I think that the events in France don't belong to this list. France is dealing with a lot of youth criminality from ghettoized communities. The burning of cars was not backed up with any political claims. It only reflects how authorities are losing control over certain neighborhoods.

The burning of cars was - as far as I understand it - a direct consequence of multiple decades of festering trouble that was not adequately recognized or responded to by politicians. The shortest complete description of the background on this was something like 'these youths are protesting not against any specific policy but against being born in to a situation that they find it almost impossible to escape from in the country that they are nominally a citizen of'.

If you can do better than that be my guest, but I definitely see them as motivated by politics, even if not directly attacking a specific policy or having a concrete goal. It's more an act of frustration with life set off by the friction between police and these youths, specifically one incidence was the spark that set off the powder.

Ah yes, but I think all other dictators be it China, Singapore, Iran or North Korea have learned from the Romanian/Yougoslavian/East German, etc. experience.

A successful mob revolution requires a huge mob that can spill over government opposition. Such a huge mob can be prevented in 2 main ways - $ and Fear:

1. The Chinese and Singaporean approach: The fascist state with a booming economy. Fear of punishment and desire to make money keeps the mob small.

2. The North Korean approach: Have such a huge military that the rest of the country can not overrun it ever. The downside is no state can support that kind of military and you get starvation.

Iran etc. are a mix of 1 & 2 with less prosperity then Singapore but more sate violence and spying then China.

I have absolutely no faith that a violent revolution can happen anywhere in today's Europe. We're too old and too rich.

I live in Romania, and although I was only 8 years old in '89, I remember pretty vividly what happened.

      Such a huge mob can be prevented in 2 main ways - $ and Fear

Fear, Doubt and Censorship is what defined the Stalinist regime before Dec '89 in Romania.

     The North Korean approach: Have such a huge military that
     the rest of the country can not overrun it ever.

The military is formed out of ordinary people that can switch sides at any time. Also wars are won in the hearts first: you can make the military switch sides if you give the impression that this isn't a war they can win.

In Romania I still think it was a coup d'état, as the army switched sides quite early; but the mob was there, it was furious ... and it emerged out of nowhere. And it was interesting because romanians really aren't violent people.

Governments should learn to not piss off citizens: people can take a lot of pain before acting, but there's always a tipping point and from there onward it turns into a civil war between millions of people and a couple of thousand with guns (but that's a short-lived tactical advantage).

Not that I disagree with your point, but 1989, while only 20 years ago was a different era. Especially regarding Romania or anywhere east of Berlin. It's closer to 1979 than it was to 1991 in a lot of regards.

I'd argue that on the surface everything seems different but that underneath that surface more of it remains than you might think.

I've lived 'east' of Berlin for a while and still spend quite a bit of time there and in Romania and this particular sentiment strikes me every time I'm there. In the big cities the differences are large but outside not nearly as much if at all. Poverty is still quite present and the fat cats have found ways of getting fatter.

At least it's gotten easier for people to get around, provided they have the means of doing so.