How did the Revolution in Tunisia lead to all other Revolutions in the Personal Statement

How did the Revolution in Tunisia lead to all other Revolutions in the Middle East - Personal Statement Example What was the history of the region? Tunisia is the northernmost Maghreb country in Africa and borders Libya to the southeast, and the Mediterranean Sea to the north and east. It measures 165,000 km ² in area with an estimated population of about 10.3 million. It has a coastline measuring 1,300 km in length, harbors the Sahara desert in the south with the rest consisting of particularly fertile soil. The authoritative Ben Ali was the president of the Republic of Tunisia from 7 November 1987 up to the rise of the jasmine revolution in Tunisia (Carvin Web). He was authoritative, undemocratic and did not observe international standards of human and political rights. There were poor living conditions, rampant unemployment, and corruption in Tunisia prior to the revolution. In fact, thousands of young people from North Africa would enter Europe illegally to look for a better life. How did the Middle East divide into separate countries after world war one? After World War 1, many countries gained boundaries, others lost, yet others were unchanged. In the Middle East, Lebanon separated from Syria in a treaty signed in 1936. This was because of rising trade and education connections between Lebanon and Europe, and the large Christian population of Lebanon (Skahill 40-41). The population of Lebanon was either wealthy or very poor. The Middle East countries include Bahrain, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, UAE, and Yemen. What is revolution? The self-burning of Al Bouazizi who was a poor, young, and educated Tunisian who lacked employment was the beginning of expressing the injustices in the Ali regime (CNN Web). Revolutions are facts because they relate production and political power. When the oppressed majority refuses to be intimidated and recognize the fundamental weakness of their oppressors, they embrace redemption and act. They organize and

A critical exploration whether Gandhi was primarily a political figure Research Paper

A critical exploration whether Gandhi was primarily a political figure or a social reformer - Research Paper Example This involvement with the emergence of India brings Gandhi the fame as a political figure. He spent a significant part of his life as a political activist in the Congress, one of the two major political parties of India under the British rule. Though he had been an active political figure, his political activities were bordered on the verge of social reformations which could successfully bring him the landslide faith and support from the common Indians. Indeed the question whether he was primarily a political figure or a social will continue to engender debate till one fails to pursue the true Gandhian nationalist zeal. The son of a senior British Government clerk, Gandhi adamantly believed in the soul of democracy and the formal democratic politics.1 Therefore, Gandhi, once the devout British patriot who once worked publicly to earn the Indians’ support for the British Army’s war against Zulu Kingdom in 1906, could not call for the violent liberation war that, causing much bloodshed, could have destroyed the British-induced political reform in India.2 Prior to his experience of successful civil-disobedience or non-violent protest against the segregation Act of the Transvaal Government in 1906, he became familiar with British democratic political culture, while he was studying law in London. Later his experience of the success of ‘Satyagraha’ further provided him a political insight into the non-violent public protest against the tyranny of a political system.3 Indeed Gandhi’s political insight and experience urged him to assume the role of a social reformer. His pose as a social reformer only served his political purpose of uniting the Indians to emerge as a strong political force. Also for the same reason, he did not have his own pure political or social philosophy. His personal philosophy was more of a loose collection of ideas that a strict structure of thought. Indeed Gandhi was a great political leader under the apparel o f a social-reformer. Brief Background of Gandhi’s Concept of Satyagraha Gandhi, once the Barrister in South Africa was inspired to put his wholehearted faith in Satyagraha, the heart of his civil-disobedience.4 This barrister was sagacious enough to perceive the power of public unity and support in a modern democratic state. He adopted the Civil-disobedience policy as a means of political protest which could simultaneously sustain the state and create pressure on it toward the intended end. Indeed this protest policy of civil disobedience could sustain the basic form of a government through non-violent defiance, while forcing her to compromise with the defiant civil group.5 But the success of civil disobedience crucially pivots on the weight, of the defiance of protesters, which in democracy is considered as the volume of support. With this new insight, in 1915, Gandhi returned at a critical moment when India was rolling into a democratic political environment from the shadow of the British colonial rule. Gandhi the barrister with his new political insight was wise enough not to jeopardize the prospect India, then, the child of democracy.6 During the 1910s the democracy was budding through the National Congress Party; it was the age when the literate Indians had already adapted with the democratic environment and the rural underdeveloped Indians were waiting for a leader who could lead to the light of democracy. Indeed Gandhi fulfilled this very need of a leader who could raise political awareness among the common Indians only to strengthen the Indians’ voice for independence.7 If Gandhi had called for violent resistance