The first thing I would like to get out of the way here is this misconception where everyone pretends Gaddafi was loved by all average citizens. Can
one of you here tell me one world leader in the last century that was actually loved by all his fellow citizenry? I can't think of one democratically
elected leader that was loved by more than 50%. Trying to find a dictator that was loved by every person would be even harder.
Now contextualise Libya for a minute. While it only has 6,000,000 citizens it isn't exactly the most stable of states (clearly evidenced in the civil
unrest- believe it or not). Within Libya there is a deep rooted tribal society that is both fractured and frictional. The Western tribes specifically
Gaddafi's and those associated have been the best off, while the Eastern tribes (where most the oil is) have seen there oil money diverted to
infastructure in Western Libya. They have come off second best, with the third probably being the deeply Islamic and often fundementalist South (that
is where the protests in relation to the Norweigien images of Muhhamed were).
So the first thing you should understand is that Libya isn't some magical utopia where Gaddafi took the oil money and gave it to the people. Social
cohesion in America and most Western nations (while it has been steadily reducing at times) is relatively stable. In Libya it is not. Libya is an oil
economy which has failed to industrialize (which is seen as the first step to becoming a developed country- the next being becoming a service based
economy). During Gaddafi's reign 200,000 Africans were employed (mostly Sub-Saharan). Libya only has a population of 6,000,000. There was 30%
Yes. It was the best off African country no doubt. But it had a deeply entrentched and complex beurucratic system. The people's congress was in most
cases a sham and at the end of the day all major decisions would go to Gaddafi, his sons and his inner circle.
So to recap, Libya was relatively wealthy compared to the rest of Africa. Gaddafi failed to diversify and industralize the economy. That mixed
together with the rise in the Middle and Lower-Middle class, higher education and an increase in the political activity of the elite class largely
contributed to the civil unrest. In my analytical opinion.
Now that we have the general truth out of the way, do I think the 2nd Libyan 'revolution' is a positive. Yes and no. Yes for the fact that there
trully is a desire for more free and democratic governance and no for a multitude of reasons.
a) Not all the rebels care about democracy, they are simply power hungry
b) There are islamist sections which will gain from this
c) They do not have the beuracratic capacity, man power and infastructure to "push the paper" in a democracy
e) Mob rule would marganalize specific tribes (those who profited from Gaddafi) and result in even greater instability
f) It seems un-natural. This (to me) is clearly shown by the fact that it required outside intervention for the revolution to make any headway
g) Primitive desires for revenge in Libya will be and currently are far to strong
f) I frankly don't want to witness a failed state, blundering their resources and becoming a hotbed for Islamic extremism.
Hopefully this revolution won't turn out like that. Hopefully it will against all odds produce a stable, free and democratic (yet run by rule of law
not mob rule) state. However I really doubt things will be better then they were under Gaddafi (and things evidently weren't that great as some think
I know most here want to tune into the conspiracy aspect, however in some cases it either isn't true or isn't as clean cut as they say it is. No doubt
foreign governments, financial institutions and corporations will profit from this rebellion. It is a proven fact that there is no evidence to sustain
the fact that mercanaries existed and it has been proven un-true that Gaddafi initially bombed his own people. Initially he bombed weapons compounds
with jets no civillian infastructure. Any civillians killed were most likely there to steal some weapons. Not to mention the initial number of 1,000
killed demonstrators was revised down to 200 dead people including law enforcment. However does this detract from the fact that a large slice
(probably majority) didn't like Gaddafi (especiially the young who cant find employment for their level of education and haven't seen the benefits of
his regime as they were to young to see the negatives of the old monarcy)? No. Frankly he was a nasty bastard. As is Obama, as was Bush, as is Assad,
as is Putin, as is David Cameron and as is almost every other world leader.
edit on 3-9-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason