Revolutions are never easy, not their start, nor their end. It takes strong political will, sacrifice and perseverance to win. Entering a revolution often comes with anger, doubts and fears. Your fears of survival and your doubts of short lived results that could demean your sacrifice, and threaten your security at cellular levels. As a major settler country that faced many social, economic, and political injustices in comparison to their settled French counterparts, Algeria took a stand to end French settlement. This sacrifices however only proved to be have disappointing outcomes leaving the country highly fractured both short term and long term, leading up to the civil war of 1992. I say with great emphasis that it is more difficult to govern a government that is faces post-revolutionary crisis than it is to overthrow an entire establishment. Such is proven in the wake of Algeria's revolution in the 1950s which has left an estimated 700,000 dead, and thousands more scarred physically and psychologically. Both sides of the battle, the Algiers and the French paratroopers, used merciless guerrilla tactics and torture against its own people.[1] Algeria continued however to struggle with civilian casualties. Among those the “Berber people at the hands various factions of insurgents, and was successful for a while”[2]. It is my assertion that decolonization France did not grant formal eminent rule, nor did it administer political order and help cultivate Algeria peacefully as a nation. The question remains however, would Algeria have succeeded long term as a nation under French rule? One can argue that Algerian ties to advanced French culture, language, medicine, technological advancement and western culture would have left Algerians in a much better conditions than the alternatives of the ensuing regimes that have depleted French roots in the country. In light of Algeria and pro independent's logic however, when you have very little to lose and freedom to gain its necessary to fight and fail at your convenience than it is to never having the chance to rule your own. Following the revolution however, even till today, we have yet to see the promise of post-revolutionary success of many pro independent idealist. It is not my bias however to argue in favor of one culture over another, rather I am presenting my thesis that Algeria has long demonstrated instability after post-colonial rule. The question of would have Algeria been better if it continued to be under French rule today is entirely a different discussion. The post Algerian Colonization did not resolve the Algerian fight for political power when Ben Bella became power as commander in chief and head of the military in 1963. There was many political animosity following 1963 because he was “opposed by other personalities from the war of decolonization, who founded the Front des Forces Socialistes (FFS), [3] who carried out attacks in 1964 including an attempt to assassinate him. His presidency did not offer the change Algeria long hoped for. Under his presidency Algeria faced an economic collapse, and “give widespread to social discontent that led to the implementation of economic reform that added to the suffering of ordinary men and women”[4]. After his death in 1978, Algerians were reminded of just how far they fell in achieving political, social and economic stability. The country was falling behind economically because the “administration failed to give value money on massive investment made in heavy industry sector”, [5]socially because of the country’s pursuit of Arabization it led to “alienation of non-Arabic speakers”, [6]and the alienation of the “country’s Berber minority”.[7]The country was also faced with the “departure of Algerians of French descents leaving the country without needed qualified administrators or professionals. Unemployment after independence stood at approximately 45 percent.”[8] It came in no luck that during the 1980s the price of oil and gas dramatically decreased which became a burden on Algeria’s socialist economy. This led the government to cut many funding’s that it promised the people. The government however was no longer able to “sustain its provision of social welfare to the public—which up to that point had been part of an implicit deal between the government and the public”[9] Bella also failed to adjust the country's political process by his “relentless concentration of power of himself [10] which discouraged and reduced people’s involvement in the political process. Although not recognized during his presidency, these issues became the core of Algerian problems when Ben Bella’s successor Chadli Bendjedid took office. Chadli Benjedid election however did not represent complete democracy. The National Liberation Front in fact ruled as a one political party regime only to reiterate the country’s failed political democracy. Having to deal with the mass social, political and economic issue, this became a growing concern during his presidency. He was confronted by huge social unrest by the Arab, Islamist, and Berber communities who “agitated for greater, cultural, and economic rights[11]”. Under Benjedid's rule in the1980s Algeria's stability only continued declined, which drew many protesters from all walks of life, including students, teachers, industrial workers. Benjedid retrieves the army restore law and order but its result was brutal and led to “public outcry”[12]. This was a slap in the face for Algerians as they continued to witness their efforts and sacrifice for a political revolution completely undermined. Enough was enough. Algerians completely detached and lost its trust with the government. The government was no longer the keeper of “scared spirit of the war of Liberation”[13], but became known as the “armed accomplice of an illegitimate regime” [14], which only focused on protecting the political privileges it rendered of the Algerians. Though Benjedid tried to enact political reform to assuage public concern and regain popularity, it failed. In attempting to remove the National Liberation Front (FLN), they were quickly exploited by the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS). Antigovernment was stemming from various social, political and economic problems including housing shortage, unemployment, and political corruption. By adopting yet a new constitution in 1889-1990 four new political parties emerged, however faced with the possibility of having the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) proclaim victory ,the army canceled the second stage of elections. This infuriated the (FIS) and acts of violence became the norm in 1992. Algerian fundamentalist began a new war against the military government who set about to destroy the FIS. Upon declaring a state of emergency the army was granted extensive power to “imprison thousands of FIS supporters often without trial[15]”, and the following month the “Judicial Council declared illegals[16]” and this rule was upheld by the Supreme Court. This only led to greater turmoil because in 1995 many groups who were influenced by the FLN gathered 30,000 fighters and “pushed the government to the brink[17]”. In the midst of all this the most vulnerable were civilians. This called for referential acts of violence that was created out by army including “search and destroying missions, exploitation” [18]By the end of the decade it was amounted to 100,000 to 150,000 lives taken revealing how high the price of this regime has come. The regime did not discriminate in the killings of people, including also focused on teachers, doctors, attorneys, and other administrative specialists. Violence this regime was also responsible for the murder of three Algerian scholarly elites, fires destroyed 75,000 acres of forests, houses, government buildings and schools. The magnitude of the violence is horrific in scale.
Similarly the conflict in Algeria in the 1990s and the battle of for Independence from France show more similarities than differences. First, the insurgency in both wars are very much alike: The National Liberation Front (FLN) is just as the Front Islamque du Salut (FIS). Just as the National Liberation Front (FLN) was the movement for Independence in 1962, the Front Islamque du Salut (FIS) served as “unifying the diverse interests against incumbent government”. [19] While some have coded the civil war of the 1990s as an “ethnic/religious/identity conflict”[20] both wars took more than just a religious stance by characterizing the reason for supporting the insurgents in “in terms of changes they wanted to see in the form of governance provided by the regime and the distributional arrangements extend in the economy[21]”. It was vested in all changes, including the economy, the social structure, and a change in the political process.
In short, Algeria’s post-colonial era was daunting for the Algerian people. The wake of the revolution draws many “what if” questions about Algeria’s stability today. Having faced many social and political and economic instability, and lose of hundreds of thousands of human life since its independence many still raise the question of “Would Algeria better off today”. Given the historical and contemporary contexts of its struggles the question is difficult to answer, even considering that its history has been nothing but turmoil.

Bibliography
Hill. "Decolonization and the Challenges of Independence in Modern Algeria." Taylor &
Francis. 2009. Accessed May 03, 2016. http://www.tandfonline.com.

Navarro, Mariano. "Algeria: A Case Study of Decolonization." Frontpage Mag. 2012. Accessed
May 03, 2016.

House, Jim. "History in Focus." The Colonial and Post-colonial Dimensions of Algerian
Migration to France, an Article from. 2006. Accessed May 03, 2016. http://www.history.ac.uk Schulhofer-Wohl, Jonah. "Algeria (1992-Present)." Http://faculty.virginia.edu. 2006.