You say you want a Revolution.

Can you smell that? That faint wafting scent that is tickling our nostrils with hope and possibility? It’s the smell of ash, rage and change. Burning effigies and vocal outrage mingle in the streets, combining with a mixture of fear and uncertainty from within. Yes it smells rather like revolution. Revolution excites me, both as a politics junkie and a historian. It is ripe with possibilities and the historical implications are virtually endless. Some people are excited by these current revolutions because of the anarchy they appear to be causing. I rather dislike anarchy. It’s too loud, too mindless, and causes an awful mess. However, revolution is not anarchy. Perhaps because there is a point behind it. An actual motive with goals that is far from mindless violence. And yes, violence is a major and commonly occurring component of revolution. Violence in the case of revolution isn’t villainous, though. When revolution rises from the streets, from the plebs and the proletariats, violence is often the only way change can be effected.

That is how it has always been. Look at the revolutionary milestones: America, France, Russia, China, Cuba, and the Soviet satellites. All of them forced change through physical and vocal aggression. But it isn’t fair to compare what has been happening in Egypt and the Middle East to what has happened in historical revolutions of centuries past. There are so many new players in technology and social networking that make these revolutions a completely different beast. Things like Twitter and Facebook have helped to put global pressure on the Egyptian government, giving the revolting masses a powerful and vast ally. America, France, and Russia did not have such a powerful outlet. Pamphlets would take weeks, sometimes months, to reach the other side of the Atlantic, not seconds.

I will happily admit, however, that it is just as easy to argue the opposite, that it is easy to compare these revolutions as they use the same tools, just in different mediums.

Thankfully, this isn’t about Egypt’s historical place in the romantic hall of revolutions. It was going to be, but then I remembered George W. Bush, Gordon Brown, and Stephen Harper and I decided I ought to climb up on my soapbox and point out the obvious. We in the West should really take a good, thoughtful look at what the people of Egypt have done and take note of it. Am I saying that Westerners are oppressed in a manner akin to those in the Middle East? No, not at all—far from it, really. I’m saying that we’ve grown complacent and lazy. We complain about our governments, our diplomatic bodies, our representatives, from the comfort of our plush sodas. How many of us actually vote, though? How many of us petition our leaders, protest our laws, or rally against our governing bodies? How many of us have just given up? Think that one vote, one voice can’t change jack squat, so do nothing?

Don’t get me wrong; I can understand feeling insignificant and helpless. I’ve long-since been used, abused, and thrown aside by politics, leaving me feeling disillusioned and jaded. But so long as there is something to complain about, there is something to vote against. And that is what must be remembered: there might not always be something to vote for in an election, but there is always something to vote against.

Egypt is still neck deep in revolutionary angst, but one thing has been accomplished: they have managed to collect the diplomatic voice and use it to create change. At least in the democratic outlook, Egypt has managed to put an end to its oppression. The people have toppled the government. They rallied, they ranted, they raved, but most importantly, they revolted. They saw something they wanted to change and they changed it. We have democratic rights, freedoms, and standards. Instead of complaining and doing nothing, why don’t we take a cue from the Egyptians and use our voice and our force? Before those democratic rights are lost and we need to revolt ourselves.

Vive le Revolution.