The Bestest Political Science Theory EVAH! (Arseh-les as a Strategic Entity)

At D-squared Digest, some ruminations about Egypt lead to the bestest political science theory EVAH! (italics original; boldface mine): that brings me to a useful piece of advice for any readers who are aspiring dictators, one that the Communists knew, Suharto knew, but that some modern day tyrants seem to have forgotten. There is always a level of civil unrest that outstrips the capability of even the most loyal and largest regular armed forces to deal with. In all likelihood, as a medium sized emerging market, you will have a capital city with a population of about five or six million, meaing potentially as many as three million adults on the streets in the worst case. Your total active-duty armed forces are unlikely to be a tenth of that. When it becomes a numbers game, there is only one thing that can save you.

And that is, a reactionary citizens' militia, to combat the revolutionary citizens' militia. Former socialist republics always used to be fond of buses full of coal miners from way out the back of beyond, but the Iranian basijs are the same sort of thing. Basically, what you need is a large population who are a few rungs up from the bottom of society, who aren't interested in freedom and who hate young people. In other words, arseholes. Arseholes, considered as a strategic entity, have the one useful characteristic that is the only useful characteristic in the context of an Egyptian-style popular uprising - there are fucking millions of them.

This is my advice to any aspiring dictator; early on in your career, identify and inventory all the self-pitying, bullying shitheads your country has to offer. Anyone with a grievance, a beer belly and enough strength to swing a pickaxe handle will do. You don't need to bother with military training or discipline because they're hopefully never going to be used as a proper military force - just concentrate on nuturing their sense that they, despite appearances, are the backbone of the country, and allowing them to understand that although rules are rules, there are some people who just need a slap. The bigger and burlier the better, but when the time comes they'll be fighting in groups against people weaker than themselves, often under cover of darkness, so numbers are more important than anything else. The extractive industries are indeed often a good source, as are demobbed veterans (Zimbabwe) or the laity of an established religion.

I think this is my new rule for assessing the stability of any dictatorship around the world, and I am on the lookout for any Francis Fukuyama style book contracts. The key factor in determining the survival of repressive regimes isn't economics, religion or military success. It's arseholes.

Now, we speak American on this blog, so let's refer to them as assholes. Unfortunately, the U.S. has a lot of assholes.


I call them Palinists. And, yes, you can have Palinism without Palin.

Just something to keep track of...

More like this

Actually, the technical term would people with high-RWA predispositions. See Altemeyer's work; it pretty much lines up behind this discription.

Many liberals wrongly claim that middle-class conservatives are stupid, because conservative policies will hurt them too. But they're fine with that, as long as there's some inferior class who has it even worse.

By Derek Ledbetter (not verified) on 06 Feb 2011 #permalink

Wait a minute: this is not a new theory: this is just at most an update of the concept of lumpen proletariat: Marx did it first.

By Laurent Weppe (not verified) on 06 Feb 2011 #permalink