The concept of destiny or determinism is one that has confounded even the greatest philosophers. Instead of becoming entangled in the philosophical concerns surrounding the aforementioned notions of destiny and determinism, perhaps a more appropriate question to ask is whether revolutions are “accidental affairs” or inevitable.

I do not believe revolutions are inevitable, because inevitability is somewhat of a binary condition. If a revolution is “inevitable”, it implies that a revolution is going to occur no matter what, and that a revolution is unavoidable. The issue with the rigid nature of inevitability is that it struggles to account for the possibility of circumstantial change. For example, if a regime exercises reforms that satisfy its citizens, is a revolution still inevitable? Instead, I believe that it is more helpful to think of revolution in terms of probability, a far more fluid abstraction. The notion of probability is aptly able to account for every type of situation, from the more stable of societies like the United States, to the more volatile of countries, like Venezuela.

Another advantage of understanding revolutions in terms of probability, is that probability can actually conceptualize the notion of “accidental affairs”.  In societies where revolutions are highly probable (almost inevitable), a seemingly isolated incident can have a much higher chance to accidentally spark a revolution. Meanwhile, in societies where citizens are generally satisfied with their government, a similar accidental incident would most likely not provide the same incendiary spark that could lead to a full scale revolution.