Michael Writes

I think you may be accused of a poor memory if you do not amend your statement "I can't think of one successful war of independence within the last century that was waged by a people against its own totalitarian regime."

Were the British in India Totalitarian? What about Apartheid in South Africa? The Philippines? I think there are many more and better examples that will crop up if you examine the question.
- Michael

Michael,

Let's examine the question. I established the conditions as follows:

1. It has to occur within the 20th Century;
2. It had to be successful in that it overturned a totalitarian government and replaced it with a long-term, democratic form of government;
3. It had to be waged by a people against its own government.

The British in India were colonial but not totalitarian. Could you possibly imagine Gandhi's March to the Sea under a classic totalitarian government such as the Nazis or Soviets? Further, Indian independence was fought for, and attained, against a foreign colonial power,not a native and indigenous totalitarian regime. Therefore, that does not meet my criterion of "own totalitarian regime."

"The Philippines". Michael, so nice that you just toss this out without any explanation. Are you talking about the Philippine rebellion against Spain in the 19th century? That doesn't meet my threshold of taking place in the 20th century and while the United States certainly was a colonial power in the Philippines, I would not consider its' role that of a totalitarian power as evidenced by the fact that the United States was committed to granting Philippine independence, which originally was to take place in the late 1930s-early 1940s, but which was delayed by World War 2. The United States eventually granted Philippine independence with the successful conclusion of the war. Again, this does not meet the criterion of being fought by a people against its "own totalitarian regime." While Philippine independence took place in the 20th century, it does not meet the threshold of criteria 2 and 3.

South Africa- I would certainly consider the white South African government totalitarian in nature, it was engaged in armed conflict with anti-government forces, and the government was changed to a more democratic form, at least for the time being. There appears to be growing evidence that this nation's government may be tilting in the direction of failure as evidenced by its support of Robert Mugabe's thoroughly totalitarian regime in Zimbabwe. Let's put South Africa on "Pending".

I think a better argument might be made by using the Polish revolution lead by Lech Walesa and his Solidarity movement, which took place prior to the demise of the Soviet superpower and with it, its retreating sphere of influence.

The demise of the Soviet Union was the result of a broad economic collapse. In any event, it now appears that the old Soviet Union, although somewhat diminished in size and reformulated as Russia, has again become totalitarian and under the control of Vladimir Putin of the KGB. Therefor, I would say that the Russian people continue to live under a totalitarian system.

TRM