Follow TV Tropes

Discussion Main / TheRevolutionWillNotBeVilified

Go To

Jan 2nd 2016 at 11:54:48 AM •••

I would like to discuss the wording in the trope's introduction. Specifically, I would like to discuss this excerpt.

"This isn't necessarily an unrealistic trope, as rebellions and revolutions never happen for no reason at all. They're usually the expression of real, preexisting problems and grievances, often founded on economic inequality."

This wording implies that all revolutions are justified, or that their reasons for fighting are always real. Some revolutions are started because of irrational fears (The Guinea-Bissau Coup was caused by the nation's military fearing that the freely elected president would let Angolan troops into their country), bigotry (The Revolution of 1688 was caused by an irrational fear King James, due to him being a Catholic and wanting to end anti-Catholic discrimination), or impatence (The October Revolution happened seven months after the February Revolution, because they thought the provisional government's changes were not coming fast enough).

I recommend changing it to something more neutral, like this:

"This isn't necessarily an unrealistic trope, as rebellions and revolutions rarely happen for no reason at all. They're usually the expression of real (or at least perceived) problems and grievances, often preexisting ones founded in economic inequality."

Edited by Timjames98 Hide/Show Replies
Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:05:09 PM •••

The original sentence has the word "usually" which naturally implies that there are exceptions of questionable causes for revolutions.

Making it "real (or at least percieved)" strikes me as being superfluous and moving pre-existing from one clause to the other strikes me as redundant. I mean "often pre-existing ones" strikes me as bad on a basic level.

In any case this trope on the whole is about when the Revolution is unambiguously a good thing, there are tropes for the opposite you know. So I don't see any reason to sully this.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:07:18 PM •••

My problem is that the sentence implies that this trope is always Truth in Television, when that's not the case.

Edited by Timjames98
Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:09:20 PM •••

I at least think we should replace "rebellions and revolutions never happen for no reason at all" with "rebellions and revolutions almost never happen for no reason at all"

Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:15:08 PM •••

Well the page doesn't have Real-Life Examples so there's no historical stuff it touches on. I also can't think of which examples there are of revolutions being unreasonable or happening for no reason. It's definitely not true for the big three (America, French, Russian).

I have no problem with the inclusion of "almost never happen". I would add a caveat that there should be a precise differentiation between a rebellion and a revolution, something which I added in the La Résistance page.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:35:06 PM •••

That's a fair compromise.

I honestly thought "Revolution" and "Rebellion" were interchangeable until now, so adding the clarification you suggested might help others understand the difference as well.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:41:19 PM •••

I already mentioned as examples of Unreasonable Revolutions. The Revolution of 1688 was motivated mostly by anti-catholic bigotry, and the Guinea-Bissau Coup was basically the military seizing power from a freely elected President out of fear that said president would allow Angolan Soldiers to enter the country.

Though I'll be the first to add that those examples, and probably all examples, are debatable.

Just thought I'd mention it to have it on record.

Edited by Timjames98
Jan 2nd 2016 at 12:57:08 PM •••

The Glorious Revolution is understood today as an attempt to establish Parliamentary suzerainty over the Crown. The fact that it was motivated by anti-catholic bigotry doesn't disqualify it since Protestants see themselves as revolutionaries against the Catholic Church (and certainly began that way, though their actions weren't totally commendable). And the Glorious Revolution is more precisely a consolidation of Oliver Cromwell's revolution during the English Civil War which violently established the Parliament over the Crown.

The Guinea-Bissau Coup is a military coup and I believe there's a trope for that, called The Coup. Coups are usually not considered revolutions. There's a reason people say the French Revolution ended with Napoleon's coup of 18 Brumaire you know.

By this measure any change is considered revolution without delineating form, style and content. And the kind of people who reacted to any change as radical are usually ultra-right wing nutjobs.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 1:09:17 PM •••

See, like I said: the examples I listed, and probably all examples, are debatable.

On an unrelated note, I made a Playing With section for The Revolution Will Not Be Vilified. Feel Free to add to it if you like.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 1:16:35 PM •••

I made the compromise edit we agreed on. Let me know what you think.

Jan 2nd 2016 at 3:53:38 PM •••

I'm glad we could reach a compromise.

Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.