Throughout history, a plethora of factors affected humanity, which formed its current organizational shape. It seems reasonable to claim that the way people decided on how to structure relationships between each other has always been a contradictable point. Mostly, monarchs, kings, parliaments, politicians, and other officials tried to create such governance that would fit their own vision and ideas. However, the historical process showed that people who do not have access to authorities also could be a substantial force that is able to cause changes. After the realization of the latter, those in power and the most significant philosophers endeavored to create such an order that would provide a balance between people and the government to establish a long-standing peace. All the theories, successes, and failures in this regard lead to the contemporary state of affairs. Nevertheless, there are still many revolts, rebellions, and strikes happening in today’s world. This paper aims to explore the factors that make a populace to resist inefficient or oppressing government ruling.
People need a number of organizational foundations – starting from the economy and ending with law. Without them, these people cannot benefit from cooperation with each other to the greatest extent. Theoreticians and practitioners, as well as history, proved that the above claims are the most appropriate basis for arranging societal relations. At times, their doctrines demonstrate a completely different train of thought and arguing. However, these theories and approaches are the product of their historical epoch, and one should take into account this fact while applying them in the analysis. Some of them supported a monarchy; the others argued in favor of democracy – but all of them aspired to provide a solid equilibrium between peace and chaos.
For instance, in his theory of absolute monarchy, Thomas Hobbes created a concept of a social contract. It implies that people create a government – Leviathan – by restricting their rights and delegating them to the sovereign (Bejan 2010). The main power that this sovereign possesses is the one to execute people, activities of whom do not adhere to the commonwealth’s interests. Instead, he provides the country with protection and equitable ruling. However, Hobbes wrote his fundamental work in the harsh conditions of revolutions and civil wars. Charles I did not respect the range of the delegated rights, rejected the Parliament’s claim to retain the approval of taxes, and ignored the fundamental English freedoms from the Magna Carta. He dissolved the House of Commons and did not convene the Parliament for 11 years – it was the period of long tyranny. These actions resulted in coup d’état and the establishment of Cromwell’s dictatorship. It is apparent that if a government exceeds delegated powers set in the country’s founding documents, the possible outcome is rebellions and revolts.
Furthermore, The French Revolution might also be a good example that depicts factors causing revolutions. The authorities did not seem to oppress the citizens to a great extent. In contrast, these citizens gained plenty of freedoms and opportunities – it was the council’s attempt to overcome economic crisis and impoverishment. Such an inconsistent and mild policy in conjunction with the dilapidation of monarchy resulted in The Revolution. “The fresh ruins of France … are not the devastation of civil war; they are the sad but instructive monuments of rash and ignorant counsel in time of profound peace” (Burke 1790). Thus, another primary aspect that leads to the resistance to order is a weak and ineffective regulatory system that cannot leverage a society coherently.
The contemporary events also maintain the abovementioned suggestions and arguments. For instance, in 2018, France started facing a new wave of mass protests organized by the yellow vest movement. Unlike other demonstrations, participants mobilized this protest movement mainly through social networks. As a result, in just a few weeks, the yellow vests brought together several thousand French people who oppose higher gas and diesel prices (McAuley 2019). These were the French living in the suborns – since their incomes are higher than the subsistence level, the state does not provide them with financial help. However, they do not have sufficient funds to lead a financially prosperous life. Hence, authorities’ policies – even of developed countries – that do not consider the needs and interests of all citizens’ will inevitably face protests and people’s dissatisfaction – it aligns with the abovementioned historical cases.
In conclusion, it might be rational to claim that the resistance against an oppressive or insufficient governmental order results from several factors. According to the above discussion, these factors are the exceed of delegated powers, mild and inefficient regulatory system, and non-consideration citizens’ interests. Then, it seems reasonable to state the common characteristic of revolutions, rebellions, and other protests is that people who do not have access to power unite due to such conditions. They form their own force of dissent and dissatisfaction and direct it into inequitable regimes and policies, aspiring to make a change. This change may be of various character – from social to economical – but the prominent point here is that a government will not stand for long if people’s anger takes place too often.
References
Bejan, T. 2010. “Teaching the “Leviathan”: Thomas Hobbes on education.” Oxford Review of Education 36(5): 607–626.
Burke, E. 1790. “Reflections on the French Revolution.”
McAuley, J. 2019. “‘Yellow vest’ anniversary: What happened to the movement that shook France?” The Washington Post. Web.