Abstracts - Keynote Panels

Day One

Monday March 9

John Foran

Revolutions Old and New

A set of momentous revolutions defined the outer limits of rapid social transformation in the 20th century, including Mexico (1910), Russia (1917), China (1949), Cuba (1959), Chile (1970), Iran, Nicaragua, and Grenada (1979). The 21st century presents another set of radical experiments in social change, with the Zapatistas, Chávez in Venezuela, and the multifaceted Global Justice Movement, among others. The very definition of revolution seems to be changing from armed and highly organized movements to more diffuse experiments with power, more democratic and multisided than in the past. What can we learn about the possibility of revolutionary social change today from the patterns of these cases? Do they portend a new future for revolutions with possibly better outcomes, or the winding down of the revolutionary tradition?

Doris Garraway

Avengers of the New World? Some Paradoxes of the Haitian Revolution

Though “silenced” for centuries in Western historiography, the Haitian Revolution is now often regarded as the most radical revolution of the age of revolutions, one that exposed the limitations of the French Revolution’s rhetorical embrace of universal liberty and challenged European colonialism and the racial order of slavery in the Americas. Yet the specificities of the Haitian Revolution-notably, its universalist claims and its establishment of an “empire” followed by a “kingdom” - are still arguably incompatible with current theoretical understandings of revolution, anti-colonialism, and radical emancipation. I will first briefly outline some of the ways in which the Haitian Revolution resists dominant categories through which modern revolutions have been understood. Turning to the writings of Baron de Vastey (1781-1820), the leading propagandist under the regime of Henry Christophe, I will then examine the paradoxical means by which one of the revolution’s most vociferous defenders articulated the tensions between universalism and particularism, equality and difference, in an attempt to argue for Haiti’s belonging within the contemporary Atlantic world.

Friedrich Katz

The Mexican Revolution and its Legacy

The Mexican Revolution, which lasted from 1910 to 1940, was one of the largest and most extensive revolutionary movements to occur in Latin America. It was also the only such movement that took place in a country bordering the United States. Between 1934 and 1940, under the presidency of Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexican revolutionaries challenged the Unites States in a way it had never been challenged before. A large number of American properties were expropriated, including U.S. oil fields controlled by Standard Oil. Government-supported unions staged massive strikes against Mexican and American companies. In 1940 it seemed to many in Mexico that the revolution had in fact achieved its aims: It had given land to millions of peasants, reaffirmed Mexico’s control of its natural resources, and done so in a climate of relative openness, democracy, toleration of opposition parties and newspapers in a climate of minimal violence. And the leader who had achieved these results did not try to maintain himself in power but resigned after holding office for six years. From 194o onward many of the results of that revolution were reversed, frequently with a large degree of repression, though that repression never remotely attained the scope of the repressive activities of military dictatorships in Central and South America. The questions I want to address are: Why was such radical revolution possible without provoking massive retaliation by the Unites States? Why the swing to a more conservative policy after 1940? And what is the legacy of the Revolution today?

Day Two

Tuesday March 10

Edward Friedman

Rethinking Revolution

The concept of revolution is understood in many diverse ways, running from a source of mayhem to the only road to justice, freedom and dignity. By examining diverse approaches to revolution and a variety of actual historical experiences whose leaders claimed to embody the truth of revolution, this paper asks if the concept of revolution has lost its usefulness, as indicated, perhaps, by the virtual disappearance of utopian literature. Are we living in a post-revolutionary age? Can people today even imagine what a good society might be? Does the loss of utopian hope lead to an inability to mobilize people to work together for a society or world of justice, freedom and dignity? Can revolution be re-conceptualized for the new era or is it a term with a history where that history has come to an end?

James Le Sueur

The Death of the Revolutionary Mystique: What Happened to Revolutionary Nationalism during the Carnage of the 1990s in Algeria?

By the late 1980s, Algeria’s FLN party lost virtually all credibility when the government could no longer disguise its failed socioeconomic policies. By that time, the mystique of revolution had rubbed off and the bitter realities of one-party rule had given way to political and religious challengers who cared little for the legacy of decolonization’s most famed political party, the party that once inspired Frantz Fanon to join ranks with Algerian nationalists as its chief spokesman. Indeed, after the military coup d’etat in 1992, which cancelled the previous local and national electoral victories by the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) and other parties, Algeria suffered from a curious lack of revolutionary zeal, despite the emergence of radical Islamist groups that tried to convince the masses to join them in their effort to overthrow the government. Why, after the history of revolution in Algeria and after the masses had voted overwhelmingly for the FIS, did the masses not rise up to overthrow the military junta in the 1990s? What happened to the idea of revolution and the nationalist ideology that had once made Algeria one of the leaders of the “Third World” during decolonization and throughout the postcolonial period?

Ron Aronson

Marxist Revolution, Impossible but Still Necessary

The paradox of my title stems from the fact that classical Marxism was the most coherent and compelling of revolutionary projects, and yet it has become obsolete today. More than ever, capitalism is incompatible with humanity’s long-term survival and well-being, but the revolutionary transformation of societies in the top-to-bottom socialist way envisaged by Marxism has not happened, is not happening, and is all-but unimaginable. One reason for this failure is that none of the societies where Marxist revolutions took place was remotely ready for the kind of socialism envisioned by Marx; Russia, China, and Cuba, for example, lacked highly-developed economies and an advanced working class. Another and related reason is that Marxist revolutions, instead of employing violence as a midwife in the liberation from capitalist domination, installed violence as a governing principle of the systems they constructed. Today, no working class anywhere seems remotely interested in or capable of being Marx’s revolutionary class. If it has always been too early or too late for a Marxist revolution, Marxism today is relegated to being a theory without a movement, eclipsed as a transformative project. Nevertheless, capitalism remains at the heart of our societal problems, and a systemic approach like Marxism is needed more than ever. Furthermore, a free and truly human society can only be brought about by the masses themselves, as Marx understood — not imposed from without. Moreover, socialism as an idea and alternative will not go away - as we see in such contemporary challenges to capitalist globalization as the World Social Forum. Revolutionary change is called for. Honestly, it is hard to imagine this proceeding without violence, even if it is violence only to protect genuinely democratic governments. Accordingly, if any future movement to solve the world’s essential problems will look very different from Marxism, it will also look very much like it. If Marxist revolution has become impossible, it is still necessary. How do we negotiate the paradox?

Day Three

Wednesday March 11

David Mason

Systemic Revolutions and the End of the American Century

Revolutions take many forms, and their outcomes may be narrow or broad, transient or enduring. Few are both broad in scope and enduring in terms of their legacy — examples of such rare events include social and political revolutions like those in France in 1789 and Russia in 1917; and scientific or economic revolutions like the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century and the Darwinian revolution of the 19th. In recent times, the most powerful systemic transformation was effected by the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe that brought down one system — Communism — and ushered in another, capitalist democracy, in the region. The collapse of the United States as the dominant economic and political power in the world, now underway, presages a similar systemic transformation that is both global and epochal.

Julie Mertus

The Revolutionary Past and Radical Future of Human Rights

Human rights concepts and practices have caused a revolutionary change in the relationship between individuals and governments and, by underscoring the equal moral worth of all human beings, have challenged traditional patterns of domination and subordination. Ever since the founding of the United Nations and the creation of the modern human rights system, the U.S. has held itself out to be a leading supporter of human rights when actually it has consistently attempted to curtail its radical potential. Why has the U.S. been so afraid of human rights when international standards are applied not in some far away place, but at home? How can the presidency of Barack Obama help advocates to reclaim the radical future of human rights in the U.S.? Professor Mertus draws from her study of post-Cold War presidencies in fashioning some suggestions for the new administration.

Jonathan Schell

The Revolution in Nonviolence

The 20th century saw the greatest expansion of violence of any in recorded history. Less noticed was a counter-tradition of nonviolence, as startling, in its own way, as the violence. Its achievements have been immense, including the end of the British raj, the American civil rights revolution, and the fall of the Soviet Union. The rise of this new force can be seen as a response to the century’s violence, especially in its imperialistic forms. Peoples all over the world found a way to oppose and throw off domination by the superior arms of the imperial West. Though there is now perhaps a lull in nonviolent movements, enduring factors work to foster their revival and continuation. These include the still intact will of peoples to run their own affairs and the presence of nuclear know-how. I will also strike a few personal notes, relating to my reporting experience in Vietnam and my friendship with some of the organizers of the Solidarity movement.

Day Four

Thursday March 12

Misagh Parsa

Seizing Power: Fundamentalists and Liberals in the Iranian Revolution

Social theorists have stressed the role of economic, political, and sociocultural conflicts in generating revolutions. While all three conflicts erupted to varying degrees in the Iranian Revolution, none of the major actors during the revolutionary struggles demanded the formation of an Islamic theocracy. This paper will examine the nature of the conflicts during the revolutionary struggles, discuss the rise of a revolutionary situation, and explain how and why liberals lost the hegemony of the movement, leading to the establishment of a theocracy in Iran. Based on the Iranian experience, the paper will also discuss some of the major lessons that can be learned from revolutions.

Karen Kampwirth

30 Years Later, the Revolution Continues? Tales from Sandinista Nicaragua

30 years after the FSLN successfully overthrew the Somoza dictatorship, the party of the revolution has returned to power, now having won presidential elections twice (in 1984 and 2006). But the revolutionary coalition of 2009 barely resembles that of 1979, having broken along multiple lines, and having made alliances with many of its historic enemies. Based on interviews with supporters of the FSLN, the MRS, and left-wing civil society — all Sandinistas despite their many disagreements — I will evaluate the perhaps inevitable breakdown and institutionalization of the original Sandinista movement.

Valentine M. Moghadam

From Islamic Revolution to Feminist Transformation? The Past and Future of Revolution in Iran

Much has changed in Iran since the 1978-79 populist revolution, but one striking difference is that in 1979 the new Islamic regime was arresting communists and in 2009 it is arresting feminists. In 1978-79 many Iranians were part of a large communist movement with different organizations, all of which were rather brutally repressed by the regime over a period of several years. In 2005, a feminist movement burst onto the public scene, after about a decade of quiet civil society activity. This movement has resonated with many Iranians in both Iran and the diaspora. However, police have attacked feminist rallies in Tehran and elsewhere, and activists have been arrested, imprisoned, banned from travel, and charged with endangering national security. Drawing on my theory of gender and revolution, I discuss the reasons why women’s rights did not figure prominently during the 1979 revolution, were subordinated to anti-imperialist and Islamist agendas, and did not resonate with large sections of the female population. I then outline the structural, socio-demographic, and cultural changes that lie behind the emergence of a mobilized feminist movement in Iran 30 years later. The One Million Signatures Campaign will be briefly described. Placing the Iranian feminist movement in its regional and global contexts, I highlight the inevitability of women’s collective action and agency, and the new pathways to social transformation prefigured by feminist movements.

Stephen Kinzer

1979: A Tale of Two Revolutions

The year 1979 saw an unusual number of violent and radical changes of government around the world. Looking back at the results of this upheaval 30 years later allows us to see the long-term effects of revolutionary change. They suggest that although revolution often goes bad, even in failure it produces some positive results. Iran and Nicaragua are perfect examples. Revolutions in those countries failed to produce good governments, but did lead to a sense of empowerment. Both countries now face serious crises that spring from the failures of their revolutions.

BACK TO MAIN PAGE