Much has been said about the events of August 5, 2024. Some describe it as a revolution, while others call it a people’s uprising. Regardless of how it is labeled, the aftermath saw the emergence of a new military-backed government, formed by the protestors and their chosen representatives, aiming to implement profound changes in the state machinery.

A revolution is not merely about reforming the state; it is about completely transforming its very structure. True revolution seeks to build a political system where the working class— who are often marginalized in comparison to the wealthy, influential, and elite families— holds power at the center.

While reforms can bring changes in the state’s laws, they cannot alone sustain lasting progress. Without a genuine transformation in people’s mindsets, the old system is bound to return. Only through a deep, collective shift in attitudes and values can society permanently reject corrupt politics and establish a just order  

To understand this, we can turn to the ideas of Antonio Gramsci. Like Lenin, Gramsci believed that the spontaneous protests, disobedience, or rebellions of the masses cannot be called a revolution until they are combined with cultural and ideological elements. What happened in Bangladesh on August 5 did not have a unified cultural and ideological aspect, nor did it involve the proportional participation of all sections of society. Therefore, it is better to call it simply an uprising rather than a popular uprising, as it only led to a change in the regime. Those who refer to it as the “July Revolution” in the manner of the October Revolution are mistaken.

Gramsci believed that the ruling class maintains its power not only through coercion but also through the establishment of cultural and ideological dominance. In his view, a popular uprising challenges not only the regime but also the cultural and intellectual dominance of the ruling class. It creates a counter-hegemony, where alternative ideas and values gradually form a new consensus among the public.

In the context of Bangladesh, what is the cultural and ideological dominance created by the Awami League? In a word, it is the Liberation War. That is the spirit of the Liberation War, their leadership in the struggle for independence, and their narrative of secularism. Each of these is justified. However, do the leaders who came after Bangabandhu truly uphold those values and ideals? The people of Bangladesh do not believe so. The protestors challenged the hegemony of the Hasina government but failed to........

© Eurasia Review