What does it mean to be a revolutionary in the Syrian context? And what is the place of ideology? Historically, revolutionaries have not only acted upon social and political injustice – they have also both been driven by ideologies and produced them. Yet few accounts exist of the process of ideology-making and its function in the revolutionary process. This paper draws on five months of multi-sited ethnography (including more than 150 interviews) of transnational, activist networks with members in Beirut, Turkey and Paris and analysis of their social networking sites. The paper tracks how distinct networks of Syrians, collectively belonging to the “peaceful movement” (harakeh silmiyyeh) emerge in Damascus during 2011, how their collective experiences and activism evolved and it explores the consequences of the geographically displacement of these networks as the crisis increasingly militarizes. The paper highlights two crucial questions pertaining to revolutionary ideological saturation; did the revolution end for the peaceful movement during 2012, and how does ideology differ from identity in the Syrian case? The paper argues that the revolutionary moment of 2011 did endure in spite of increasing militarization. Although each interlocutor’s experience is unique, a common pattern of revolutionary stages and a lasting ideological commitment emerges; firstly – strong, affective experiences of uprooting social conventions and the imaginaries sustaining them spark a revolutionary zeal as well as a new political, revolutionary ideology. Secondly, this ideology is saturated and contributes to the gradual evasion of other aspects of mundane life – such as work, family and friends – in tandem with externally imposed structures (i.e. increasing surveillance and harassments by mukhabarat). Established social navigation, relationships and imaginaries were thus radically transformed. And thirdly, intensification of violence and personal threat leads to flight. New strong “revolutionary friendships” were forged in the process of ideology-making. A new horizon of expectations (Koselleck 1979) ascribed by revolutionary ideology kept being enacted despite increasing militarization. And despite disagreements over key political issues (including the place of Islamism) and despite the eventual geographical displacement of these networks, revolutionary solidarity among the members stayed strong and became nurtured through personal interactions and mobility across borders, affective virtual iconography, commemorations and – most importantly – a continuation of revolutionary activism. Finally, the paper seeks to qualify the term “ideology” as a particular theoretical category to grasp ongoing transformations in Syria – one which transcends sectarian and ethnic identities and accumulates differently among Syrian revolutionaries in comparison with other cases of revolution.