Thich Quang Duc committed self-immolation on the streets of Saigon on June 11, 1963, and it changed the course of history. Today, the photograph of Thich Quang Duc’s death, The Burning Monk, has become a universal symbol of rebellion and the fight against injustice. His death was reduced to a symbol, but it was much more than that (Sinzelle, 22). It was an act of defiance against a corrupt government that had killed its citizens. It sparked a revolution, overthrew the regime, and may even have caused the Americans to enter the Vietnam War. However, the monk himself most likely did not die for revolutionary ideas. His self-immolation was an act of rejection of the system and the inability to deal with injustice.
Tunisian street vendor Mohammed Bouazizi set himself on fire in protest against harassment by local officials. The desperate act of the young man caused mass street protests in the city. The rioters demanded the resignation of President Ben Ali. His political regime faced long-term economic and social problems, resulting in unemployment, mostly among young people. Mohammed Bouazizi became a symbol of the Arab Spring; he gained followers in Tunisia and other Arab countries, which also led to mass protests.
Most of the self-immolations did not impact the current situation; however, some of them played an important role in the political events in the country in which they took place. The actions of both men can hardly be called a specific call for revolution. Both cases can be compared, considering them as an extreme measure of disagreement with injustice. It seems that the men have no other means left for the official authorities to hear them. In one way or another, both events significantly influenced the course of history.