How to Start a Revolution (2011) User Reviews

The works and thoughts of a non-violent revolutions visionary

[balpomoreli · 7/10 · 30 January 2012]

Or why is important to keep fighting without violence to get a healthy people's revolution.

This is a great and not well known documentary of the works and opinions of a man who shows once again that ideas have repercussions. Gene Sharp has influenced pacific revolutions all around the globe and will keep guiding them with their revolutionary manuals to go from dictatorship to democracies. Or from tyrannies to people's governments. The documentary goes quite well trough the passed revolutions influenced by Gene and some of the leaders of it. It shows basically that people have power, even in the worst regimes, and this is priceless.

I warn you, watching and getting to know this could be extremely helpful for the people in your country.

Gene Sharp Misperceived

[keithdt · 6/10 · 11 August 2021]

Gene Sharp is often misperceived by the left as a liberatory thinker. In fact, he is more of a neoliberal cold war intellectual (though I'm not sure it's fair to entirely cast his work in that way). Rather than me documenting this myself, I refer people to google the 2 outstanding articles on Gene Sharp by Marcie Smith on the Nonsite website. That said the film is worthwhile because Sharp was undoubtedly a historically highly influential thinker and in particular for it's showing of his links to the uprisings in Egypt and the Berbia. The 6 star rating also reflects some of the films weaknesses such as its hagiographic approach, some overstatement of his direct influence and a lack of analysis as to the shortcomings of the approach and any exploration of revolution for what ends (leading back to the neoliberal attribution).

Interesting subject, manipulative film

[tenshi_ippikiookami · 1/10 · 15 March 2016]

"How to Start a Revolution" explains a little bit about Gene Sharp's work about bringing non-violent movements to the light, an approach little known about but that has shown that it works more than violent revolutions. Sharp has written some books, and has made a list of 198 ideas of how societies can try to change their countries. You may not agree with his list or his ideas, but that doesn't mean that they should be thrown away. For any human being out there, non-violent solution to a problem has probably worked more than once, be it an excuse to not wash the dishes or the "forgotten" homework.

Sadly, the movie is as manipulative as it comes. First, it takes the white guy saves the world perspective, making Sharp's work more important than it is. He is good in bringing some ideas to the public light. That doesn't mean he created them or that he is the one implementing them. It takes people out of the light. Oh, yes, you have some interviews... about how important Sharp's books were. Really? People didn't know that singing had an use till Sharp said so? It reeks of pandering. And people that do a good job shouldn't need that. On top of that the best world would be a world without heroes. You just need them in time of need, so... And how about all this countries that are spoken about (Ukraine, Egipt, Syria...). Did the ideas work out? Were they correctly implemented, or implemented by the "right" people? I can hide information and make things seem what they are not too.

And if that was not enough, the film tries to play with the viewer's feelings, using music and images in a cheap cheap way.

If we take into account that non-violent movements is something that should be thought more about, the movie should not pander to the converted. And if you want to make a movie about Gene Sharp, make it about him, not about his supernatural powers to bring revolution.