Cliff Arroyo says:
With very few exceptions, revolutions are terrible ways to try to improve societies.
Unless the population is well educated and/or financially stable and/or culturally composed* enough they’ll for sure end badly.
I agree completely. Both on the level of societies and in what concerns personal development, a revolution is an attempt to forego slow and painful process of transformation. And that never works. You have to work patiently and consistently for a very long time to create anything worthwhile.
Clarissa's Blog 
Supposing you get rid of the authority that defines your limits, how will you deal with your new limits? Many people respond by contracting not expanding — thus Zimbabwe has many of the qualities of colonial hierarchy reimposed. People think they desire unlimited freedom, but the majority do not know themselves very well at all, and actually do not. They want restrictions — something to fight against and to feel morally outraged over. That is why it is advisable to give a lot of radical liberal movements a wide berth, too. They absolutely do not want what they think they want.
LikeLike
There is a popular saying among Spain’s Liberals, “When we lived against Franco, life was better.” So you are absolutely right when you say that, “They want restrictions — something to fight against and to feel morally outraged over.”
LikeLike
There were also some good changes in Zimbabwe, in that even though the majority population only became marginally better off materially, they are happier and more relaxed in the new Zimbabwe. But so far as the ruling class goes, it is clear they just wanted to emulate the colonials as closely as possible. Also they do this rather crassly and chaotically. The tone is lowered.
LikeLike
In Ukraine, too, the Orange Revolution was initially a good thing. The problem is that after it succeeded, everybody just sat there and waited for everything to get better on its own. That never happened, so now everybody is really enraged.
LikeLike
The understanding of what it is to rule is missing. Even in the new Australian government, it is seen as an opportunity to exploit, but this is very modern and immature. To create an environment where others can express their potentials should be the purpose of ruling. But it is not good enough to run things mechanically. You need to have an understanding of organic life and how that fluctuates, so that you can make adjustments for it. No use brutalising people because they don’t come up to your expectations. So many radical liberals do, however, do this, both from the bottom of the hierarchy and from the top. And right wingers who have no experience in leadership, but only in opposition do it as well. Being masterful is an art. The white colonials largely had that disposition, whereas the current encumbents do not.
LikeLike
How Zims are happier after the revolution:
LikeLike
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/02/study-suggests-occupy-wall-street-movement-undone-by-liberals-need-to-feel-unique/
LikeLike