Sa’adeh the Revolutionary: On Revolution in General... and the First Social Nationalist Revolution in July 1949 Specifically
Adel Beshara
Revolution, as defined by the Arab Encyclopedia, is "a method of social change involving political, social, and economic conditions and structures." This change process does not adhere to the methods sanctioned by the state’s constitutional system; instead, it is radical, comprehensive, and swift, leading to the collapse of the existing regime and the emergence of a new one. Politically and symbolically, revolution represents a total rejection of all forms of injustice, humiliation, slavery, and oppression inflicted upon citizens or people.
Given the importance and transformative power of revolutions in people's lives, the concept of revolution remains one of the most significant, prevalent, and enthralling ideas in political and social thought throughout human history. The concept continues to spark widespread debate among thinkers and researchers due to its rich, diverse, and nuanced connotations and implications.
The term "revolution" carries various connotations, ideas, and perceptions. It is used across different forms of expression, positions, and actions. The word applies to numerous incidents marked by violence and severity aimed at creating change. It also intersects with concepts such as rebellion, disobedience, coups, resistance, uprisings, and rampages against a regime in any scenario where significant change is pursued, intentional or unintentional.
Based on this perception, the term "revolution" is relatively recent in Syrian and Arab culture. It has been used to describe movements that arose against colonialism, particularly Western colonialism. These armed movements, which opposed Ottoman, French, British, and Italian rule, were termed liberation revolutions. Examples include the Great Syrian Revolution, the Algerian Revolution, the Palestinian Revolution, the Iraqi Revolution, the Arabi Revolution in Egypt, the Al-Khattabi Revolution in Morocco, and the Omar Al-Mukhtar Revolution in Libya, among others across the Arab world.
Not every armed movement qualifies as a revolution, nor does every instance of anger and agitation signify a new revolutionary situation. Upon closely examining the Arab “revolutions,” it becomes apparent that most fail to meet the contemporary criteria of true revolutions. Many of these movements did not achieve the level of a genuine revolution because they either erupted suddenly without planning as reactions to unacceptable conditions or were part of power struggles. Consequently, the so-called “revolutions” of the Arab Spring cannot be considered revolutions in the proper sense, as they did not seek to transform the social, economic, and political foundations of the state and society. Their achievements were limited to changing those in power. The events of the Arab Spring cannot be classified as revolutions. According to Crane Brinton's definition in "Anatomy of a Revolution," a revolution is "a dynamic process characterized by a transition from one social structure to another." This did not occur during the Arab Spring.
In contrast, the first social nationalist revolution announced by Sa’adeh in July 1949 was distinct from other Syrian and Arab “revolutions” because it aimed not only to oppose tyranny through armed popular movement but also to advance the country from an outdated economic, social, and political state to a progressive one. The revolution’s stated goal was “a major transformation in the structure of society,” rather than merely altering the existing regime's form, as clearly outlined in the leadership's communiqué of the First Supreme Social National Revolution.
From the initial reading of the communiqué, it is clear that the revolution's aim was never merely to "overthrow the government and dissolve the parliament," as opposed to the political opposition at the time. Instead, it sought something far more profound: a new constitution for the country and a secular system that mandates the separation of religion from the state. This would prevent clerics from interfering in national politics and judicial matters, eradicate social sectarianism before addressing political issues, establish a civil society, and create a new economic system based on national policies encompassing Lebanon and the entire Syrian region. If we scrutinize these demands, we find that they involve significant issues affecting all aspects of society and require more than just amendments to political forms and structures. They call for a new outlook on life that is wholly dependent on reason.
The first social national revolution, as perceived, marks a significant rupture in the current political landscape. Fundamentally, it seeks to liberate society from its existential suffering. The revolution's goal was not simply to topple the Al-Khoury-Solh government for the sake of change or to replace it with opposition politicians from the same traditional political school. Had the objective been merely to overthrow the government, Sa’adeh and his party would have joined existing alliances and utilized conventional political pressure to achieve their aims. Here we pause at his statement, “The fall of our enemies does not mean our rise,” which implies that the objectives of the initial social nationalist revolution extended beyond just toppling the government. The goal was also to establish favourable conditions that meet the requirements for comprehensive progress.
In addition to its comprehensiveness, the first social nationalist revolution was pioneering in its proposed reforms, bold in its vision for the future, and clear in its contents. It was the first to define goals, assign tasks, and offer solutions that transcended the traditional meaning of revolutions that rise to power without a purposeful national project. Unlike those who eventually wither away or become mere authoritarians without legitimacy, Sa’adeh’s revolution maintained its purpose and vision over time. Indeed, the first social nationalist revolution preceded the Egyptian July Revolution of 1952 in addressing the social and economic problems affecting the most disadvantaged groups. From its inception, the Declaration of the First National Social Revolution demanded justice for workers and farmers and called for the elimination of capitalist monopoly and tyranny. The July Revolution later sought to achieve these goals after its initial success.
Moreover, the first social nationalist revolution, with its call to abolish all provisions impeding civil and political rights, surpassed the Egyptian revolution in rejecting various settlements and concessions to both religious and civil institutions. Sa’adeh's revolution was founded on the principle that "the nation is one community" and that citizens are entirely equal in rights and duties outside of religious constraints. This principle was not seriously addressed or adopted by the Egyptian July Revolution, leaving Egypt to continue suffering under the tyranny of religious institutions and the weight of deeply rooted traditions, despite the reforms implemented by Abdel Nasser in Egyptian society.
This comprehensiveness, evident in the goals of the first national social revolution, is rarely found in contemporary “revolutions.” According to Sa’adeh, this is an extension of the marriage between national and social factors. Therefore, the revolution’s message was not purely nationalistic or political but included a comprehensive, radical social aspect that addressed social problems in both material and spiritual aspects. Here, some may wonder: If totalitarianism is the main feature of the revolution, why did Sa’adeh not call for the dismantling of the Lebanese entity and its integration into Syria? The answer is that Sa’adeh believed Lebanon's final national status should be determined entirely by the will of the Lebanese people, provided they are allowed to choose their preferences. He never advocated for forced dismantling or arbitrary political integration.
To the extent that the first social national revolution was based on planning and a clear vision, it transcends the psychological concept of revolutions as mere social explosions. Gustave Le Bon, a pioneer in this field, argues that revolutions occur under the influence of destructive unconscious mass emotions, with the collective unconscious acting as the primary force behind these movements. In contrast, Sa’adeh did not support intuition or subconscious principles; he believed solely in reason, particularly in the context of revolution.
Some argue that the true value of a revolution lies in its popularity, resonance with the broader masses, and ability to mobilize these forces. From this perspective, the first social nationalist revolution might be dismissed as merely an armed rebellion against the government. However, this conclusion overlooks many realistic inferences, empirical evidence, and scientific and logical comparisons. The reality in 1949 reflected a broad and popular expansion of the Syrian National Social Movement across various sects and social circles in the country. The early suppression of the revolution does not imply that it failed to represent the interests and will of the masses. Change, as exemplified by the so-called "Cedar Revolution," may involve broad participation, but this does not necessarily constitute a true revolution. For an event to be deemed a revolution, it must lead to a significantly improved situation with clear objectives and goals, rather than simply introducing changes or amendments under vague slogans such as "fighting corruption" without providing a clear and non-corrupt alternative.
Also, a real revolution can occur in a specific place or time led by a particular elite without requiring broad public participation, as seen in the Egyptian July Revolution of 1952. The term "revolution" applies only to those aimed at achieving radical, positive change.
Others may argue that the first social nationalist revolution resembled more of a coup than an actual revolution. This perspective is incorrect, as it fails to recognize the essential differences between a coup and a revolution. A coup seeks to monopolize power without instigating comprehensive political, social, economic, or legal changes. It represents a power shift within the same regime using official means of violence, without altering the political status or the distribution of benefits within society. In contrast, revolution, unlike a coup, seeks to fundamentally transform existing systems and conditions in a comprehensive and integrated manner. Examining the social nationalist revolution closely and transparently, it is evident that the revolution aimed to bring about profound changes in the political, economic, and social systems, rather than merely redistributing political power among various government bodies or officials, as is typical of a coup.
Sa’adeh was not just a revolutionary pioneer and leader; he was also a thinker, a founder, and the leader of the first modern, comprehensive revolution. His revolution was liberatory, social, unifying, and humanitarian. Its aspects were intertwined and its goals unified, transcending traditional revolutions that aimed simply to change political forms without addressing deeper societal and structural roots, including economic, legal, and political systems.