When people rise up to demand their squandered rights, as a reaction to the violation, injustice, and tyranny that has befallen them, and when they triumph over injustice and the oppressor, they must transform this victory into success. The victor here must transcend what the tyrant did to them. Victory cannot be transformed into success without eliminating the oppressor’s methods of practicing his injustice, and eliminating the oppressor’s methods cannot be achieved without the victor refraining from using those methods against which they revolted and triumphed. Whoever triumphs over cancellation and exclusion must refrain from practicing them, and must refrain from practicing the culture of revenge. Whoever triumphs over illegality must be legal and believe in accountability according to the law, otherwise victory will turn into failure, and failure is the opposite of success. Violence and revenge are nothing less than society’s fall into the trap of mutual ostracism and rejection, which gives victory the character of a “coup,” not getting rid of the culture that led to the coup, the coup. Changing names, and those who practice it keep the country stuck in the same place. A revolution is not a coup! There are different models of victorious behavior. There is the Iraqi “dragging” model, the ISIS slaughter model, and then the model of developing victory into success, as happened in South Africa, when Mandela and his party refused to practice revenge, when the Gandhian culture in India rejected the practice of revenge, and when jihadist factions in Syria practiced brutality that surpassed that of the Assad regime. There are many clear and confirmed examples that true victory, or so-called success, can only be achieved by reaching a state opposite to the one that prevailed before victory, such as accepting the other rather than excluding them, which confirms victory over exclusion. The same applies to many other areas. There is no comparison between the importance of the oppressor and his fate and the importance of success in establishing the values of a better future, far removed from violence. Moving away from violence is essential to confronting violence and its consequences, such as killing, destruction, and alienation from humanity. What is important is, and remains, success in establishing and consolidating the values of a better future, far removed from violence, which destroys every capacity for progress. We were unable to detect any renewal movements in the Arab region, as the new name was similar to the old, and sometimes even worse. How will the new name differ from the old, when a single religion is the sole source of thought for both the old and the new? What did the faction revolutionaries want, regardless of replacing the Alawite leader with a leader from the group of the Companions or the Umayyads? Do the new leaders truly want to spread democracy, establish secularism, and achieve social justice? And then commit to the principles of freedom? And can a sane person believe the claim of a revolution for freedom and democracy led by factions, while examples of their understanding and concepts of freedom and democracy are before our eyes and are known to us and others? Some of those who practice taqiyya curse ISIS, and they are more ISIS-like than ISIS, and they think that cursing, insulting, and enslaving Yazidi women is the ideal way to remove suspicion. These people are more ISIS-like than ISIS, and one can imagine their position on ISIS if ISIS were victorious, and if ISIS were victorious, they would cheer and praise it! A victory for a movement or factional war would represent a devastating and fatal defeat for Syria. Does the caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Julani, al-Baghdadi, or al-Shishani represent a lifelong success? Is Afghanization or Somalization a sign of progress and advancement? Is the new era formula of transitioning from the “I” of citizenship to the “I” of the group or factions a contribution to building a nation? Did the transition from Assadism to al-Julaniism represent the fulfillment of Syrians’ expectations since 1958? There is no point in defeating others, because others have nothing to do with Syria’s miserable situation, and defeating others is impossible. Syrians must first defeat their own corrupt, ignorant, morally and socially degenerate selves. No matter how bad or good the ruler is, he will not succeed in establishing the foundations of democracy and freedom in a nominal state based on clans and sectarian sects. In a nominal state, elections become a formality and lead to changing names vertically without affecting the political structure horizontally. As long as religion draws political borders, the country will fall into the trap of dictatorship based on rigid lineages. It is a dictatorship of religious “lineages” that is far worse than the dictatorship of the individual. No form of democracy can be established except on the basis of variable and exclusively political lineages, because lineages cannot be variable unless they are political and not religious. We must abandon the illusion of victory over others, and we must adopt the reality of victory over ourselves first, the backward dictatorial self. Colonized by its ignorance, sectarianism, and behavioral and moral inferiority