It is unclear who coined the term color revolutions but they generally imply nonviolent means of protest culminating in an overthrow of an oppressive government.
Color revolutions are generally agreed to have taken place in Serbia (Bulldozer Revolution of 2000), Georgia (Rose Revolution 2003), Ukraine (Orange Revolution 2004), Lebanon (Cedar Revolution) and Kyrgyzstan (Tulip Revolution 2005).
The overthrow of Slobodan MiloševiÄ‡ is generally considered the first of these color revolutions. However, true color revolutions could be said to have begun with the Georgian Rose Revolution. This had the hallmarks of a color revolution – massive street protests that were mostly peaceful followed by escalating demonstrations and finally, the peaceful overthrow of a despised government. Another hallmark of these color revolutions is that they are led by younger rather than older people – a group often termed "the youth." It is interesting to note that the takeover of parts of Somalia has been managed by the "Shabob," which roughly translates into "the youth." The fundamentalist Islamic revolution in Somalia is anything but peaceful, however.
While it is unknown who coins these nomenclatures, the Bush administration did make an attempt to label the 2005 Iraq elections the "Purple Revolution," after the color of the ink that stained voters' hands to prevent individuals from voting more than once. The name did not stick.
More recently, the color revolution in Tunisia that led to an end of President Ben Ali's reign has come to be known as the "Jasmine Revolution." Western news media are using the term "Lotus Revolution" to describe the Egyptian color revolution, though once again, this does not seem to be a term in especially wide use. The Lotus flower has many resonances for Egyptian culture, representing resurrection among other characteristics.
There is plenty of evidence that these color revolutions are not what they seem. It is openly acknowledged in the media that Western intelligence trained Egyptian youth in the arts of nonviolent revolution for at least two years before the Egyptian uprising began. The Soros Foundation has been cited as a backer of these revolutions as well.
Western intel may even have provided Internet resources via something called Freenet, which was used extensively in some of the countries that experienced color revolutions. The UK Guardian, for example, has reported on a slew of Western institutions that are supposedly involved in helping train "youth" and incite revolution. These include USAID, National Endowment for Democracy, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs and Freedom House.
Recent color revolutions are claimed to have been inspired by high food prices. It seems indisputable that there is deep involvement of Western institutions in these color revolutions. While it is not quite clear for what reason, it has been hypothesized (by the Daily Bell in particular) that the real idea behind them is to create a series of Islamic states that the West can then use as foils to continue the faux "war on terror."
These color revolutions are also to be seen as ultimately ineffective because they do not change the underlying fundamentals of the machinery of oppression, specifically central banks and much of the paraphernalia of the Western regulatory state.
It is therefore likely that these color revolutions are merely a way to reconfigure societies for purposes best known to the Anglo-American power elite, which is obviously orchestrating them.
News & Analysis
|11/07/11||Directed History Sets War Between Syria and Turkey|
|06/24/11||The Real Reason the USSR Fell|
|11/22/11||Danny Panzella: Why the Left Likes the Fed|