonstrations that presage revolution.

2. In every uprising there are ample opportunities for extremists to exploit public anger to further their own aims.

Within populations that have experienced decades of oppression and injustice, there is a natural well of anger and hatred against the former oppressor. Leaders can either stoke this anger or seek to dissipate it in the service of compromise. Violent revolutionaries such as Lenin chose the former path. Leaders such as Nelson Mandela chose the second. Unfortunately, hot-headed revolutionaries are much more common than consensus builders.

3. Decisions taken early on by those in power can shape the conflict for decades to come.

The Troubles in Northern Ireland began as a peaceful civil rights movement in which Catholics demanded equal rights with Protestants within Northern Ireland. The violence directed at peaceful demonstrators, followed by the introduction of detention without trial aimed mainly at Catholics, empowered those who insisted that a united Ireland was the only solution, and shaped the conflict for decades to come. A similar dynamic is playing out in Bahrain, where the government reacted violently against peaceful protestors during the Arab Spring, and still denounces those striving for peaceful change as sectarian Shia terrorists.

4. Extremists on all sides often join forces to eliminate moderates.

Moderates are those who are able to rise above the ‘them and us’ characterisation of the conflict and are willing to seek a compromise solution. Moderates may have broad appeal across the entire population and therefore pose a threat to the power base of extremists on all sides. Extremists therefore often collaborate to eliminate moderates.

This dynamic was clear in the aftermath of the Iranian Revolution, for example, when Marxists and communists sided with religious fundamentalists to eliminate democrats and secularists. When that was accomplished, the religious fundamentalists then turned on the Marxists and communists in an effort to marginalise them and secure power alone. [1]

5. The outbreak of violence empowers extremists and further marginalises moderates.

As Hannah Arendt noted, violence changes the world, but the most probable change is a more violent world. The outbreak of violence empowers extremists. For this reason, extremists will often initiate violence. Amidst the chaos, those to whom violence comes easily then come to the fore. From their newfound positions of authority they recruit others and organise the brutalisation of their fellow fighters.

Violence also sucks in many former bystanders – both those whose relatives or friends have been killed, and those who empathise with the suffering of their community. Justice and empathy can both play a role in recruiting normal people to violence.

6. Nationalism, religion, communism and ethnicity can all be used as tactics to increase the appeal of extremists.

Killing acquires a different meaning when it serves an ideological cause. From being a heinous crime, killing becomes an act of virtue. [2] A compelling ideology can mobilise mass support, disguise an extremist group’s true nature and intent, and serve to justify acts of mass violence. The more strongly the ideology resonates with the values and concerns of the population, the greater its value for extremists. Nationalism, religion, communism, ethnic identity – all can be used to urge followers to exact revenge by appealing to grand narratives of threat, humiliation and retaliation. [3]

7. Atrocities – acts of micro-genocide – are present in many violent conflicts, whereby killing is accompanied by the total dehumanisation of the ‘enemy’.

Genocide is not simply about killing. The perpetrators of genocide are also intent on dehumanising their victims before the final act of murder. [4] Mutilation, raping children in front of their parents, forcing mothers to kill their own children, prolonged acts of torture: such atrocities are designed to totally dehumanise the enemy. Almost all violent conflicts – not only genocides – contain such atrocities. These acts terrorise the opposition and further radicalise the opposing sides, feeding the spiral of brutality.

8. In this cycle of violence, psychopaths, people with paranoid personality disorder and people with narcissistic personality disorder – whose minds are structured for extremism – play catalytic roles in escalating and perpetuating conflict.

People can be violent by nature or by circumstance. Those impacted directly by violence may hit out violently in revenge. Others may take up arms to right a perceived injustice or out of empathy with those who are suffering. To say that ordinary people can commit acts of violence is to state the obvious.

The fact that ordinary people can kill should not blind us however to the leading role which people with psychopathic, narcissistic and paranoid personality disorders play in starting and sustaining violence. The fault line in violent conflicts does not run mainly between the West and Islam, say, or between communists and capitalists. The main fault line runs between the normal majority who are capable of empathy and compromise, and those with dangerous personality disorders whose minds are shaped for violence and extremism.


[1] Ali Gheissari and Vali Nasr, Democracy in Iran: History and the Quest for Liberty, Oxford University Press, 2006, page 95

[2] Mona Sue Weissmark, Justice Matters: Legacies of the Holocaust and World War II, Oxford University Press, 2004, page 11

[3] Evelin Lindner, Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict, Praeger Security International, 2006, page xv

[4] Evelin Lindner, Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict, Praeger Security International, 2006, page 8

Dr. Ian Hughes' blog DisorderedWorld can be found here.

You can also follow Ian on Twitter at @disorderedworld

Earlier article by Ian Hughes on Facts & Arts:

Dangerous Personality Disorders in Leading Positions – The Role of Religion

Published 11.08.2014
ISIS in Iraq is murdering Christians and Shia Muslims alike under the guise of a Holy War. Israel’s merciless bombardment of  Gaza has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of women and children- the youngest to be killed was ten days old, the...

Dangerous Personality Disorders in Leading Positions – DR Congo

Published 21.07.2014
The story of the Congo wars is one of state weakness and failure – the weakness and failure of Congo to defend its borders, impose law and order in its eastern provinces, and build the institutions of state necessary to improve the impoverished...

Psychopaths as Predators of the Poor

Published 25.05.2014
History is the story of the struggle of the psychologically normal majority of humanity to free ourselves from the tyranny of a psychologically disordered minority who are marked by their innate propensity for violence and greed. This minority...

Nelson Mandela and the Wisdom of Non-Psychopathic Leaders

Published 22.02.2014
Failure of leadership is arguably the greatest curse afflicting our world. Too many countries are cursed still by leaders who oppress their people, make a mockery of the institutions of government, and cling to power regardless of the cost in...

Dangerous Personality Disorder in a Leading Position: Mao

Published 22.02.2014
Ten years ago, on the one hundred and tenth anniversary of Mao’s birth, a group of dissidents wrote a letter entitled ‘An Appeal for the Removal of the Corpse of Mao Zedong from Beijing’. In it they wrote[1], ‘Mao instilled in people’s minds a...

Dangerous Personality Disorders in Leading Positions

Published 08.02.2014
Small proportion of people with dangerous personality disorders have dominated the psychologically normal majority of the population in every society on earth for most of human history. The conditions that prevailed the world over, until...

Rate this article

Click the stars to rate

Recent articles