Power has always been derived from grassroots, distributed cultural processes. It is only the king who remains unaware of his dependency on systems outside his control. The crowd keeps the king in the dark long enough to see if he does anything to justify his existence, and if he fails the test, the mechanisms of culture unravel the king's power even as he cracks down in his need to display it, to make it fact. Facts exist within networks of relationships and cannot be manufactured at will, even if the outward semblance of factual power can be maintained for a while through the theatrical use of fear.

One nice new fact of technology: digital cameras don't distinguish between the abuses of government and the abuses of revolutionary militias -- violence is allowed to be UGLY in its sensory form, as opposed to the disembodied language of political sacrifice which easily dismisses cruelty as necessary treatment for "lawbreakers". Maybe with that kind of impartial presentation of events, humanity will start to realize that "evil" people are trapped in bad systems that eventually cave in upon them, more tragic than terrifying. It's only the theatrical use of power, harming flesh-and-blood human beings, that is terrible. Individuals use systems of power to feel important and secure, and it's only a matter of degree whether we're talking about Rush Limbaugh's dismissal of the suffering of detainees at Abu Ghraib, or the Supreme Leader's denial of the legitimacy of civilian protests. Either way, someone's pain is papered over by words, and souls inherently capable of redemption and rebirth become trapped in labels, turned into instruments of some other will.