Which Comes First: Evolution or Revolution?
by Bob Schwartz

The 20th century gave us two world wars and an atomic bomb, but the most interesting of the Big Events of the century may be the Russian Revolution. An inequitable and unbalanced way of life gave bloody way to abstract enlightened visions of a better world. The particular inequities ended, Russia moved into modern times, but competition for the “right” vision and ineradicable baser human natures seeking power and control led to decades of national and global troubles. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss,” the Who said.
The Russian Revolution was grounded in a Marxist vision, which was in turn a Christian vision: a community on earth as it is in heaven, a brotherhood of people in which suffering and want would be softened, if not alleviated, by those who have a surplus of comfort and resource. It was Lennon, not Marx, who said, “You can say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I hope someday you’ll join us, and the world will live as one.”
What went wrong?
What almost always goes wrong is that evolution and revolution are out of sync. It is easy to say that people and society should first evolve for a while, and then at some critical moment, all that’s needed is that next faster-than-evolution event to take it to the next level.
That turns out rarely to be the case.
Evolution is slow, erratic, and always engenders resistance and reaction. The cliché is that people and society fear change, but that is too easy. They fear the unknown. The expression “better the devil you know than the one you don’t” sums it up. It takes a substantial leap—you might say a leap of faith—the walk into a vision rather than remain in a lesser but familiar reality.
Revolution is both an attempt to make evolution more real and to create conditions where that evolution can continue more broadly and forcefully. But, as pointed out with the Russian experience, it doesn’t always work that way. Revolution is conflict, and conflict creates its own set of conditions sometimes antithetical to evolution. “Fighting for peace” is oxymoronic (some would say just plain moronic), but we have had to live through that. (Note the moment in Stanley Kubrick’s brilliant film Dr. Strangelove where the President scolds his arguing advisers, “Stop it. There’s no fighting in the War Room.”)
One of the exceptional examples of evolution and revolution working together is the American Revolution. It is one of the reasons it worked so well. The founders may have been the fathers of our country, but they were the children of the Enlightenment. That multi-faceted evolution—philosophical, political, economic, spiritual—had gone as far as it could go when it hit a wall. They believed that if they could break through, which did mean war, they could establish an enlightened nation. And, to an extent greater or lesser than some might like or expect, they did.
Evolution, or lack of it, is at the heart of some current American problems.
America is heir to two great evolutions, sometimes unrecognized, often distorted. Some of those obstructionists who fight today hark back to the patriots who were mad as hell and wouldn’t take it any more, and so upended a cargo of British tea. Others who claim this is a Christian nation have the idea that if alive today, Jesus would certainly choose to be an American.
Every American in these dynamic times is free to pick the evolution they aspire to. There are plenty to choose from. We do have two very big ones on the menu. If a rabid revolutionary patriot, you might choose to follow the path of a 21st century version of Enlightenment; you might even study the work of those founding Enlightenists—Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et al.—for guidance. If a committed Christian it’s even easier. No slogging through the Federalist Papers, or even the whole Bible. Just read and read again the words of Jesus—the ones in red type—and consider just how much evolution he was asking for and expecting. Then again, maybe it’s not evolution he was talking about at all.
Gospels – agreed. Everything you need is right there.
I loved everything you said here. We need to think very carefully about our aspirations, ask ourselves: who do they really serve?
In my experience, and my learning of the human experience, I have felt that that revolution and evolution were not mutually exclusive. Evolution is an inevitable consequence of revolution, but revolution doesn’t happen without the spark of evolved thinking. Our progress seems circular.
What slays me about revolutionary ‘talk’ these days is that it’s all very loud. It is all very dramatic. Is that really necessary?
I wouldn’t say that all the screaming isn’t an active force in enacting change (if you scream at someone to move, chances are they will), but it seems that when we really want to get things done, we just get together and do it; we don’t announce it first.
The biggest changes we’ve seemed to have made as a species, our most successful revolutions came quietly: technological, sociological, and definitely psychological. Our best accomplishments moved swiftly through the masses like a virus–silent, but effective.
While our rebelliousness is what made the news and secured a place in the history books, it was the quiet men and women of evolved reflection and experience that chopped the wood, piled the logs, and lit the fires of revolution. Once the revolutionary flames were hot enough, then the screaming mobs came to light their torches. The actual burning down of walls and fences isn’t the revolution as much as it is a physical manifestation of an already expanding, but quiet idea.
Jesus was a revolutionary, and he was the exact opposite of the screaming mobs. Sure, they razed the cities and built new worlds; but JC was the one with the match.
“The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”
And the Strangelove quote, yes! That’s my favorite scene!