The weapon of choice
Bloodshed sometimes helps autocrats stay in power. It rarely benefits protesters
“THE little screaming fact that sounds through all history”, John Steinbeck wrote, is that “repression works only to strengthen and knit the repressed.” The standard Western critique of skull-crackers on the streets of Cairo, Moscow or Tehran is “You will regret it.” But will they? History’s lessons regarding protests and violence are more complex. Bloodshed sometimes works for autocrats, at least temporarily. But for protesters themselves, taking up arms is usually a mistake.
This article appeared in the International section of the print edition under the headline “The weapon of choice”
International September 28th 2013
Discover more
The world is losing the fight against international gangs
Globalisation and technological progress are leading to a boom in organised crime
Half a loaf, at best, from the climate talks
This year’s negotiations made very modest progress
Is your master’s degree useless?
New data show a shockingly high proportion of courses are a waste of money
The perils of appeasing a warlike Russia
Finland’s cold-war past offers urgent lessons for Ukraine’s future
The danger zone between two presidents
The world’s bad actors will relish any power vacuum
How to avoid Oval Office humiliation
A dozen officials offer tips on the dangerous art of Trump-flattery