[Lazamataz]

So even mostly non-violent massive protests seem to have little long-term effect on political leaders.

I conter with the clearest example: Russia.

Russia threw off the yoke of Communism, and if they had been more prepared, and if they had a clearer desired direction, they would have avoided the KGB-dominated Kleptocracy that followed.

Also, to an extent, the Russian people are not as used to freedom. They'd need to be trained on how to be free, and how to desire freedom.

I feel, though, that the USSR collapse was one of the worst missed opportunities in a century. Imagine if Russia had strongly embraced freedom. ~

[who_would_fardels_bear]

My take on what happened in Russia is that the neocons and libertarians via the "Chicago Boys" tried to get Russians to be too free too quickly.

If the Russians had stuck with Gorbachev and morphed into a capitalist welfare state like Sweden, then they would be in a much better position today.

Instead the Friedmaniacs tried to get them to go full freemarketard and what happened was that those in the positions of power (e.g. ex-KGB agents) grabbed hold of the major economic centers and became the oligarchs that now control the country.

We have to find the proper balance between atomized individualism and ant-farm collectivism. The Russians went from the ant-farm to anomie too quickly and paid the price.

[ought-six]

“Imagine if Russia had strongly embraced freedom. ~”

Russians have NEVER been free; it is an alien concept to them. Submission is as natural to Russians as vodka.