Why do people protest?

Protests sweeping the world today seem to be a strong echo of the protests that rocked the middle east in the Arab spring. People are trying to find a unified reason for these protests as they tried for the Arab spring, and they are having barely any more luck. This is because people are looking in the wrong place, and because what we identify as a catalyst is actually a cause.

People are protesting because of the Internet.

It is not that protests are made easier by the Internet. It is not that social media makes it easier to organize. The Internet is the actual root cause of the current round of protests, the Arab spring, the election of Trump, flat earthers, incels, and the rise of the right in Europe. All these things are a manifestation of only one thing: entitlement.

And I don’t mean entitlement in a bad way. I just mean it in a descriptive way. For example, people seem to agree that millennials are entitled. This is the experience of everyone everywhere all over the world. I don’t think there has ever been a time where people in all areas of the world agree that there is a certain trait that characterizes a whole generation. Even after historic events of epic proportions like the second world war, the impact on the war generation was always different. The UK was not affected the same way India was. Hell, the impact on France and the UK wasn’t even very similar.

So what has changed. The internet. It’s pure and simple. It is true that the Internet, and particularly social media has worked as a catalyst for protest movements by providing a means of organizing. And it is true that protests almost always have some foundational causes, and that they are almost always leveraged by the governments of powerful countries to gain influence. But that’s not what these protests are about. These protests be they street protests, social movements, or voting decisions, are an expression that people are finally discovering that they are worth something.

It is a cry against an elite of some sort. An economic elite, a political elite, a scientific elite, or a woman-hogging elite. But it is always a cry against the dominant order by people who, for very long, have had to contend with being second rate. The Internet finally gave voice, form,  and credence to these counter-movements. “Counter” they no longer had to be, they did not have to be defined as marginal. They were as good as whatever they are countering, because they are an expression of real people who for very long did not have a voice.

It is difficult and sometimes dangerous to try and make sense of these protest movements. It is difficult because there is something there, there is an element of legitimacy. But if you approach these movements that way you will never understand them, because they are not about legitimate concerns or logical discussion. They are not about finding a solution or the real world, they are about an expression of exasperation. And when you start to dig a little deeper you find a lot to make fun of. The whole thing crumbles, serious street protests as fast as flat Earth experiments. Which is dangerous, because you then run the risk of being tarred and feathered by the establishment common wisdom.

There are a few axioms that are assumed about all these protest movements, some of which are true and some are myths:

-They are often thought to be leaderless. And they very often are. Some people have trouble getting to grips with this, assuming there must be a nefarious foreign hand involved. And there often is! The two things are not mutually exclusive. It is naïve to think western intelligence is not stoking tensions in Hong Kong to put pressure on China. In fact, if western intelligence didn’t, western intelligence would be criminally negligent. But also, these movements are often spontaneous and leaderless. It’s a little tough to believe, but that’s because you are missing that critical component: the Internet. It has allowed a swarm intelligence to develop around many subcultures in a very undirected manner.

-The movements are always legitimate. They aren’t always. In fact, they almost never are. While some are based in legitimate concerns, they do not have legitimate demands, realistic goals, or even a world view that accepts diversity.

-The movements provide an alternative to what they are rebelling against. They don’t. There aren’t always two sides to every issue. Flat Earth is not an alternative, it is bullshit. There aren’t good guys on the neo-NAZI side. And equally true, the Lebanese protestors aren’t protesting the right things, and protestors in Chile are making things worse.

The last two statements are dangerous. It is forbidden to criticize street protests, especially ones in which people die or are wounded. And double especially if there is legitimacy to the grievances. The Lebanese leadership is corrupt, kleptocratic, and sectarian. The Lebanese protestors are indignant about a situation that they themselves causes, they are making it worse, and they are demanding things that can never happen. Both sentences are true.

And yet, you have to give them legitimacy. Why? Because our brains aren’t programmed to grasp the concept that movements so large and so seemingly purposeful could be chaotic, destructive, ineffective, or aimless. That’s because we are living in a universe that is being reshaped by the democratization of self-worth. You do not have to be right. You do not have to learn. You do not have to prove. You are worth something because you are you.

What we are witnessing is a manifestation of the post-truth world in which there are versions of reality and alternative facts. This transcends left and right, White and Black, religious and atheist.

We are in the alternative fact universe.

The Arab Spring going home to die

Western neo-liberals and neo-conservatives alike have had varying degrees of ease defending and promoting the Arab Spring. The high point was probably Tahrir square in Egypt in 2011. The facade of well-connected, modern, diverse, and secular youth fighting a sclerotic tyrant was very easy to sell. Any Egyptian on the ground trying to communicate the fact that the Islamists formed a huge driving force in the square was brushed aside as reactionary. Normal people who were concerned about the immediate deterioration of normal life were labelled government agents. It was easy to brush everything aside. Any concerns or whistleblowing from normal people was labelled conspiracy theory. Any real disaster like the storming of prisons or the burning of police stations, was immediately explained by insane conspiracy theories that were quickly established as "facts".

Things changed over time. Beyond Egypt and Tunisia, the Arab Spring experiment invariably disintegrated into civil war. But it was always easy to blame the civil war on anything but the Spring. The war was because the west did not immediately go in and remove Bashar. But then again, the west did go in and take out Ghaddafi, so how do you explain Libya?

Shush.

Shush, I said you Mubarakist reactionary.

It was a bumpy ride, but western neo-conservative, and western liberals in particular had a lot of stamina. The mental gymnastics required increased with time, but these people's superpower to keep at it was almost super human. The idea had to live on. The idea of a glorious "spontaneous" leaderless revolution sweeping away old regimes had to go on. It really does not matter what replaces what these revolutions remove. That is secondary. People's quality of life is secondary. People's life or lack thereof is secondary. The idea is primary.

The idea is important, because it combines two things that a western liberal desperately needs. It combines the white man's burden with a modern multiculturalist sheen. It allows the Guardian reporter to tell Arabs what they should do to save themselves, while at the same time acting as if they are just supporting what said Arabs want to do. It allows interventionism with a hands-off approach. It is amazing and effective. And the best thing about it, is that when it blows up and people's lives go to shit, you don't have to pay the price. In fact, you can still keep pontificating about the revolution and how to truly truly get rid of the old regime.

There was one big huge setback though. It was a mile thick concrete wall that the bandwagon crashed on, and nobody saw it coming.

The election of Donald Trump.

I have to admit it was funny seeing western liberal suddenly screaming about things we screamed about in 2011, only to be accused of being Mubarak cronies. Suddenly western liberals were crying about how they only wanted change, not a breakdown of all normalcy and civil behavior. And I laughed. All of a sudden there is an overwhelming concern about how social media is weaponized and used to push an agenda. Suddenly foreign interference is a bad thing. Suddenly, we are supposed to seriously discuss "Russia sowing discord and chaos in America". All things we said in 2011 as we saw life crumble. All things we were ridiculed for. And we are still being derided for wanting to preserve the very essentials of basic life. The gall.

The second wave of the Arab Spring came to the rescue. Sudan and Algeria were a breath of fresh air. Certainly we can avoid the "mistakes" of the first wave. We can insist the protestors on the ground never move until they get to their goal, until Sudan is Switzerland. And for a while, this first wave seemed to be working. In both countries, the change seemed to be fundamental, and in Sudan, the "mistakes" of trusting the military in Egypt were avoided. Also the Islamists don't exist. Dadadada, can't hear you.

But as Algeria and Sudan fizzle down to the reality of post-revolutionary entropy, the new and rising star is Iraq.

And Iraq is interesting for many reasons. Iraq is the birthplace of the Arab Spring. No matter how much you want to deny it, Bush's invasion of Iraq is what started the domino. And the current demonstrations in Iraq are something else. They are the exemplary Arab Spring demo. Leaderless, violent, chaotic, rudderless, and allover the place.

Iraq is where all this was born. It is where all this goes to die.

For Iraq is the answer to all the excuses of why the Arab Spring failed. The old regime in Iraq was decimated. There were no remnants left. The police was destroyed. The military melted in acid. There was no trace left of anything that had to do with the old regime. The new regime is democratic. There are elections, and nobody has special influence on the elections. The constitution is spotless. The process should allow participation by everyone. It was all brand new and spotless clean, created by neo-conservatives in the image of western liberals.

And it has been a constant implosion. Civil war, marginalization of minorities, breakdown of the state, loss of territory, ISIL, breakdown of basic services, and an economy in constant decline even when it is not in decline. Iraq has never managed to get up again, no matter how much it tries. Removing governments does not seem to work. Peaceful handover of power does nothing to change anything. The army keeping out of it only allowed two thirds of the country to breakaway.

And now people are in the streets. Because a military leader was removed by civilian leaders.

People are in the street because the military leader bitched and moaned on TV about being demoted.

And because they hate everything, they hate the ruling class, they hate the elites, they hate how nothing seems to improve.

And it's all meaningless and will lead to one of two things: either a military strongman taking power and ending the chaos, or a spiral or constant violence. Why? Because what do the protestors want? They want good stuff, but it is neither well-defined good stuff, nor is it achievable and realistic.

The problem is that Arabs keep protesting against governments. The problem is not governments, the problem is much more fundamental. The problem is limited and receding resources. The problem is a growing youth population because people keep having children without actually thinking if they can afford it. The problem is a culture that does not value facts, science, or work. This is not a government culture, it was not created by governments, and will not be solved by governments. Arabs can keep protesting all they like, but the very same things western elites respect about these demos is why they will never work. If you protest, protest about something specific, have leadership, and have specific achievable realistic demands.

The true Arab Spring will happen when the population rises against the conservative religious forces keeping their soft power and culture locked up. A true revolution will happen once people cross the culture of entitlement created by Arab socialist regimes and decades of petro-dollars in the kingdoms and the emirates.

Until then, it's all vain.