Mock questions on Revolutions

97 thoughts on “Mock questions on Revolutions”

1. Good morning ! I tried to make an introduction and an outline for one of the proposed cross-subjects, that is to say “Do revolutions escape the public?” In February 2021, the coup d’etat in Burma put an end to ten years of democratic transition. Indeed, the Burmese army violently seized power by arresting the president and the head of the civilian government. This Coup d’Etat can be considered a revolution because it involves a major political upheaval, but also concerns the domain of secrecy in the sense that it benefited from a surprise effect. Burma then becomes a regime governed by the army where many freedoms are restricted. At first sight, it seems that revolutions escape the public in the sense that they can be secret. For example, a coup d’etat needs to be organized in secret and must be known to a minority of people in order for it to succeed. Also, it can constitute a real revolution because it suggests the overthrow of a sudden and brutal regime as well as a major political and social upheaval. However, some revolutions are organized by the people themselves and, consequently, they cannot escape them, because they are aware of them and actively participate in them. However, couldn’t revolutions escape the people by spiraling out of control? Therefore, it is observed that the problem lies in determining to what extent the public knows about revolutions? Is he still involved in these? To answer these questions, we will first study to what extent revolutions can be secret. Then, we will look at revolutions exposed to the light of day and, finally, we will end up explaining how revolutions can get out of control. I/ Revolutions that can be secret A/ In order to carry out a political project → coup d’etat ⇒ requires secrecy to succeed and guarantee the surprise effect ⇒ importance of the moment chosen e.g. coup d’etat in Sudan in dawn in 2019 → raison d’Etat ⇒ principle theorized by Nicolas Machiavelli in the Modern Era, according to ⇒ capacity of the State to give precedence over any other consideration to that which guarantees the success of the policies undertaken by the State ⇒ secret because the government does not need to reveal its intelligence methods to take such and such a decision → Revolution, Emmanuel Macron, 2016 ⇒ reforms which are forms of revolution in themselves because they imply the introduction of a disruptive element , he describes it himself as a “democratic revolution” ⇒ political, economic and social upheaval ⇒ secret because the revelation only took place when the book was released (if this subject had fallen into the competition I would have removed an argument to be able to have 2 arguments s per sub-part and therefore a good balance) B/ In order to protect oneself from competition → use of secrecy to obtain patents, and situation of monopolistic competition ex: USA/China trade war with the significant competition Apple / Huawei → use secret services to try to counter a revolution e.g. CIA → Cuban revolution of 1959, Fidel Castro who survived numerous assassination attempts and dismissal (e.g. failed Bay of Pigs landings) II/ Revolutions exposed to great day A/ Revolutions inscribed in the history of Humanity → first great revolution, does not escape the people because modifies their social, cultural environment and their way of life, it is not hidden from them ex: the Neolithic revolution → revolutions can be radical turning points for humanity e.g. the revolution in writing which results from the need to “signal” in increasingly complex societies ⇒ revolution yet another time not concealed from the people because they live it fully by following its evolution and using the writing B/ Revolutions at the origin of the people → revolutions can come from peoples who wish to be heard and who wish for an important change whether political, social, economic or cultural ex: the French revolution coming from the third estate → revolutionary movements at the origin of women ex: MeToo, BalanceTonPorc or in any other context the women’s march on Versailles III/ Revolutions that can get out of control A/ If it evolves too widely → revolutions can get out of control if they can no longer be controlled by the people ex: epistemological revolutions ⇒ radical change of perspective on knowledge whose consequences engage the becoming global of society with, for example, the Copernican revolution and the adoption of the heliocentric system → if the revolutions concern too much different fields, the people may no longer be able to control it because they do not have the necessary skills to intervene in all these different fields, e.g. the digital revolution is at the same time an epistemological revolution, a technical revolution, an economic revolution and a societal revolution B/ If it is no longer controlled → groups that act within the revolution to sow chaos eg: thugs during the Yellow Vests movement ⇒ discrediting of the movement → the revolution no longer fulfills its role first and suffers significant consequences ex: violence “the more violence there is, the less revolution there is”, Simone Weil If you could give me some advice and your opinion on this plan, that would be great 🙂 Thank you in advance , Good evening !

   1. Hello Audrey, Bravo for these training efforts, it is thanks to this practice that you acquire reflexes that will be useful to you tomorrow. Here are our tips for your proposal: – Preferably, use less recent, less burning examples or hooks. Indeed, even if the test is well titled contemporary questions, it is impossible to have enough hindsight on the current events that you describe, the light will only be shed in several years or even decades. One could imagine (in a very hypothetical way) that the power is restored before the corrector corrects your paper, what will be his reaction by reading in the first sentence: “the coup d’etat in Burma puts an end to ten years of democratic transition” ?On the other hand, the positive point is that the example chosen is well treated and well used, that is to say that it serves your duty and your demonstration well. Your problem is correct. It would be even more relevant if you explained more clearly the paradox of the question, but it is already well done thanks to your catchphrase. Grammatical note: you cannot end an affirmative sentence with a question mark (“it is observed that the problem lies in determining how much the public knows about revolutions?”)It is good to be mindful of balancing and not overloading your subparts, it is great to keep clarity for the proofreader in mind. In this case, we would advise you to withdraw the argument which is the least authoritative, and it is often because it is too current and has not yet had time to prove itself as a marker of “History”. (Here, maybe President Macron’s book?) The IB will be very appreciated by the corrector, good part also. We are sure you will not make this mistake, but the Neolithic or writing revolutions still span a long period. This will be an opportunity to discuss the definition of a revolution as upheaval, therefore in a relatively short time, and of the need or not to be aware of being an actor in this revolution. For your II. B., same remarks on the lack of hindsight as to current events. It is certainly a test of Contemporary Questions, and MeToo and BalanceTonPorc certainly have a certain posterity, but it will then be necessary to defend your arguments with sociological analyzes of recognized authors, or to rely on other examples which have greater authority (not to make a best-of news heard this year on the radio). Your III. A. seems to put people’s revolution and epistemological revolution on the same line, it is a little dangerous to put all these dimensions in the same basket, we are still talking about extremely different phenomena, which have little more than an adjective in common. For your III. B. you must surely anticipate our comment on the thugs and the yellow vests. Do you not have more legitimate historical examples to describe this double dynamic of revolutions? Above all, revolutions ≠ demonstration, revolutions ≠ protest movement. The advantage is that you will easily avoid the same pitfalls afterwards, it is a question of understanding the spirit of the event (which cannot be an organized synthesis of current events), to better meet the expectations of the Sciences Po competition.

2. Hello, I have chosen the following question: “Is a society without revolution healthy? Problem: Are revolutions the key to progress and the well-being of societies? I-Revolutions, a stage which seems obligatory in the history of societies A)Revolutions have often brought progress, liberation B)While a society without revolution cannot progress II-But the violence which results from it serves his wishes first A) A revolution can sink/worsen a society B) The revolution must therefore be careful not to degenerate and get out of his way I had a little trouble finding the second sub-part of II and I do not find it very satisfactory, so I take all your advice (for the rest also of course). Thank you in advance for your answer, have a nice day

   1. Hello, Your II.B. seems to us to be on the right track (ideally, it would still be necessary to give proposals so that a revolution can go well, because isn’t it its nature to degenerate?), and it’s always good to bring a final solution, the proofreader will always appreciate ending on an optimistic, balanced and resolute note. So we’re pretty much in line with your plan. It is difficult to comment on it further, because we would have to see how you argue, with what references you defend your point. Your problem, on the other hand, is not really one, it is a defect that we have noticed regularly since we receive outline proposals. It will therefore be to your advantage to work on “how to formulate a good problem”, to set yourself apart from the other candidates. Good luck for that,

3. Hello, I chose the question “Is there a duty to revolt” could you please give me your opinion? Problem: To what extent does man have the choice to fight for his ideas? Wouldn’t his morals and his convictions compel him to rise up in the face of oppression and injustice? I) Revolt seems inevitable a. Revolt is a feeling of indignation common to all individuals, the first reaction to injustice b. the pride of Man pushes him to fight against what is unjust: he prefers revolt to humiliation and puts his truth before his life c. According to Sartre “man is condemned to be free” he therefore bears the weight of his acts and has the responsibility to act and not to hide behind excuses II) Nevertheless, if the feeling of revolt, the basis of all revolutions seems innate and therefore obligatory, active participation in a revolution remains a choice. To. The revolution differs from the revolt by its precise objectives and its considered character. She therefore asks for a real decision b. Nothing legally obliges the man to act for his ideas, he has the right not to engage c. However, he has the right to revolt and his resistance to a model that does not respect the social contract is legitimized. Thank you so much 🙂

   1. Hello Léna, Your outline is rather well carried out, quite nuanced, brings real very useful distinctions (revolt / revolution, legal / legitimate), and contains a certain richness (openness to justice, freedom, the feeling of humiliation, contract social). All very well. As advice, remember the common thread of your argument, and work well on your transitions, precisely so that this richness does not become penalizing, given the heavy themes that are introduced. Indeed, these are heavy themes that are difficult to treat in a sub-part (for example the social contract had multiple formulas). So insist on what connects all your thinking. Keep it up and good luck

      1. Alright, thank you very much for your advice!

4. Hello everyone, hello the company it’s still and always me, this time I come back with any new subject that is not on your list: “Is the revolution always desirable?” Here is my problem: To what extent can revolutions of different kinds be desired and sought by the different actors? By whom, for whom and why can they be? And are they still so today in our contemporary societies? Here is my plan: establish democratic regimes (French Revolution, American Revolution, “Velvet Revolts” of Eastern Europe, Carnation Revolution in Portugal) B) Other nonpolitical revolts that brought the necessary progress for development and advancement of human civilization/human societies (Neolithic, Copernican revolution, agricultural revolution, Industrial Revolution of the 19th century and digital revolution of the 19th century) II). However, certain revolts should not be desired because they do not lead to a regime democracy favorable to the people, on the contrary, they limit their rights, restrict their freedoms (even suppress them) and there are also non-political revolutions that take place. We have proven harmful and harmful to the environment and the planet. A) Revolutions that have been brought to power totalitarian regimes that are often “murderous” and with leaders who are more like dictators. (Communist revolutions of the 20th century which caused many deaths cf: the USSR, China, Cambodia) Iran theocratic regime B) Technical revolts which were at the origin of serious environmental problems such as pollution, global warming (Neolithic revolution and Industrial Revolution) III) Today, revolutions may still be desirable to solve certain more contemporary problems B) Political revolts to reform certain not very democratic states (Russia and Algeria to challenge the regime in place) A) Current revolutions to achieve contemporary goals (ecological revolution for the climate, citizen, social revolution for more social justice…) Thank you very much for giving me your opinion and correcting me and if possible if you want it Nice to give me an idea for a catchphrase.

   1. Hello El boss / anonymous, Your problem remains very (too) broad, a problem that goes on tracks as diverse as “By whom, for whom and why” will have difficulty in maintaining a unity of meaning. The expression “revolution of various kinds” means so many things that it ends up meaning nothing. We advise you to read more on how to formulate a good problem statement, we have given advice on this in the other comments of this article, as well as in the one devoted to the mock exam on the secret. Your 3-part outline works very well, and strikes a good balance. Well done for that! Your sub-parts are also held, it will just be necessary to take care to defend with more forces your ideas, in particular thanks to analyzes of authors who are authoritative. Finally, all your development remains very historical and descriptive, it will benefit, for example, from integrating a more in-depth reflection on the very concept of revolutions. Do not hesitate to question the question as you can already do in your philosophy dissertations, which you can then effectively illustrate with historical facts. We see real progress in your proposals, so we congratulate you on this development. PS: be careful on the day of the competition to correct your typos, the incorrect spelling revolts is a mistake that comes up in all your proposals. Why not use the find/replace function of your word processor on the day of the contest.

      1. Thank you very much to the integrate science po team

5. Hello, I would just have liked to know if there was an eliminatory mark for the contemporary question test?

   1. Hello, There is no eliminatory mark, so if the file (which counts 85%) is excellent, and the mark in the test of contemporary questions (which counts 15%) mediocre, the candidate indeed has his chances. .. That was the theory. In practice, you are 14,000 to compose this year according to the figures of the Réseau Sciences Po, and we know from experience that all the candidates will find themselves in a pocket handkerchief, where just 0.1 point on average can make the difference for be admitted or not. So you have to be good everywhere. The moral is that you have to give everything you can on D-Day, to regret nothing, and because it will count!

6. Hello, I took the question “do revolutions escape the public? » and I decided to make this plan, is it possible to have your opinion? I/ the revolutions that are played out in secret: a) in order to provoke surprise → Rº political: coup d’etat: in order to ensure the surprise and the success of the seizure of power (Burma, coup d’etat of the military junta) Democracy: in order to create an effect of surprise by the innovation of the proposal , seen as a small revolution (e.MACRON and his 2016 presidential campaign, his book “revolution” …) b) in order to protect himself from competition / adversaries → technological: trade war for technical revolutions in order to obtain patents, and situation of monopolistic competition (ex: trade war between usa and china which results in very significant competition Apple/huawei…) II/ a revolution can become out of control a) when technology and scientific discoveries lead to epistemological changes → scientific: Certain phenomena can no longer be explained by god (Darwin in 1958 the origin of species) resulting in the slow dislocation of the Catholic matrix and the societal changes that this entails (Jérôme Fourquet the French archipelago) → technique, here digital: which leads to an economic revolution uberisation of employment, but also societal: artificial intelligence etc B) when a political revolution is no longer controlled → no longer plays the role defined by H. Arendt but secondary consequences: violence (Simone Weil), Repression (terror during RF or Fidel Castro…), and appropriation of the movement by others (thugs and yellow vests, terrorists and Arab spring…) Thank you in advance for your answer Have a nice day

   1. Hello Clothilde, There is a lot of thought in your plan, it is very appreciable. We feel that it is worked on in terms of ideas. Your first part is the most interesting, it could be even stronger with historical examples in addition to the very current examples you give. This would give depth to your reflection, and would avoid the risk of basing yourself on current events that are still too recent, and on which we do not yet have sufficient hindsight. Your II.A. makes you lose the thread of your thinking, especially when you deal with scientific revolutions. It goes in too many directions, and does not serve your purpose which was until then more political even if linked to technologies, an aspect which moreover seems more relevant for this subject, indeed. The advantage is that once this is understood, you will no longer fall into this pitfall, especially on the day of the competition. Good continuation for this last straight line,

7. Hello, I trained on the cross question: do revolutions escape the public? and I would need an opinion my problem is: Have we become forced into Revolutions since the rise of transparency in the 21st century? I- An increasingly transparent society which allows the public to follow the revolutions but which involves risks. a) new revolutions (new actors, means, issues), the media,… b) transparency anchored in values (Constitution, condition of democracy,…) c) risks of too much transparency (conspiracy, totalitarianism, Big Data…) II- Does the people undergo revolutions? a) technical, scientific, digital, epistemological revolutions (Darwin, 5g) b) economic and social consequences (uberization, change of the place of the individual, no longer master of everything with digital data…) c) risks and prospects (consequences of an “overflow” of revolutions, not insignificant consequences for man can be considered, revolutions in memory,…) Thank you in advance 🙂

8. Hello, thank you for offering this writing and proofreading exercise! I tried to make an outline from the question: Are revolutions democratic? I am submitting a small introduction to you which is not really one but above all the basis of my reflection, as well as a problem and an outline Democracy = sovereign people but democracy is above all a State of law = public power subject to the law. Protocol for the change of power at the top of the State is strictly framed and is based on the expression of a majority. The political revolution, on the contrary, does not rest on the general consensus; it does not give rise to the expression of all but proposes itself as a brutal and sudden rupture, to which force is often associated. Can we identify democratic foundations and achievements in revolutions that are subversive in nature? I) The Revolution rests on legally non-democratic foundations and whose objectives are not always democratic. A) The Revolution is not based on any established law, which democratically discredits it to the Immanuel Kantian ideal of political association based on the right. To The Question of People’s Sovereignty: Revolution Sometimes by and for a Minority B) … and is not free from paradoxes: use of violence, ambiguous relation to progress   to can the violence of the revolution always be justified by a hypothetical progress.  Following the example of conservative, religious, authoritarian revolution  II). But the Revolution can claim a natural right < u>A) The Revolution in the name of universalism flouted in the pre-existing regime (in the name of an ideal) -→ A legitimate and necessary violence against an unfounded injustice (Camus/Stéphane Hessel) -→ The defense of a universalist ideal led by a collective and which goes beyond individual subjectivity (Arab Spring/Hirak) B)… And which can allow the establishment of a democratic model in terms -→ Revolutions that bring progress and -→ … and which rebuild a fairer and more egalitarian system are part of a democratic drive. 

   1. Hello Bisonravi (In other words Boris Vian?), We are happy to read your comment, which achieves what is not immediately gained with this subject, namely to grasp it and treat it, without giving in to the temptation to do so derive. The demonstration is well conducted, the knowledge well used. The problem brings out the paradox behind the question. So it’s pretty good. To improve, it will therefore be a question of developing your parts well, because the 2×2 outline may seem a little tight if the sub-parts are not sufficiently supplied. Good job by Saturday,

      1. Thanks a lot ! (yes Boris Vian it’s me ;))

9. Hello, this time I’m coming back to ask you a question that bothers me a little, so here it is finally according to the rules of the Sciences Po the final mark of the competition will actually depend up to 85% on our academic record and the test Saturday will only count for 15% (article 9 of the rules). So here is my question, if a student fails “miserably” in Saturday’s test or if at least he has an average grade close to what, but he has a very good or even excellent academic record with very good averages, this student will he still be able to hope to integrate an Sciences Po or will these chances of integrating one be very low? In other words

   1. Hello, There is no eliminatory mark, so if the file (which counts 85%) is excellent, and the mark in the test of contemporary questions (which counts 15%) mediocre, the candidate indeed has his chances. .. That was the theory. In practice, you are 14,000 to compose this year according to the figures of the Réseau Sciences Po, and we know from experience that all the candidates will find themselves in a pocket handkerchief, where just 0.1 point on average can make the difference for be admitted or not. So you have to be good everywhere. The moral is that you have to give everything you can on D-Day, to regret nothing, and because it will count!

10. Good morning,

    Today I take my courage in both hands and I try my hand at the question, “Are revolutions the condition of progress?”

    The problem would be: To what extent have the revolutions been, are and will be globally positive for the many?

    For the plan:

    I. The notions of revolution and progress are historically linked.

    1. the philosophy of the Enlightenment linked these two notions (progress of reason, reason and revolutions)

    2. revolutions which brought many advances (political progress, democracy and freedom, social progress)

    II. Nevertheless, their bonds tend to dissolve.

    1. contested revolutions (industrial revolutions, digital revolution)

    2. revolutions that can be described as conservative (cultural revolution in China, Arab revolutions)

    III. The revolution could be attached to other, less controversial notions.

    1. the concept of progress more and more discussed (how to qualify it? for whom?)

    2. the revolution to be associated with sustainable development (awareness raising – =internal revolution – , international revolution and consideration of global problems via digital technology)

    1. Hello Candidate, The problem you have come to is very close to the question, you will surely agree by looking at this little table: Revolutions → To what extent do revolutions are they → were, are and will be progress?  → Generally positive for the many? You will also notice that a subject word has been removed, namely “the condition”. Perhaps it is precisely this word which makes all the interest of the question and on which one can play to find a good problem? On the day of the competition, it will be useful for you to rewrite the question well in the draft, and for each word (we insist), to draw all the possible ideas from it. As for the problem, we discover with all the suggestions of the candidates that it is still a very obscure exercise for many. By question that pinpoints the problem, it is not so much a question of going back to the initial question, but of seeing the issues hidden behind this initial question. It almost always comes from a paradox. Thus we will very often find an effective question that pinpoints the problem by formulating it as follows: “Considering both that …, but in the sense inverse that …, so how…?” This model – of course we can formulate the question that pinpoints the problem with other words – has the advantage of clearly identifying the paradox behind the question, and thus posing the real deeper problem. Do you or the other potential reader of the site manage to find a problem? Give your suggestions, it will help you for the contest to get your hands dirty with the contest. As for your plan, it is built in a classic way, it works. Your third part offers interesting, nuanced and contemporary perspectives, which is good. It will be necessary to fill them out with serious references. Well done,

       1. Hello, Thank you for your valuable advice, is the issue:

          • Do revolutions destroy or advance society?

          Or

          • can a society progress without revolutions?

          Could be suitable, please? Thanks in advance

11. Hello again. My subject this time is: “Are revolutions the condition of progress?” Problem: To what extent do revolutions, as we understand it in our contemporary societies, come as a means of access to this evolving and accepting form that is progress? Plan: I/Revolutions bring progress to our societies A-Revolutions seek the acquisition of new human rights B-Revolutions can put an end to the democratic terror of certain states II/Or, on the contrary, constitute- Are they an obstacle to this progress A-The revolution can be characterized by violence trampling on the rights it tries to acquire B-Revolutions do not lead to any progressive, democratic achievement III/Revolutions can lead to a certain form of progress but they can be achieved without incurring consequences If you could propose me ideas of sub-parts for the third axis, I would appreciate it.

    1. Hello Racim, We do not really understand your problem on a purely grammatical level: “ Does it come as an access route to this evolving form and accepting what is progress”? This generally seems like a rephrasing of the topic, only with an expression that gives itself a complex air, but that the corrector of your copy will flush out easily. Your outline is very classic but it works, it is good to want a third part to find more nuances. On the other hand, we are not sure to fully grasp the idea. We encourage other would-be readers of the site to comment on your post to share their ideas, as finding a solid third party is a great exercise for this topic. Good day, and does not hesitate to think about a problem again yourself.

    2. Hello for your IIIrd part, you could for example talk about revolutions in the field of art (arrival of impressionism, romanticism…) Afterwards I admit blocking a little because all revolutions, from my point of view, lead to consequences. From there it is a question of knowing if they are harmful or beneficial 😊 So it all depends on what you want to talk about in your IIIth part. If you’re talking about the digital revolution, for example, it can be interesting to see that it’s both good and bad 😉 These are of course simple suggestions and I don’t claim to be an expert on the question. Good luck 🙂

12. Hello, it’s me again I’m coming back to see you for my question: Do rebellions benefit the people?: Here I wrote an intro and part 1 so I would like to know if it’s good May 5, 1789, begins the French Revolution, this was at the origin of many changes in the political order, such as the transition from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy and then the proclamation of the First Republic. It is very important for the people because it enabled them to acquire a certain number of rights, abolished privileges and saw the birth of the declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen. A revolution is a historical event during which an abrupt change of situation takes place in the political, scientific or artistic fields which leads to a radically different reorganization of this field and such that no turning back is then possible. Often the term political revolution is used, but there are several types of revolutions (economic, cultural, technological, etc.). The history of the people, that is to say all the people subject to the same laws and forming a nation is closely linked to that of the revolts sometimes he suffered them and sometimes he was the key actor. If these political revolts in particular have enabled the people to obtain more rights, more freedoms and to become sovereign, as we often tend to think in our contemporary societies, we nevertheless note that other revolutions have not always been very favorable, limiting or even greatly reducing his civil rights and individual freedoms. We will thus ask ourselves: how can the revolts orchestrated by actors of different kinds be put at the service of the people and thus serve their interests and their sovereignty? For this, first, we will study the revolutions that have been beneficial for the people, then in the second time we will see the revolutions that have limited the powers of the people.   Many revolutions have been beneficial for the people, which has allowed them to obtain more rights, more freedoms and thus become sovereign.  Political revolts are essentially intended to break with the political regime in place, which is often judged to be oppressive, inefficient and unfit to fulfill its function. The actors of these political revolutions, whether they themselves come from the political sphere or whether they emanate from the popular masses, played a role because they erased the old political order and moreover allowed the people to to acquire more civic rights, more individual freedoms thus making him sovereign of the nation and master of his destiny. Indeed, for example, the French Revolution strongly limited the powers of the king allowing the passage to absolute monarchy then to the First Republic which allowed the people to gradually access more rights, more freedoms, more equalities thus giving rise to a more egalitarian society. The American Revolution was also beneficial for its people because it allowed them to obtain their independence, to no longer be under the tutelage of the British crown to aspire to more civil rights, fundamental freedoms and more equality. Nevertheless certain authors like Jacques Ellul, in his work Autopsy of the revolution of 1969, only distinguishes in these events a war of independence. Marta Malia, meanwhile, considers this revolution to be a major and founding event to spread the word “revolution”. Of the camp of conservatism in the camp of progressivism and republicanism in his book History of Revolutions of 2008.                     Later in history at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century, other revolts will take place, particularly in Europe and in certain countries of the Arab world. These revolutions are democratic, and thus aim to overthrow the regime in place in order to achieve a new, more stable political order and guarantee the fundamental freedoms and civil rights of the people who would then be sovereign. Indeed, in 1989, the states of Eastern Europe which were then under Soviet control and domination, will experience peaceful and pro-democratic revolts called “velvet revolutions”. Which will make it possible to bring down the old communist regimes without bloodshed with the exception of Romania, where the Ceaucecu spouses were executed in December 1989. Finally, the Arab revolutions started at the beginning of 2010 in Tunisia called “Jasmine Revolts” are also democratic revolutions during which the people revolted demanding greater equality, work, and a more democratic regime. In Tunisia, this revolution turned out to be positive and beneficial for the people because it led to the departure of former President Ben-Ali.   Thus, as we have just seen, certain revolutions have been very beneficial for the people, allowing them to acquire more freedoms, more rights and generally democratic regimes have replaced the old regimes considered as non-democratic or even totalitarian for some.  Nevertheless, other revolts have been disastrous for the people and of little benefit to their sovereignty.

13. Hello to the whole team, can you give me your opinion on my intro (and tell me if my catchphrase can pass or not) and my plan. Thank you in advance

    “ This is the final struggle, let us fight and tomorrow the International will be the human race,” such is the refrain of this very famous revolutionary song that is The International< /em>. This refrain affirms that the uprising of the working classes against the bourgeoisie must allow the proletarians to take power and behind it to form a new “human race”. And therefore somewhere towards a finality. The term revolution has a long etymological history and has several meanings depending on the field. Traditionally, a revolution means a step backwards, to designate for example in astronomy the period necessary for the earth to revolve around the sun. In politics and in the religious sphere, it was more or less a synonym for reform. The French Revolution marked a turning point in the meaning of this term to designate a significant and sudden change in the political regime. This meaning has gradually imposed itself in everyday language. The revolution is distinguished from the reform because the latter modifies by the elements already available in the system without modifying the heart. The term “condition” present in the question insinuates that it is necessary to appeal to a revolution for there to be any progress. The term “progress” is not more neutral because it underlies a progression, a constant improvement to move towards a single goal. It differs from evolution which can mean that there is an improvement or a degradation but does not imply a finality. So this subject is not without posing problems like what is the difference in purpose between a revolt and a revolution? Are revolutions progress or evolution? Are there other means than revolution to move towards progress?

    I Revolution is a way to move towards something new

    A)  Revolutions and a historical purpose  

    Karl Marx, all the political regimes that followed one another consisted of an opposition of one class against another, a revolution made possible by the struggle of the classes allows changing of the dominant class. RF revolution of 1830 represents the desire for power of the bourgeoisie

    Hegel, revolutions are inevitable and will inevitably tend towards a bourgeois republic. History is a dialectic that must eventually allow human freedom

    Condition for a revolution to be considered a revolution is that it leads to something totally new, unlike reform, sometimes privileged so that you can actually make things happen, e.g. of MLK, first wanted reforms

    B). The scientific revolution and the progress that goes with it

    Bachelard, scientific progress can only come by constantly questioning what we know through experiments

    Kuhn, several phases with a pre-paradigmatic phase, in which several paradigms clash (mode of thought), then paradigmatic phase deepening of this paradigm. Then crisis of the paradigm because of anomalies which one discovers, new paradigm which can take it into account is essential, return in the paradigmatic phase, ex. classical physics confronted with the discovery of electrons that do not correspond to any category of object envisaged, denies it to think that they are errors, then cannot be denied, crisis opened by Einstein, highlights the anomalies. Dept of the quantum physics paradigm

    II but revolution may also not bring progress

    A).  A revolution can bring back to an initial situation

    Grec thinks of time in a cyclical way, the interest of history is to retain what is memorable and not to make a chronology of events. The regimes do not escape this cycle, this passage makes it possible to make the transition from one revolution to another, cf. Plato, the excesses of one diet lead to another. Examples in the UK, transition from monarchy to parliamentary monarchy, then rump parliament, then Cromwell then taken over by parliament until the return of the monarchy

    Change in direction with rave amé and RF< /p>

    B). A revolution to bring about something new must meet conditions

    For a revolution to succeed it should seek only freedom, cf. Arendt

    Mounier, for revolution to achieve something, it must be radical from a moral point of view rather than a physical one, it must come from within

    III there are means other than revolution

    A)  Reform rather than revolution

    Weil, to radically transform society, we must favor reform and find a mode of productive organization that does not subjugate the workers, the takeover of the factories by the workers is not satisfactory

    Question of the name of RI, digital revolution. Debate on the real digital changes, modernization or transformation? Moreover, the notion is debated because it does not really make a clean sweep of the past

    B)  Revolt, to a lesser degree than revolution

    Revolt can lead to demands, examples of the 343 manifesto, helped to forge public opinion for legalizing abortion.

14. Hello team integrating science po, do you think that this year there will be a cross subject mixing two themes or even worse two exam questions that fall on the same theme? Or do you think that a question on secrecy and another on revolutions will be proposed in a completely classic way?

    1. Hello, this will most likely be a question on Revolutions more specifically, and another on Secret more specifically. We are betting on this classic formula, which as you have well noted, has always been current until now. Additional info: the theme of Revolutions should a priori be reused next year, while that of Secret should be replaced.

15. Hello, Please forgive me for the inconvenience caused by my question but I take advantage of this space to hope to find an answer. How many references or theses should we rely on for a game? Since this is a multiscalar dissertation, one for each subpart seems to me both desirable and potentially “heavy”…

    1. Hello, you’re right, we must avoid the pitfall of the “catalog”, namely listing references without logic. Taking more time for a single reference or thesis as you call them allows you to go deeper. So to give you an answer, it all depends on the weight of the resource you are exploring. If it’s an anecdotal quote, or a stat that doesn’t mean much, then you can’t spend an entire game on it. If, on the contrary, it is an author who has full authority on the question and all relevance for your problem, and that in addition you master his work, then yes it is really worth digging and deepening, for one, two , or even three subsections. There is no absolute rule, you just have to understand that your statement must be based on solid elements (we do not doubt the genius of the candidates’ reflection, but hey, it will always have a better effect if it’s Aristotle , the Civil Code and Bourdieu who say it rather than you…)

16. Hello, I prepared an introduction for “Are revolutions democratic” and I would have liked to have your opinion.

    The French Revolution is the democratic revolution par excellence: the Third Estate, discriminated against for the benefit of the privileged, rose up in order to obtain more rights. Conversely, the Russian Revolution is one of the many examples that prove that all revolutions are not systematically democratic: it allowed the establishment of an ultra-violent totalitarian regime whose watchwords were repression and propaganda. De facto, a revolution, which designates a spontaneous uprising which most often allows the upheaval of a society or a regime, is not necessarily democratic, in extenso not necessarily in favor of a people, their rights or of its first freedoms.

    Thus, one can wonder if the revolutions are they made in favor of the democracy?  Are they really a way to access a more just and egalitarian regime? Or are they not rather violent and disorganized events which are by definition anything but democratic?

    It is possible to support in the first analysis that the revolution is the other of a democratic movement. It is built by the will of a part of a people which is not systematically in the majority and, moreover, establishes a climate of violence against anti-revolutionary figures.

    But aren’t these violent episodes a necessary evil to achieve a more just and egalitarian society? Is it not possible that the revolution seeks to deal with the insufficiencies of a State and that it therefore wishes to implement the necessary changes of which it is nevertheless incapable?

    So in this case, should we not prefer reforms, which are non-violent and inherent in the functioning of a State? Are reforms not a good alternative to the disorganization and spontaneity of revolutionary movements?

    Thanks in advance

17. Good evening, I had already written a dissertation concerning revolutions and progress, but the problem was a little different from the one you are proposing: is revolution always a factor of progress? I had found the problem: Does the revolution carry within it the aspiration of an improvement, or the instability it brings, on the contrary, makes the situation worse than at the origin? And for the plan: I. The purpose of a revolution is to change the order of things and we witness many changes throughout history, which proves their effectiveness a)   Desire to change society b) Many revolutions have been conclusive  I. But some revolutions failed, and the pattern did not change, or even got worse a) Revolutions that failed despite efforts b)   Revolutions rather associated with instability due to violence, in particular I. One can have the impression that revolutions do not bring progress when it is just that some are registered in time a) Revolutions represent changes in mentalities and therefore it takes time b) Revolutions that do not really end Thank you in advance for your opinion

    1. The exam question you present to us is an interesting variant. The question that pinpoints the problem is imperfect: “Do revolution carry […] or does instability […] render?” because you can always answer it just yes or no, one or the other. This problem will not lead far, and is content to reformulate the question. A tip for the next few times is to force yourself to find an issue starting with “comment”. Your outline is balanced, it is roughly: I. The progress of revolution II. Failures of revolution III. Leave time for revolutions. Your outline defends itself, it is rather appropriate. We advise you now to “muscle” the sub-parts, to avoid the pitfall of a simplistic historical presentation where the good revolutions will be presented, then the bad revolutions. This objective can be achieved with the help of history, as you already do, but also other approaches such as sociology – how does a revolution work? – and of philosophy – what is progressing?

18. Good evening, I have just been told that for this competition which is taking place quite exceptionally due to the health crisis, the school results (our school record) count for 85% and this famous long-awaited test of contemporary questions only counts for 15%. I just wanted to know if this is true or false please answer me

    1. Hello, we do not know the exact percentages, but indeed the school results the copy made will count more than the test of Contemporary Questions. The Sciences Po Network prefers to remain vague in the coefficients and is content to indicate:

       • Academic results (Première and Terminale classes) – “very important”
       • Examination from Contemporary Questions – “important”
       • Good copy made earlier in the course – “complementary”

       More info here.

       It is therefore true that the effort you invest in this test will not be as useful as your academic record. However, it may be this test that will allow deciding between you, since it is about a contest: it is often enough of one or two points to pass in front of tens of candidates.

       So we can only advise you to stay motivated.

       1. Hello, the Contemporary Questions test will constitute 15% of the final grade. See the Sciences Po press release: https://www.reseau-scpo.fr/ admission-2021-choices-guides-41

19. Hello again, this time it’s for “is a society without revolution healthy”? Pb : Is revolution the key to a progressive society?  I. A society without revolution cannot progress A. A society without revolution therefore conforms to a form of immobility -→ Idea 1 : A society without revolution= suffocating paradigm reforms don’t work B. Revolution is a vector of benefits and progress —> social rights democracies technological revolution II.  Violent revolutionary rhetoric threatens the sanitization of a society. A.  The revolution can, however, threaten the democratic balance -→ populism social movements digital revolutions with surveillance B.  The revolution must therefore be part of a democratic framework and reform to make society healthy again

    OR

    I.    healthier and fairer society A. Revolution is a vector of benefits and progress – > social rights democracies technological revolutions B.  But democracy has erected the idea of reform into a vector of progress; a sign that revolution is not the only way to sanitize a society. – > Reform as a mode of democratic action II.  Faced with the failures of reform, revolutions can threaten the rehabilitation of society A. Revolution can nevertheless threaten the democratic balance – > populism social movements digital revolutions with surveillance B.  The revolution must therefore be part of a democratic framework and reform to make society healthy again Thank you very much.    

20. Here is what I tried: Are revolutions democratic? To what extent are revolutions, as we understand it in our contemporary societies, part of democracy in their development and outcome? I / Revolutions as carriers of progress in our societies A / Revolutions seek the acquisition of new human rights, therefore they have a democratic spring B / They can allow the acquisition of a democratic model in limited societies . II/ But they can however use and move towards objectives which are no longer a matter of democracy A/ They can be characterized by a violence which tramples on the rights it tries to acquire B/ The development of a conservative revolution, a paradox which strips the revolution of any democratic aspect.

    1. Hello Rita, Your outline is really remarkable, relevant and fine. Cheer. You have also identified the question well, which was not easy to do, but you did it well. We don’t have much commentary to add, other than to think about your references, and train you on other topics. Continue accordingly !

21. And hello again, it’s me again, thank you for the answer. I also have another question to offer you brand new again “What is a political revolution?” here is my little intro and I have two outlines to offer you, tell me which one is the right one. Since January 2019, in Algeria a protest movement has been born: the “hirak (movement in Arabic) the demonstrators of this movement are fighting to obtain a more democratic regime so they demonstrate every Friday in favor of a democratic transition, indeed the country being governed for almost 60 years (1962) by the same and only party the FLN which had allowed the Algerian people to gain independence.Today the high military hierarchy (thus the great generals) run Algeria , and the demonstrators who advocate democracy and more freedoms thus aim to change this. Would we be witnessing a political revolution that emanates from the popular masses in order to change the power in place? (that’s my catchphrase) Definition of political revolution The first political revolutions took place between the 17th and 18th centuries in England, America and France. Atlantic ions. Later at the beginning of the 20th century, other political revolts occurred (the process of political revolution accelerated) generally leading to the advent of new, often totalitarian (communist) regimes. Nowadays, the concept of political revolution seems to have weakened in particular because many regimes are democratic republics guaranteeing the sovereignty of the nation and individual freedoms and therefore their population seems less inclined to carry out revolts. policies. My problem: How to question, while defining the concept of political revolution, now old, so that it is most useful to all? My outline I) The concept of political revolution, its meaning by studying some examples II) the goals, objectives and ambitions of the protagonists of these political revolutions and III) What about today (Arab springs ..) Plan 2 : the big 1 changes only to become I) the origin of political revolts

    1. Hello, such a descriptive subject is not likely to fall on the day of the contest. The definition exercise that you have just completed is still interesting and will no doubt be able to feed your introduction for the competition on Saturday.

22. Hello, my chosen question is “Are revolutions democratic?” My problem is: To what extent can democracy support the contestation of the established order? And my outline is: I.   Revolutions are democratic but some can undermine democracy A. Revolution and radicalism appear as a process inherent in democracy   =with the establishment of democracy by revolution and the fact that radicalism is normal B. But democracies can be threatened by revolutions = with populism and revolutions conservative II.    Faced with these various risks for democracy, reform seems to be a privileged means for democracy A. Thus the revolution seems to be giving way to reform, which is democratic B.  We must register the revolution in a legal framework so that it can be fully realized.  = revolution by the ballot box, etc. Here can you tell me what you think? THANKS

    1. Hello, You focus your problem on democracy, rather than the concept of revolutions which was however the questioned concept. Why not reverse the question during your demonstration, but that should not make you forget the real (and unique) question of the question. Therefore, it derails your plan. On the day of the competition, be sure to constantly refocus your plan. An effective way to do this is to check that each of your sub-sections responds at least in part to the question and your problem (the problem must be aligned with the question). Good luck,

23. Hello again, it’s just for a quick question, I would like to know our school record and our averages obtained as well as all our marks combined will be more important for our integration into an Sciences Po than the contemporary test or the reverse or so that they count as much as the other are they equivalent? Because according to the site of the Science po network, school results are “very important” while the test of contemporary questions is just if I dare say “important”

24. Hello, I have a question regarding the question “Is there a duty to revolt?”. Does the verb “revolt” refer to revolts or rather to revolutions? The two terms are different and it seems important to me to differentiate them. Thank you so much.

    1. This is an excellent reflex. These terminological distinctions will be essential if you come across a subject of this type on D-Day. They can often even help you to build a more nuanced outline by playing on the different meanings of the word. On the day of the competition, you will not be able to ask for this kind of precision: we therefore advise you to take the word as it is (do not change the question), remembering as you do that the theme was Revolutions, which will give a more assured orientation to your remarks, but remaining on the question chosen by Sciences Po. We hope to have been clear enough in our explanations. Good luck forming a plan,

25. Hello, it’s still and always me this time I come to see you for a brand new subject that is not on your list: “Do revolutions benefit the people?” My problem is: “How do revolutions orchestrated by actors of different kinds be put at the service of the people and thus serve their interests and their sovereignty? My outline would be: I) Revolts beneficial to the people (democratic revolts, French, American, English revolution but also the revolts of the early 2000s, color revolts, Arab spring..) II) revolts that limited powers of the people (therefore non-beneficial) where there I will approach the communist revolutions (establishment of totalitarian regimes, people deprived of freedom, form of dictatorship ..) and in large 3 III) a nuance, a reconciliation of the two points of view. I would have liked to talk about the digital and industrial revolution but in which parts exactly. Please give me a correction.

    1. Hello, Your outline seems more solid this time and follows a good logic. With the exception of III, for which you do not specify what nuances, what reconciliation. Directing your III towards a more contemporary reconciliation by introducing your idea of a digital revolution could work, be careful not to stray too far. For example, you can take the case of the Arab Spring in 2010-2011 (which you placed in your first part), where digital technology played a strong role. The problem is very classic (too simple?) but better than what you have proposed so far, so bravo for this progress. Now you have to dig your parts, also making the outline of your sub-parts (ABC). Continue accordingly,

26. Hello, my chosen question is: “Is a society without revolution healthy?” My problem reformulated: Without the need to practice revolution, can a society be considered balanced? My plan: I-A society without revolution does not fall within its validity II-The absence of revolution is the sign of political satisfaction within societies III-Revolution can lead to the right balance sought by society Regarding the hang on, I have nothing to the idea so please let me know some tips.

    1. Hello Racim,In your question that pinpoints the problem, as you see yourself, you content yourself with reformulating the terms, with “healthy” which becomes “balanced”; besides the fact that the expression “The necessity of having to practice revolution” sounds strange – does a revolution practice, and what is a homework necessity? Your plan, on the other hand, is working very well, it is well balanced and there is real progress. You will just have to clarify your capital I: do you mean that revolutions are not a criterion for measuring how healthy a society is? Or do you mean something else? For the hook of such a subject, a historical reference would seem quite relevant. Do you have any ideas of a society that has not known a revolution? And why not compare with other companies that have experienced revolutions in counter-hook to bring out a paradox? Sif this can help you find inspiration, this Wikipedia page in reference dozens and all times.

27. Hello again, the team integrating Science po, that’s me again, would you have any advice for me to formulate a relevant, dynamic, coherent, and above all excellent problem to allow me to pass the competition because I really feel that my difficulty comes from my inability to formulate a solid and reliable question that pinpoints the problem, the problem is that the question that pinpoints the problem constitutes the crux of my duty, in other words if I fail at the stage of the question that pinpoints the problem I simply fail for the dissertation so thank you in advance for your advice. And also I would like a lot of advice for my outline because it seems that there are not many things missing to succeed.

    1. Hello, Finding a problem is indeed a difficult stage of the dissertation, and this will remain true throughout your studies. You give us an idea for next year, because finding a problem indeed deserves a dedicated article. In a few words, you need to find out what the problem is behind the question. You can see the question as the tip of the iceberg, and the problem as the submerged part, where the real, deeper problem lies. Your problem will therefore correspond to this stronger and deeper question that underlies the question. So much for the theory, there is still the practice, and it is on this practice that the students will be assessed. Good luck,

28. Hello again, I’m coming back to you again but this time it’s for question 3 (should the state prevent revolutions?) Here is my introduction: Throughout history, many essentially political revolts have occurred with main goal to overthrow the State then in place such was the objective of their protagonists; the State then did everything in its power to oppose them and thus make them impossible (counter-revolution); nevertheless some of these revolts would be beneficial for the State or would constitute them, as we often tend to to think it a real danger, a real threat to the state then in place? So here is my “catch phrase” or maybe it’s more of a problematization. My problem is: “To what extent can revolutions represent a threat to the existing State but also a means of improving and perpetuating this State? With the outline I) Revolutions aim to overthrow the State (A. historical examples French Revolution and B. revolutions theorized to challenge an oppressive State) and II) Yet revolutions seem paradoxically to perpetuate the State (A. examples of revolutions that have in fact strengthened the States and B. state-sponsored revolutions)

    1. Hello Anonymous, Here’s a quick fix:

       During the story,

       too general a formula, it is better to start with a precise fact. Do not use generalities such as “always”, “ever since”, or here “throughout history”.

       Many essentially political revolts have occurred with the main aim of overthrowing the state then in place, such was the objective of their protagonists< /span>

       This is more of a definition than a reflection, but even as a definition this sentence is still too obvious.

       Would some of these revolts be beneficial for the State or would they constitute, as we often tend to think, a real danger, a real threat to the State then in place?  

       You understand much better on the question than the last time for subject 1. However, this is similar to a reformulation of the question.

       To what extent can revolutions represent a threat to the existing state but also a means of improving and perpetuating this state?

       That is interesting. Once again, you still run the risk of locking yourself into too narrow an angle. Finding an issue that starts with “How” rather than “To what extent” might help you? In any case, we advise you to look at examples of issues to better understand what is expected. More generally, it will be necessary to significantly expand the introduction. As for the plan, the game titles you envision say nothing of substance. Even if these titles do not appear in the copy explicitly, it will be necessary to build parts around more solid ideas. So much for our quick fix. In any case, a big congratulations for confronting you with the question and making proposals, it is by training as you do that we progress!

29. For subject number 1, (Are revolutions democratic?). My problem is: “To what extent can we say that the advent of a revolution in the political sphere necessarily leads to the formation of a new democratic political regime? My outline is I) Political revolutions that have made it possible to access to a democratic regime and II) non-democratic revolutions which gave rise to non-democratic regimes with a rather totalitarian (“dictatorial”) tendency

    1. Hello, The question that pinpoints the problem that you propose for the question “are revolutions democratic” takes into account only one aspect of the question. In other words, you propose to study only whether revolutions lead to democracy. But the question bears directly on the democratic character of the revolution itself, and not on what it engenders, even if that is an interesting question as well. As a result, your outline is wrong as well. To avoid this pitfall the next time, we advise you to spend more time on the draft on the “brainstorming”, that is to fire this phase where you write down as many ideas as possible on the given subject. It is after having exhausted all your ideas on the question that you will be able to formulate the most complete problem possible. Tell us if our comment is not clear, and do not hesitate to make a new proposal. Good day,

30. hello, I would like if possible to know the outline and the problems of all the exam questions because I trained myself to carry them out but I do not know if it is good so I would like the correction. THANKS

    1. Hello, You can offer us the outlines you have found, and thanks to that have the opinions of the other candidates for the Sciences Po competition who can comment here too, or the advice of the Academics in Politics team. We do not, however, offer standard answer keys for these practice topics. Do not hesitate to share your ideas, a suggestion that we also address to all the other readers of the site: it is thanks to practice that we get there! The Academics in Politics team

Comments are closed.