Political Change Essay, Research Paper
Political Change
In the French and Russian Revolutions, could political change have occurred without bloodshed and the use of force? In the French and Russian Revolutions, there was a lot of force and bloodshed used. Can political change occur without the use of bloodshed and force?
I think it can happen, although there are very few people that have done it. There is still many years to come yet so people still have their chance to change from wars and violence to means of peace to obtain political change. If people would compromise instead of using violence we wouldn t have to fight to death and we would actually have more people alive today.
Mikhail Gorbachev was one person who sought to reform society by introducing perestroika (restructuring of the economy in the former USSR) and glasnost (openness in political and cultural affairs in former Soviet Union). These reforms met stiff opposition within the Communist party, in cracy s control over m any aspects of Soviet domestic life. Gorbachev in 1989 and 1990 shifted some power from the party to popularly elected legislatures and greatly strengthened the powers of the presidency. Augmentation of his constitutional prerogatives did not, however, enhance Gorbachev s ability to control developments in Eastern Europe, where Soviet influence declined republics, where rising nationalism posed a serious challenge to the viability of the Soviet state.
In international affairs, Gorbachev withdrew Soviet troops from Afghanistan, normalized relations with China, and, after a series of meetings with U.S. President Ronald Reagan, negotiated a treaty with the U.S. to eliminate medium, and certain shorter-range missiles from the two nations nuclear arsenals. In December 1989, Gorbachev conferred with U.S. President George Bush on nuclear and chemical weapons reductions. He also met at the Vatican with John Paul 2, the first Soviet leader to have an audience with a pope. Gorbachev paid a state visit to Canada and then met again with George Bush in May 1990. In October Gorbachev was awarded the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize.
Therefore if one person can obtain political change without the use of bloodshed and force I think everyone else should be able to. In order to establish political change in the French and Russian Revolutions bloodshed and force were used. In the Russian Revolution the country wanted to go to Communism from Tsar, and in this bloodshed and force was used and there were many lives lost. In the French Revolution the country didn t want to be controlled by the King but by democratic means, also bloodshed and force was used and many lives were also lost.
In present times there are still many wars going on to obtain political change but if people could use diplomatic negotiations, or negotiate between leaders then we could obtain political change by peace. This would occur over time so there would be less chance for reactionary ideas.
Eventually I think peace should overload the world rather than bloodshed, force and death. If leaders came to their senses and realized that fighting to death isn t the only way to obtain political change and do like Gorbachev did. Using bloodshed and violence may have worked in the past, but should it still be used to solve future political problems?