Momentum of revolutions

Politicians take momentum seriously. That's why Iowa and New Hampshire can play such an important role in shaping the American politics. This holds true not only for elections, but for revolutions.

Why did U.S. go to Korea and Vietnam to fight against the communists in countries that does not concern the American key interests? Because there was a theory called "Domino Effect" that if one country was allowed to fall, countries by countries will follow suit, and communism will reach the shore of the cornerstone of the free world.

This did not happen. Although there were communist movements in many countries, and some of them achieved success to grip the power here and there, but it never reached the scale to threaten the West. One thing was that the Soviet leaders decided to settle on what they had at that time, but it also showed the limit of the momentum.

On the other hand, the momentum showed its strength when the communism collapsed. All but five communist countries surrendered to popular demonstration from 1989 to 1991. The color revolutions also toppled a couple of dictatorships, although to no avail. Everybody is waiting to see what is going on in the Middle East, but the success in Tunisia proved to be contagious.

People do feel emboldened when they see the success of their peers. One thing that sustains the dictatorship is opposition's lack of ability to mobilize, and that is why those regimes shudder to see those social network sites. When everybody sees the success in our countries, this serves as an alternative for mobilization. But the key is that people need to believe that others will also think this way. That's probably why the Tunisia revolution can only affect Egypt, not Belarus. Georgia to Ukraine, but not Burma.

I think we do need to think harder on how people think, and how momentum works. State Department had better be doing that right now.