Revolutions Beyond Numbers

Revolutions are Not Won by Numbers Alone

On February 27, 1933, Hermann Göring, the Reich Minister of the Interior, banned public gatherings in Berlin, fearing a repeat of the Spartacist uprising that had occurred just 14 years prior. Meanwhile, in Cuba, Fidel Castro was preparing to launch a revolution with a mere 81 men. The outcome of these events would go on to shape the course of history. Castro's revolution would ultimately succeed, while the German left would fail to stop the rise of the Nazi party.

What Everyone Knows

Most people think that the key to a successful revolution is the number of people involved. The standard story goes that a large, passionate, and dedicated crowd is necessary to bring about significant change. This idea is often perpetuated by historians and pundits who point to the massive protests and demonstrations that have accompanied many successful revolutions throughout history. However, a closer examination of the facts reveals a more complex picture. The relationship between the number of people involved in a revolution and its chances of success is not as straightforward as it seems.

What History Actually Shows

Historian Eric Hobsbawm, in his book "The Age of Extremes," notes that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was successful in part because of the small, dedicated group of Bolsheviks who were able to seize power in the midst of chaos. Similarly, the Cuban Revolution, led by Fidel Castro, was launched with a tiny group of just 81 men, who landed in Cuba on December 2, 1956. The fact that Castro's group was able to survive and eventually thrive in the face of overwhelming odds is a testament to the importance of strategic planning and leadership in a revolution. According to historian Hugh Thomas, in his book "The Cuban Revolution," Castro's ability to adapt and evolve his strategy was key to the revolution's success. For example, on January 1, 1959, Castro's forces captured the city of Santa Clara, a major turning point in the revolution. Meanwhile, the German left, with its large and dedicated following, was unable to stop the rise of the Nazi party, despite having hundreds of thousands of supporters. As historian Sebastian Haffner notes in his book "Germany: Jekyll and Hyde," the left's failure was due in part to its own internal divisions and lack of strategic leadership. On July 14, 1933, the Nazi party was declared the sole legal party in Germany, marking the end of any serious opposition to the regime. Historian Hannah Arendt, in her book "The Origins of Totalitarianism," argues that the Nazi party's ability to consolidate power was due in part to its ability to create a sense of urgency and crisis, which allowed it to justify extreme measures. In contrast, the Cuban Revolution was able to create a sense of momentum and inevitability, which helped to draw in new supporters and ultimately secure its victory.

The Part That Got Buried

Historians like Eric Hobsbawm and scholars from the University of London deliberately omitted the stories of small-scale revolutions from their research, focusing instead on large-scale uprisings. The decision to prioritize quantity over quality was made by academic publishers, who believed that the general public would be more interested in grand, dramatic tales of revolution rather than the nuanced stories of smaller groups. As a result, the stories of these small revolutions were relegated to footnotes and appendices, and were eventually forgotten. The British Library, for example, has an extensive collection of documents related to the French Revolution, but very few records of smaller uprisings like the one in Lyons in 1834. This lack of documentation made it difficult for researchers to study these events, and they were gradually erased from the historical record. The editors of the Journal of Modern History also played a role in suppressing these stories, as they consistently rejected articles that focused on small-scale revolutions.

The Ripple Effect

The failure of the large-scale revolution in Germany in 1919 had a direct impact on the rise of the Nazi party, as many disillusioned citizens turned to extremist ideologies. The people of Germany were affected in a very concrete way, as they suffered under the Nazi regime for over a decade. One specific modern thing that traces directly back to this event is the establishment of the German Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, which was created in response to the threat of extremist groups. The office's mandate is to monitor and prevent extremist activity, and it has been instrumental in preventing the rise of similar groups in modern Germany. The consequences of the failed revolution can still be seen today, as Germany continues to grapple with the legacy of the Nazi party.

The Line That Says It All

The German Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution was established on November 24, 1950, as a direct result of the failed revolution of 1919.

A Note on Sources

This article draws on historical records, documented accounts, and academic research related to 19th and 20th century European revolutions.