Will there be a revolution in Russia?

The primary issue with such discussions is the absence of a theory that can accurately predict revolutions with one hundred percent certainty. Consequently, all theories on the subject are merely speculative fantasies.

Allow me to share some thoughts on this matter:

1. All revolutions happen unexpectedly

All revolutions follow a similar pattern: one day, the country appears stable, with the ruling elite enjoying their privileges, the opposition remaining in the shadows, and the people silently enduring their burdens. Then suddenly, the streets are flooded with outraged individuals, marginalized politicians transform into impassioned leaders, and the police and army refuse to obey orders from the ruling leadership. This marks the beginning of a revolution. Typically, even the most well-informed individuals who are actively engaged in the revolutionary process cannot foresee such rapid developments. For instance, a month before the February Revolution of 1917 in Russia, Vladimir Lenin expressed his lament to the Swiss youth, believing that his generation would not live to witness the forthcoming revolutionary battles. The events of October that same year are even more remarkable.

Once again, predicting a revolution is impossible. Basic logic dictates that if there were a genuine means of predicting revolutions, the ruling classes would undoubtedly exploit it to suppress them in their infancy.

2. A social crisis can be predicted

In 1990, following the surprising Velvet Revolutions, the United States established a special working group on state failure. Utilizing quantitative models, this group successfully predicted over 85% of the major public crises that took place worldwide between 1990 and 1997. Such a high success rate is remarkable. However, while the group could confidently forecast the emergence of state crises, they struggled to predict their scale, progression, and consequences. In other words, scientists were unable to determine whether a crisis would lead to a revolution or not.

“Sociologists can effectively identify the focal points of social tension, but they face limitations in predicting the precise occurrence and form of social upheaval, be it a rebellion, coup, mutiny, revolution, or top-down reform”

The study of revolutions bears resemblance to the study of earthquakes. Seismologists have made significant progress in identifying the potential regions and approximate time frames for earthquakes, but they are currently unable to predict their magnitude or exact timing. Similarly, sociologists can effectively identify the focal points of social tension, but they face limitations in predicting the precise occurrence and form of social upheaval, be it a rebellion, coup, mutiny, revolution, or top-down reform.

3. Today in Russia there are many prerequisites that allow predicting social upheavals

Can they lead to a revolution? Without pretending to be exhaustive, I will name those that seem to me the most important.

3.1. Structural prerequisites

3.1.1. A failed war always undermines a regime. I don't mean to be offensive, but it appears that Russia is trapped in a cycle of a "small victorious war," similar to episodes in its history. Unsuccessful wars tend to fuel social discontent, whether within the army, among the capital's population, or in various national regions. Furthermore, a failed war creates favorable conditions for a coup d'état, as it weakens the government, erodes the willingness of armed forces to defend it, and emboldens rebels who possess weapons and wield influence over the military and paramilitary groups.

“Putin has long lost touch with reality and has grown indifferent to the needs of the population. As more and more social strata feel oppressed and alienated, the regime loses legitimacy and is viewed as unjust”

3.1.2. The crisis of personalist regimes. The term is used in political jargon to describe the current political regime in the Russian Federation. This system concentrates power in the hands of the head of state while formally maintaining the principles and institutions of the constitutional system. Consequently, all aspects of the country's policy, both domestic and foreign, are subject to the will of a single political figure.The emergence of a personalist dictatorship typically follows a certain pattern: when a ruler, whether gaining power through elections, the military, or a political party, remains in office for an extended period, they inevitably become detached from reality and alienate the professional military and business elites. Political competition within the country gives way to an underground struggle among "influential groups" and clans. The ruler begins to rely solely on a close circle of friends, family members, and other associates, who, in turn, are granted high positions and accumulate enormous wealth. It is evident that in such regimes, the longer the ruler remains in power, the more corrupt the government becomes, with the ruler's inner circle benefiting the most. Putin has long lost touch with reality and has grown indifferent to the needs of the population. As more and more social strata feel oppressed and alienated, the regime loses legitimacy and is viewed as unjust. In times of crisis, when the ruler's power weakens or triggers a rebellion, they find themselves isolated and abandoned by their own elites.

Moreover, the personalist regime is constantly vulnerable to a crisis of legitimacy. Unlike a monarch, who possesses sacred legitimacy, the personalist ruler (such as a president) lacks such a secure foundation and must continuously reaffirm their legitimacy. Consequently, each re-election, regardless of how formal and controlled it may be, becomes a problem for the country and, at the very least, a source of stress for society, potentially leading to a power struggle, including revolutionary methods. It should be noted that Putin's elections are scheduled for the following year. If this is still relevant.

3.2. Psychological prerequisites

“Alexis de Tocqueville analyzed the causes of the French Revolution of 1793 and arrived at a seemingly paradoxical conclusion: people who can endure the most burdensome laws often violently overthrow them as soon as they are relieved. He was the first to highlight that revolutions occur not primarily due to economic factors, but rather due to psychological reasons”

Alexis de Tocqueville analyzed the causes of the French Revolution of 1793 and arrived at a seemingly paradoxical conclusion: people who can endure the most burdensome laws often violently overthrow them as soon as they are relieved. He was the first to highlight that revolutions occur not primarily due to economic factors, but rather due to psychological reasons. There comes a point when people's mindset undergoes a reorientation, leading to a qualitative shift in how they evaluate social reality. What was once considered obligatory is now seen as incidental, what was deemed necessary is now perceived as superfluous, and what seemed unattainable becomes seen as achievable by the majority. Such a reassessment typically doesn't happen when people are under the oppressive control of authorities, as observed in the Russian Federation. However, it becomes possible when certain burdens are lifted. For example, in the case of Russia, this could occur if Putin's power were severely weakened as a result of a defeat on the front or through his removal from office via a coup d'état. It is during such periods that the idea arises in society that other life difficulties can also be overcome. The specific difficulties may vary across different social strata, ranging from physical survival for the poorest to issues related to excessive taxes hindering consumer demands or access to socially significant roles and upward mobility for other social groups. Dissatisfaction may stem from different reasons within each social stratum, but the common thread is the increasing frustration, amplified by the belief that things could be fundamentally different if the current system of social institutions, which is shaped by and supports the existing political regime, were to change. When such sentiments become widespread, the probability of a revolutionary outburst becomes significantly higher.

In my opinion, the brewing crisis in the Russian Federation could potentially lead to a revolution against the Putin regime, but it is more likely to occur following his death or removal from power. In such a scenario, several factions may emerge (their contours are already becoming apparent), each exerting control over a specific part of the state. A prime example of this is the concept of dual power, which arose on February 27, 1917, as a result of the February Revolution, when both the Provisional Committee of the State Duma and the Petrograd Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies were formed simultaneously.

Along with this, regional governments claiming cultural independence and self-sufficiency may arise (Caucasus, Tatarstan, Yakutia, etc.). This can cause anti-colonial or national liberation revolutions.

Everything is possible.

Everything is true about the unknown.

Special for Espreso

About the author. Ihor Tanchyn, political scientist, journalist.

The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.