Popular revolutions/uprisings are a myth

[disillusioned]

There are virtually no instances in history where the masses or some rogue entity has overthrown the status-quo by themself/itself. They've all be funded and/or supported by some external and powerful entity.

American revolution: Supported by France.
French revolution: Coup by the army that the peasants just happened to join in on.
Russian revolution: Funded by Germany.
Rise of Hitler: Funded by powerful industrialists.
Various socialist revolutions: Funded by Russia and/or China.
Various other coups: Funded by the USA.
Taliban: Funded by CIA.

"Muh but popular revolutions!!!!!!! "

Jfl.

Just face it. The great masses of sheeple are ahistoric and meaningless. They don't matter. Nobody actually overthrows fucking shit unless there is some powerful party that has an invested interest in making sure it happens. Without outside support you won't have the resources, and the sheeple itself will only rebel if the TV (which is controlled by the powerful parties) says they should. Otherwise they won't give a shit.

Popular uprisings and revolutions are a myth. It's all just controlled and manuplated by the wealthy and powerful. It's sort of like the bluepill myth about 'hard work' where you work your way upwards. Things don't work that way.

The world is deterministic. You have no agency.

 

[Deleted member 17791]

You're right, most revolutions are lead by some lower level elites in that country. I'm pretty sure Lenin was some small fry aristocrat or something. The equivalent of a doctor or uni professor today class wise.

They're always started by a group of highly educated people. No normie can do that.

With the American revolution. It was started by the cream of the crop in society.

 

[Aypo129]

That is legit
Time by time we are realizing that no such thing as virtue exist
The only ones that make changes are inventors and super geniuses

 

[Deleted member 17997]

Even William Wallace was a minor nobleman

 

[disillusioned]

What about the industrial revolution?

Not sure if shitposting or just really stupid.

 

[incel194012940]

right but a horrible arguement

popular revolutions don’t exist because they receive foreign support? How much support is that? If a popular revolution received 10% of its funding from Armenia, is it a popular revolution still?

 

[Gonthar]

What about the Haitian, Mexican, Cuban, Iranian or Romanian revolution?

 

[sub5inchcel]

true, when british took iver indja they took over a watered dkwn mughal empire and a shittier replacement for it ehich was marathas and mysore got negged at the end because marqthas, nizam and british all went against them

 

[Deleted member 5892]

You forgot ''incel uprising'' yakhi

 

[Adamsmith12345]

The anarchist revolution during the spanish civil war wasn't funded by USSR, they were actually opposed by USSR

 

[Deleted member 21620]

/

 

[Ceo of cope]

Read every word + high iq. Repped