Here’s what ChatGPT had to say. (yeah, AI slop, I know ).
Successful or lasting transitions:
1. Eastern Europe 1989 (Velvet Revolution): Student protests toppled communist regimes; quick move to democratic institutions blocked a return of the old guard.
2. South Korea 1987: Student-led movement forced constitutional reform; strong institutions cemented long-term democracy.
3. Tunisia 2011: Youth uprising ousted Ben Ali; fragile, but managed more reforms than its neighbors.
4. Bangladesh 1990: Student protests forced out Ershad and restored parliamentary democracy.
5. Indonesia 1998: Students ended Suharto’s 32-year rule; transition to democracy largely stuck.
Failed or reversed outcomes:
1. Egypt 2011: Mubarak fell, but the military quickly reasserted power.
3. Hong Kong 2019: Mass mobilization, but Beijing tightened control further.
4. Bangladesh 2018 & 2024–25: Student protests (road safety, anti-corruption) drew support but faced crackdowns or stalled reforms.
5. Indonesia 2019–20: Youth protests against anti-corruption rollbacks failed to overcome entrenched elites.
Learnings & guidance:
1. Toppling is the easy part.* Building resilient, accountable systems is much harder and requires as much energy as the protests themselves.
2. Institutions matter. Wins lasted where protesters translated momentum into concrete legal and institutional reforms (Eastern Europe, South Korea, Indonesia 1998).
3. Beware the vacuum. Without credible alternatives, old networks (Egypt, Bangladesh, Myanmar) reassert control.
4. Broad coalitions win durability. Success is stronger when youth movements ally with labor, civil society, and reformist insiders — not just street mobilization.
5. International context counts. Where outside powers supported transitions (Eastern Europe), reforms stuck; where they didn’t (Myanmar, Egypt), regimes rebounded.
Takeaway: Gen-Z has shown it can bring a government down in days. The real test is whether it can also build structures that stop corruption and nepotism from creeping back in.
Really bad GPT answer on so many levels. e.g. Tunisia is much worse now; Bangladesh succeeded in toppling the old regime (we'll see about the new gov). Myanmar became a full fledged war that they might actually win (IMHO, the junta would be done by now had it not been for China).
Interesting experiment! Have you considered splitting it into three 1-hour blocks spread throughout the day? That way, people in different time zones would always have at least one convenient slot, and it might also feel more intentional-spending a focused hour instead of a longer 3-hour window.
While transparency and honesty are noble ideals, governments (to take one example) often navigate complex environments involving diplomacy, national security, and political strategy. Do you think it’s possible to run a government entirely devoid of lies? And by government, I am imagining the "for the people, by the people" government that wants good for the people.
Note: I am not pro lies, but challenging myself to think from the other angle.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.
- Apple Inc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Different
Go to 00:38, and assume that the dummy was hit by a lorry with flat face. The lorry would make a direct impact on the back of the head, before the helmet inflates.
Go to 03:55, and assume that the cyclist had hit a wall. This time too, the cyclist's head would hit the wall.
Successful or lasting transitions:
1. Eastern Europe 1989 (Velvet Revolution): Student protests toppled communist regimes; quick move to democratic institutions blocked a return of the old guard.
2. South Korea 1987: Student-led movement forced constitutional reform; strong institutions cemented long-term democracy.
3. Tunisia 2011: Youth uprising ousted Ben Ali; fragile, but managed more reforms than its neighbors.
4. Bangladesh 1990: Student protests forced out Ershad and restored parliamentary democracy.
5. Indonesia 1998: Students ended Suharto’s 32-year rule; transition to democracy largely stuck.
Failed or reversed outcomes:
1. Egypt 2011: Mubarak fell, but the military quickly reasserted power.
2. Myanmar 1988 & 2021: Youth-led protests brutally crushed; no systemic change.
3. Hong Kong 2019: Mass mobilization, but Beijing tightened control further.
4. Bangladesh 2018 & 2024–25: Student protests (road safety, anti-corruption) drew support but faced crackdowns or stalled reforms.
5. Indonesia 2019–20: Youth protests against anti-corruption rollbacks failed to overcome entrenched elites.
Learnings & guidance:
1. Toppling is the easy part.* Building resilient, accountable systems is much harder and requires as much energy as the protests themselves.
2. Institutions matter. Wins lasted where protesters translated momentum into concrete legal and institutional reforms (Eastern Europe, South Korea, Indonesia 1998).
3. Beware the vacuum. Without credible alternatives, old networks (Egypt, Bangladesh, Myanmar) reassert control.
4. Broad coalitions win durability. Success is stronger when youth movements ally with labor, civil society, and reformist insiders — not just street mobilization.
5. International context counts. Where outside powers supported transitions (Eastern Europe), reforms stuck; where they didn’t (Myanmar, Egypt), regimes rebounded.
Takeaway: Gen-Z has shown it can bring a government down in days. The real test is whether it can also build structures that stop corruption and nepotism from creeping back in.