[dgoldstein0]

> Throughout history, revolutions only succeeded when there were enough privileged people on "their" side (eg. those with money, status...).

Counterpoint: what about the French revolution?

You are absolutely right that it's easier to have revolts led by the privileged - the American revolution was one. I'm sure there were plenty of others.

As for sanctions causing regime change, you may be right. But that's also not the goal here - the goal is to tank Russia's war effort and generally cause pain for him and his cronies. Of course plenty of people are probably hoping regime change will result but I doubt it'll be a direct consequence, if it happens at all.

[fellellor]

This is total ignorance of western history. Even the French Revolution only succeeded because it pitted the incumbent nobility and high clergy against the very rich merchant class, who in spite of not being nobles by blood, ran all the factories and the French colonial settlements abroad. For source read the relevant books by the Durants, on both Rousseau and Napoleon.

Broad based sanctions assume, completely wrong, that Putin’s (or any dictator’s) power comes from the common Russian people. Wrong! And that’s why sanctions will only hurt the common Russians and keep Putin and his cronies in power for decades. In reality, he draws his power, like all other dictators, from an inner circle. These would be the oligarchs, heads of military and police and some others. This is where the sanctions should be targeted if the intention is to effectively change the regime. Hurting the population does not mean the pain will trickle up to the inner circle.

[necovek]

> Counterpoint: what about the French revolution?

https://learnodo-newtonic.com/french-revolution-leaders seems to disagree: most, if not all, of them come from privileged backgrounds.

[dgoldstein0]

Interesting. Yeah, my knowledge of the French revolution is a bit limited. Thanks for the link.