Ending the Rebellion or restarting it differently

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Jim Fetters:
In fact, your description intimates that he had someone to help guide him while growing up - a trusted advisor, perhaps? I think I'm referencing Dune here, where Paul had all kinds of teachers to whom he was close. I'm wondering if he had some similar advisors as a teen before heading to the Academy.

Jim,

I'm sure Strephon had the best tutors, advisors, flakcatchers, and whatnot the Imperium could provide. I'm also sure that friends and confidants were in very short supply.

What's this, Bill? I don't think I have heard this story (although I wholeheartedly agree with preferring Strephon alive!). Where are there two versions of the assassination?

Okay, it's a little involved but stick with me.

When MT was first being put together, the Real Strephon on Usdiki was a fraud. He was either the surgically altered double or robot that Dulinor and Lucan claimed him to be.

GDW was staffed by wargamers and all wargamers are history cranks. LKW has specifically said that the Real Strephon was patterned on Pugachev (google the name). Perkin Warbeck is another historical example of this that you may be more familiar with.

So, MT is released and the Hobby learns that Strephon has been killed. The reaction is not what GDW expected.

It seems that the Hobby in general is extremely pissed off that Strephon was killed! They may like the idea of the Rebellion but Strephon and family gunned down in the Octogon is a little too much. When the Real Strephon faction is revealed through TNS items and in follow-on products (Rebellion Sourcebook), the Hobby ignores any and all suggestions that the Real Strephon is a fake Strephon. They want the Real Strephon to be the real Strephon and treat the man at Usdiki as such.

Time passes and MT's run is being wrapped up with a series of products meant to usher in TNE and the post-Rebellion era. One is, as you pointed out, Arrival Vengence, and GDW now needs to make a decision. Norris' borrowed AHL cruiser is touring the shattered Imperium and should call at Usdiki. What will Norris' crew find there? GDW decides to bow to the Hobbys' opinion and ret-cons the fake Real Strephon into the real Real Strephon!

I'm not privy to all the thinking behind the decision. All I know is what LKW and other GOOs have posted over the years. Having Strephon absent at Longbow-II fits neatly into the TNE story, but it leads to a few questions. Was Strephon 'resurrected' before the idea of Longbow-II and the Empress Wave was broached? Or was he resurrected afterwards and then inserted into those ideas? Or was it a little bit of both? Does anyone remember? Would knowing make the game more fun? LKW has said that the Hobby's opinion was a factor in turning the Real Strephon into the real Strephon.

All I know is that when I read AV at the coffee shop next door to my FLGS and learned that man at Usdiki was really Strephon, I shouted 'YES!' and pumped my fist in the air. (The staff called the police to come and throw a net over me. I did the same when I read about Dulinor being killed by the thresher and got netted again. YES!!)

So, summing up...

- For most of MT's run, Strephon was dead and the Real Strephon was a fake.

- At a point towards the end of MT's run, Strephon was brought back to life and the Real Strephon became real.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by Jim Fetters:
In fact, your description intimates that he had someone to help guide him while growing up - a trusted advisor, perhaps? I think I'm referencing Dune here, where Paul had all kinds of teachers to whom he was close. I'm wondering if he had some similar advisors as a teen before heading to the Academy.

Jim,

I'm sure Strephon had the best tutors, advisors, flakcatchers, and whatnot the Imperium could provide. I'm also sure that friends and confidants were in very short supply.

What's this, Bill? I don't think I have heard this story (although I wholeheartedly agree with preferring Strephon alive!). Where are there two versions of the assassination?

Okay, it's a little involved but stick with me.

When MT was first being put together, the Real Strephon on Usdiki was a fraud. He was either the surgically altered double or robot that Dulinor and Lucan claimed him to be.

GDW was staffed by wargamers and all wargamers are history cranks. LKW has specifically said that the Real Strephon was patterned on Pugachev (google the name). Perkin Warbeck is another historical example of this that you may be more familiar with.

So, MT is released and the Hobby learns that Strephon has been killed. The reaction is not what GDW expected.

It seems that the Hobby in general is extremely pissed off that Strephon was killed! They may like the idea of the Rebellion but Strephon and family gunned down in the Octogon is a little too much. When the Real Strephon faction is revealed through TNS items and in follow-on products (Rebellion Sourcebook), the Hobby ignores any and all suggestions that the Real Strephon is a fake Strephon. They want the Real Strephon to be the real Strephon and treat the man at Usdiki as such.

Time passes and MT's run is being wrapped up with a series of products meant to usher in TNE and the post-Rebellion era. One is, as you pointed out, Arrival Vengence, and GDW now needs to make a decision. Norris' borrowed AHL cruiser is touring the shattered Imperium and should call at Usdiki. What will Norris' crew find there? GDW decides to bow to the Hobbys' opinion and ret-cons the fake Real Strephon into the real Real Strephon!

I'm not privy to all the thinking behind the decision. All I know is what LKW and other GOOs have posted over the years. Having Strephon absent at Longbow-II fits neatly into the TNE story, but it leads to a few questions. Was Strephon 'resurrected' before the idea of Longbow-II and the Empress Wave was broached? Or was he resurrected afterwards and then inserted into those ideas? Or was it a little bit of both? Does anyone remember? Would knowing make the game more fun? LKW has said that the Hobby's opinion was a factor in turning the Real Strephon into the real Strephon.

All I know is that when I read AV at the coffee shop next door to my FLGS and learned that man at Usdiki was really Strephon, I shouted 'YES!' and pumped my fist in the air. (The staff called the police to come and throw a net over me. I did the same when I read about Dulinor being killed by the thresher and got netted again. YES!!)

So, summing up...

- For most of MT's run, Strephon was dead and the Real Strephon was a fake.

- At a point towards the end of MT's run, Strephon was brought back to life and the Real Strephon became real.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[daryen]

What Bill has described mirrors my memories of comments by LKW. Do note that at what point the GDW team decided to make the Real Strephon actually real is a bit hazy. However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

I will argue with the wording of Bill's second ending bullet point. Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Also, moving forward, AV really made Strephon a more defined and sympathetic character. Pushing forward, MJD's treatment of Strephon for 1248 makes him truly heroic. (But don't worry, another member of the family continues the Alkhalikoi 'problems'.)

 

[daryen]

What Bill has described mirrors my memories of comments by LKW. Do note that at what point the GDW team decided to make the Real Strephon actually real is a bit hazy. However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

I will argue with the wording of Bill's second ending bullet point. Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Also, moving forward, AV really made Strephon a more defined and sympathetic character. Pushing forward, MJD's treatment of Strephon for 1248 makes him truly heroic. (But don't worry, another member of the family continues the Alkhalikoi 'problems'.)

 

[daryen]

What Bill has described mirrors my memories of comments by LKW. Do note that at what point the GDW team decided to make the Real Strephon actually real is a bit hazy. However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

I will argue with the wording of Bill's second ending bullet point. Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Also, moving forward, AV really made Strephon a more defined and sympathetic character. Pushing forward, MJD's treatment of Strephon for 1248 makes him truly heroic. (But don't worry, another member of the family continues the Alkhalikoi 'problems'.)

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

Daryen,

Yes. The Real Strephon's dismissal of IRIS in Hard Times along with the near extinction of his safe zone pretty much signalled his faction was done for.

Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me. Strephon is a human being and thus should have warts. Turning him into an actual Marble Man instead of portraying him as someone who projects the persona of a Marble Man detracts greatly from the character of Strephon. I don't want a stainless saint as that's a lame cop out besides being poor writing. I want a depiction that is more nuanced, more real, and more mature in its construction.

Traveller has always been wheels within wheels. A more nuanced and less perfect Strephon fits that motif much better.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

Daryen,

Yes. The Real Strephon's dismissal of IRIS in Hard Times along with the near extinction of his safe zone pretty much signalled his faction was done for.

Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me. Strephon is a human being and thus should have warts. Turning him into an actual Marble Man instead of portraying him as someone who projects the persona of a Marble Man detracts greatly from the character of Strephon. I don't want a stainless saint as that's a lame cop out besides being poor writing. I want a depiction that is more nuanced, more real, and more mature in its construction.

Traveller has always been wheels within wheels. A more nuanced and less perfect Strephon fits that motif much better.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
However the change was not made until after Hard Times, as Hard Times pretty clearly shows the Real Strephon being fake. (And pretty close to elimination, too.)

Daryen,

Yes. The Real Strephon's dismissal of IRIS in Hard Times along with the near extinction of his safe zone pretty much signalled his faction was done for.

Strephon wasn't brought back to life as such, but the whole backstory was changed to show that Strephon had never actually died in the first place.

Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me. Strephon is a human being and thus should have warts. Turning him into an actual Marble Man instead of portraying him as someone who projects the persona of a Marble Man detracts greatly from the character of Strephon. I don't want a stainless saint as that's a lame cop out besides being poor writing. I want a depiction that is more nuanced, more real, and more mature in its construction.

Traveller has always been wheels within wheels. A more nuanced and less perfect Strephon fits that motif much better.


Have fun,
Bill

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I knew what you meant. I just wanted to make sure the others did. That's all. No slight intended.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me.

I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I knew what you meant. I just wanted to make sure the others did. That's all. No slight intended.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me.

I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

 

[daryen]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Let me just say that I used the phrases brought back to life and resurrected in a figurative sense and not a literal sense. Prior to the AV(?) ret-con, Strephon had been dead since 1117. After the ret-con, Strephon had been alive since 1117.

I knew what you meant. I just wanted to make sure the others did. That's all. No slight intended.

I have trouble with one-note characters, so the trend since Strephon's 'rebirth' to make him more noble, more sacrificing, and more heroic, falls flat with me.

I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

Daryen,

My comments weren't specifically aimed at 1248 but more at the post-MT near canonization of Strephon. There's an active thread here at COTI asking whether Strephon is the 'Kennedy of his generation' whatever the hell that means.(1)

The Strephon of the Survival Margin is more to my liking. We are presented with a basically noble man who is first shattered and numb, next an almost bezerk warrior, then resigned and bitter, and finally wisely taking the 'long view'. The writing is quite remarkable, we watch Strephon react and grow as a human being.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

That's the rub. History does tend to play a single note with regards to historical figures. However, it is important not to lose the nuances. Jefferson is far better understood as the writer of the Declaration of Independence and a slave holder, than just as some near-deified Founder Father. The same should hold true for Strephon.

The Rebellion and the Viral Holocaust both were rooted in ground partially of Strephon's making while his actions and inactions after the Assassination did help the Rebellion grow and fester. He does make amends towards the end and he does start preparing for a 'rebirth' he will not live to see, but his 'nondecision' to flee to Usdiki, or to dismiss IRIS out of hand, or to raise battlefleets and fight on three fronts are just as disasterous as Dulinor's actions in the Throne Room or Lucan's panicky fleet withdrawls.

Those facts should always be remembered.


Have fun,
Bill

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

Daryen,

My comments weren't specifically aimed at 1248 but more at the post-MT near canonization of Strephon. There's an active thread here at COTI asking whether Strephon is the 'Kennedy of his generation' whatever the hell that means.(1)

The Strephon of the Survival Margin is more to my liking. We are presented with a basically noble man who is first shattered and numb, next an almost bezerk warrior, then resigned and bitter, and finally wisely taking the 'long view'. The writing is quite remarkable, we watch Strephon react and grow as a human being.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

That's the rub. History does tend to play a single note with regards to historical figures. However, it is important not to lose the nuances. Jefferson is far better understood as the writer of the Declaration of Independence and a slave holder, than just as some near-deified Founder Father. The same should hold true for Strephon.

The Rebellion and the Viral Holocaust both were rooted in ground partially of Strephon's making while his actions and inactions after the Assassination did help the Rebellion grow and fester. He does make amends towards the end and he does start preparing for a 'rebirth' he will not live to see, but his 'nondecision' to flee to Usdiki, or to dismiss IRIS out of hand, or to raise battlefleets and fight on three fronts are just as disasterous as Dulinor's actions in the Throne Room or Lucan's panicky fleet withdrawls.

Those facts should always be remembered.


Have fun,
Bill

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by daryen:
I don't think he is "one-note". I think he has nuance. I will admit that MJD does have a specific "writing style" and, if you don't like it, it is possible to miss, but I do think Strephon still has flaws. But it is his nobility that is remembered.

Daryen,

My comments weren't specifically aimed at 1248 but more at the post-MT near canonization of Strephon. There's an active thread here at COTI asking whether Strephon is the 'Kennedy of his generation' whatever the hell that means.(1)

The Strephon of the Survival Margin is more to my liking. We are presented with a basically noble man who is first shattered and numb, next an almost bezerk warrior, then resigned and bitter, and finally wisely taking the 'long view'. The writing is quite remarkable, we watch Strephon react and grow as a human being.

It is just that, with the 1248 book, he will be a historical figure, not an active character (like in AV). As such he may appear more one-dimensional than wanted, but it is not out of place, nor does it necessarily detract from his prior presentations.

That's the rub. History does tend to play a single note with regards to historical figures. However, it is important not to lose the nuances. Jefferson is far better understood as the writer of the Declaration of Independence and a slave holder, than just as some near-deified Founder Father. The same should hold true for Strephon.

The Rebellion and the Viral Holocaust both were rooted in ground partially of Strephon's making while his actions and inactions after the Assassination did help the Rebellion grow and fester. He does make amends towards the end and he does start preparing for a 'rebirth' he will not live to see, but his 'nondecision' to flee to Usdiki, or to dismiss IRIS out of hand, or to raise battlefleets and fight on three fronts are just as disasterous as Dulinor's actions in the Throne Room or Lucan's panicky fleet withdrawls.

Those facts should always be remembered.


Have fun,
Bill

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

 

[kafka47]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

As you asked, you shall recieve, JFK retains a certain aura and questions abound around his death believing that he was on the verge of a fundamental social change. Most of this is speculation and myth, just as I suppose it would be with Stephon. Also, the twin assassinations of the Kennedys also radicalized a segment of the population in no longer believing in things were as they once were.

I will live the debate about Kennedy for the pulpit but it is interesting to speculate if the assassinations had a defining role in the shaping of the Traveller Universe by creating similar myths.

 

[kafka47]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

As you asked, you shall recieve, JFK retains a certain aura and questions abound around his death believing that he was on the verge of a fundamental social change. Most of this is speculation and myth, just as I suppose it would be with Stephon. Also, the twin assassinations of the Kennedys also radicalized a segment of the population in no longer believing in things were as they once were.

I will live the debate about Kennedy for the pulpit but it is interesting to speculate if the assassinations had a defining role in the shaping of the Traveller Universe by creating similar myths.

 

[kafka47]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:

1 - The actual Kennedy wasn't even the 'Kennedy of his generation'.

As you asked, you shall recieve, JFK retains a certain aura and questions abound around his death believing that he was on the verge of a fundamental social change. Most of this is speculation and myth, just as I suppose it would be with Stephon. Also, the twin assassinations of the Kennedys also radicalized a segment of the population in no longer believing in things were as they once were.

I will live the debate about Kennedy for the pulpit but it is interesting to speculate if the assassinations had a defining role in the shaping of the Traveller Universe by creating similar myths.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Gents,

We need to remember that revolutions occur when rising expectations are not met.

Starving peasents do not spark revolutions. Instead, they're kicked off by disaffected elites and wannabe elites.

Revolutions happen when the contradictions between the current structure (propaganda included) and the actual reality reach their most extreme levels, and when the current elite is so outdated by the current situation that it is cannot compensate for the changes anymore.

Another related condition which is needed for a revolution, is both the percieved and factual weakness of the current system, especially of the ruling class. Ever wonder why so many revolutions came at the end of wars (Parisian Commune after Napoleon III's defeat at the hands of Prussia; all of Europe in revolutionary fervor after WWI and, to a lesser degree, WWII; Egypt's King Faruk's overthrowing after the Egyptian army getting utterly defeated by Israel in 1948-1949, the big change in Israeli politics after the pyrric [sp?] victory of 1973 and so on)? Being defeated in war weakens the rulers (as they often have to make big concessions to the victors) AND reveals them to the masses as very defeatable weaklings instead of their (often) former "undefeatable collosus" image from before the war. Not ALL revolutions follow war, ofcourse, but many do.

By 1789, the French semi-feudal absolutist system was totally outdated by the growth of manufacture (worskshop) industry, and the contradiction between the interests of the failing nobility (many of which in big debts to the bankers and industrialists of the city) and the interests of the manufacturers reached such a level that the pressure of centuries of exploitation sprung out, and the peasant masses stood behind the manufacturers, who, in turn, promised them the one thing they wanted - private land and an end for Feudal exploitation.

And sometimes growth and prosperity, rather than decline and stravation trigger revolt - especially if the new growth increases by much the contrast between haves and have-nots.

Simple contradictions betwenn the ruling classes and the opressed classes do not cause, by themselves, revolutions; changes in the historical situation, which make them understand the fact that these contradictions are not eternal but the product of the system, do.

A powder-keg could stand for years in a storage shed and never explode; only a spark starts the chemical reaction that brings forth a detonation.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Gents,

We need to remember that revolutions occur when rising expectations are not met.

Starving peasents do not spark revolutions. Instead, they're kicked off by disaffected elites and wannabe elites.

Revolutions happen when the contradictions between the current structure (propaganda included) and the actual reality reach their most extreme levels, and when the current elite is so outdated by the current situation that it is cannot compensate for the changes anymore.

Another related condition which is needed for a revolution, is both the percieved and factual weakness of the current system, especially of the ruling class. Ever wonder why so many revolutions came at the end of wars (Parisian Commune after Napoleon III's defeat at the hands of Prussia; all of Europe in revolutionary fervor after WWI and, to a lesser degree, WWII; Egypt's King Faruk's overthrowing after the Egyptian army getting utterly defeated by Israel in 1948-1949, the big change in Israeli politics after the pyrric [sp?] victory of 1973 and so on)? Being defeated in war weakens the rulers (as they often have to make big concessions to the victors) AND reveals them to the masses as very defeatable weaklings instead of their (often) former "undefeatable collosus" image from before the war. Not ALL revolutions follow war, ofcourse, but many do.

By 1789, the French semi-feudal absolutist system was totally outdated by the growth of manufacture (worskshop) industry, and the contradiction between the interests of the failing nobility (many of which in big debts to the bankers and industrialists of the city) and the interests of the manufacturers reached such a level that the pressure of centuries of exploitation sprung out, and the peasant masses stood behind the manufacturers, who, in turn, promised them the one thing they wanted - private land and an end for Feudal exploitation.

And sometimes growth and prosperity, rather than decline and stravation trigger revolt - especially if the new growth increases by much the contrast between haves and have-nots.

Simple contradictions betwenn the ruling classes and the opressed classes do not cause, by themselves, revolutions; changes in the historical situation, which make them understand the fact that these contradictions are not eternal but the product of the system, do.

A powder-keg could stand for years in a storage shed and never explode; only a spark starts the chemical reaction that brings forth a detonation.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Bill Cameron:
Gents,

We need to remember that revolutions occur when rising expectations are not met.

Starving peasents do not spark revolutions. Instead, they're kicked off by disaffected elites and wannabe elites.

Revolutions happen when the contradictions between the current structure (propaganda included) and the actual reality reach their most extreme levels, and when the current elite is so outdated by the current situation that it is cannot compensate for the changes anymore.

Another related condition which is needed for a revolution, is both the percieved and factual weakness of the current system, especially of the ruling class. Ever wonder why so many revolutions came at the end of wars (Parisian Commune after Napoleon III's defeat at the hands of Prussia; all of Europe in revolutionary fervor after WWI and, to a lesser degree, WWII; Egypt's King Faruk's overthrowing after the Egyptian army getting utterly defeated by Israel in 1948-1949, the big change in Israeli politics after the pyrric [sp?] victory of 1973 and so on)? Being defeated in war weakens the rulers (as they often have to make big concessions to the victors) AND reveals them to the masses as very defeatable weaklings instead of their (often) former "undefeatable collosus" image from before the war. Not ALL revolutions follow war, ofcourse, but many do.

By 1789, the French semi-feudal absolutist system was totally outdated by the growth of manufacture (worskshop) industry, and the contradiction between the interests of the failing nobility (many of which in big debts to the bankers and industrialists of the city) and the interests of the manufacturers reached such a level that the pressure of centuries of exploitation sprung out, and the peasant masses stood behind the manufacturers, who, in turn, promised them the one thing they wanted - private land and an end for Feudal exploitation.

And sometimes growth and prosperity, rather than decline and stravation trigger revolt - especially if the new growth increases by much the contrast between haves and have-nots.

Simple contradictions betwenn the ruling classes and the opressed classes do not cause, by themselves, revolutions; changes in the historical situation, which make them understand the fact that these contradictions are not eternal but the product of the system, do.

A powder-keg could stand for years in a storage shed and never explode; only a spark starts the chemical reaction that brings forth a detonation.