At this time last year, Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, and Egyptian president Hosni Mubarek were all comfortably and securely in power - although violent protests were pushing against the president's authority in Tunisia.
How quickly things change.
Now, Egyptians are back in the streets protesting what they see as delays in the turnover of governing authority from the military council set up after Mubarek's departure, pushing for democratic elections. And it looks like the regime in Syria is headed the way of others in the region, forced into recognizing the power of the people.
Meanwhile, over here our own calm, moderate version of "Arab Spring" vanished as many predicted with the onset of winter, doomed also perhaps by its lack of focus and lack of any specific target. The "occupy" movement had some great ideals, but despite "everyone" knowing exactly what it was about, it didn't have the focus of the popular protests in the Arab world that inspired it.
"Occupy" was about everything - big business, corporate salaries, bank profits, big-money CEOs, government squeezing the little guy, the very rich, powerful and privileged few steamrollering over the rest of the population … all of that.
But ultimately, there was no real goal - certainly nothing as specific as deposing a ruler and instituting election reform. And really, especially up here in Canada where things are, generally, pretty good, we're a pretty complacent lot and honestly, we'd rather walk our dogs in a park than give it up to a group of demonstrators who deep down we kind of thought would be much better off if they had a job, eh? And a lot of them seemed to be uncomfortably reminiscent of those long-haired hippie-types from the Woodstock movie, too, eh?
Did "occupy" accomplish anything? It's hard to say. In one sense, it reinforced the basic futility of protest in our cushy, democratic, affluent society; but it also showed that some people were willing to do something almost unheard of in a cushy, affluent society and stand up against the forces of authority and the privileged few.
Unfortunately, authority didn't particularly listen or care what happened in a group of parks in various cities - which left the movement somewhat floundering.
As one political analyst put it, with something like 66 percent of people basically satisfied with what's going on in the country, and three-quarters of people feeling positive about their financial outlook, it's hard to generate the kind of violent disaffection the movement needed to really effect meaningful change.
No matter how much they might complain about CEO salaries or bank profits, or corporate greed that forces layoffs, or smugly self-satisfied politicians, many Canadians are just too content with their lot. As long as they can watch the game, pick up a coffee at Tims and whine good-naturedly about the weather, they're happy.
Perhaps with the risk of another recession on the horizon thanks to continued problems in Europe and the U.S., the next "occupy" might not fizzle as rapidly.