10 ms·

Don't forget that we very nearly had a successful coup, which would have spelled the end of American democracy. Are we on the verge of becoming a Stalinist stat

Don't forget that we very nearly had a successful coup, which would have spelled the end of American democracy. Are we on the verge of becoming a Stalinist state? No, not really. Could it happen? Absolutely, and we need to recognize that possibility to avoid becoming the next one.

ipaddr 5y ago
Please forget whatever idea you came up with. America was never under a coup attempt. Hard to even attempt to call it a coup without weapons. Don't worry America is safe from farmers rallying at the white house.
- whateveracct 5y ago
  Maybe they're referring to the attempts to invalidate the 2020 election? No weapons, but what is a better word for a coordinated attempt to undermine the government?
  - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
    How about 'attempt to undermine the government'? That is much more accurate than coup. Words have meanings, and using the words inaccurate/the wrong meanings is saying one thing but meaning another, and the word for that is lying.
    - jetpks 5y ago
      This is the same verbal gymnastics confederate sympathizers use when trying to say that the civil war was about "states rights." All you have to do is follow the logic to its conclusion. What was the civil war about? States rights. What rights, specifically? The right of states to allow their citizens to practice slavery. Therefore, the civil war was about slavery. What was jan 6 about? It was about an attempt to undermine the government. An attempt to undermine what, specifically? The election process. Why did they seek to undermine the election process? So that the mob could extra-judicially install a leader of their preference. Another word for this is coup d'etat.
      - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
        I can see where you're coming from. AFAIK, in common use the word coup involves the military taking control of the government.
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        > AFAIK, in common use the word coup involves the military taking control of the government. That is one common kind of coup, but distinguished from the broader category. That's why the phrase “military coup” exists to distinguish the kind of coup where the military (or some part of it) is the main actor in seizing control outside of normal bounds.
        ashtonkem 5y ago
        You’re using a much more narrow definition of what a coup d’état means. > The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority. Or to use Wikipedia’s definition > A coup d'état (French for "blow of state"), often shortened to coup in English (also known as an overthrow), is a seizure and removal of a government and its powers. Typically, it is an illegal seizure of power by a political faction, rebel group, military, or a dictator. Many scholars consider a coup successful when the usurpers seize and hold power for at least seven days. Yes, the military can be involved in a coup, but the essential definition does not require their involvement. Different terms might be applied if the military is involved, and based on whether or not the military is the primary driver (as in Myanmar) or is backing one side.
      - StanislavPetrov 5y ago
        >What was jan 6 about? Jan 6th was about a small number of ignorant people who bought into a bunch of lies. A protest that got out of control. One that was far, far less violent, with far fewer casualties than dozens of protests that happened around the country the prior year. All mobs are bad, all riots are bad. Unfortunately different partisans have been trying to blow up the implications of one riot while downplaying all the others.
        5y ago
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > How about 'attempt to undermine the government'? That is much more accurate than coup. No, attempted coup (specifically, attempted self-coup) is much more accurate. > Words have meanings Yes, they do. And the precise political science terms for the coordinated attempts by the 45th President and his allies to extend his powers beyond their lawful duration by extralegal means is “self-coup” or “auto-coup” (in the original French, “autogolpe”), which is a form of coup carried out by or on behalf of the existing leader. > and using the words inaccurate/the wrong meanings is saying one thing but meaning another, and the word for that is lying. Yes, that is exactly what you are doing when you explicitly refuse to use the correct term in attempt to minimize the act.
    - verve_rat 5y ago
      Just because it wasn't a very good or well organised coup attempt doesn't mean it wasn't a coup attempt.
- mojzu 5y ago
  The 'without weapons' implies it wasn't violent, which seems a stretch to me when a police officer was beaten to death and plenty of others were injured
  - edm0nd 5y ago
    >when a police officer was beaten to death Not single LEO was beaten to death on Jan 6th. You are literally spreading misinformation and fake news lol. SCP Officer Brian Sicknick died after having two strokes aka natural causes.
  - mpalczewski 5y ago
    First I'm hearing of this, do you have a source about the officer being beaten to death?
    - webstrand 5y ago
      They're probably referring to this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/brian-sicknick-police-capitol-dies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/brian-sicknick-police-...
      - mpalczewski 5y ago
        oh looks like fake news, even the ny times article says. "New information has emerged regarding the death of the Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick that questions the initial cause of his death provided by officials close to the Capitol Police." Wikipedia says "The cause of Sicknick's death was first thought to be from injuries, but months later the medical examiner reported there were none." "The District of Columbia chief medical examiner found that Sicknick had died from stroke, classifying his death as natural" The original commenter said some officer was beaten to death. Maybe another officer, or were they just mistaken?
  - StanislavPetrov 5y ago
    >The 'without weapons' implies it wasn't violent There is no such implication at all. "Without weapons" means "without weapons". The vast majority of people at that riot were gun owners, and none of them were armed or fired a shot. I can assure you, people who own guns and are committed to violently overthrowing the government bring those guns and shoot them. For evidence see any of the numerous coups that occur in countries around the world.
- Forgeties79 5y ago
  >America was never under a coup attempt Oh come now. "Hang Mike Pence." "Stop the steal." The former president calling election officials telling them to "find the votes." I don't care what your politics are, what we saw this last election was like nothing we've ever seen before in this country. It was a failed attempt to overturn a democratic election on the basis of a lie.
- coliveira 5y ago
  From your words, it seems that history rewriting is in full swing right now.
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
An attempt to overturn the results of the election? Yes. A coup? Not really; doesn't fit the definition, though it was far closer than I thought I would ever see. "Very nearly successful"? No.
- coliveira 5y ago
  A failed coup, since "overturn the results of the election" is pretty much what we may call a coup.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    Hmm. I went to dictionary.com, looked up coup d'état, and it said: > a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force. So, I stand corrected. It does meet the definition of "attempted coup".
    - coliveira 5y ago
      Yes, many people are under the impression that a coup is only the result of military or generalized revolt. In fact most modern coups are staged as a political mechanism to avoid the results of the democratic norm.

ipaddr 5y ago

Please forget whatever idea you came up with. America was never under a coup attempt. Hard to even attempt to call it a coup without weapons. Don't worry America is safe from farmers rallying at the white house.

whateveracct 5y ago
Maybe they're referring to the attempts to invalidate the 2020 election? No weapons, but what is a better word for a coordinated attempt to undermine the government?
- hackerfromthefu 5y ago
  How about 'attempt to undermine the government'? That is much more accurate than coup. Words have meanings, and using the words inaccurate/the wrong meanings is saying one thing but meaning another, and the word for that is lying.
  - jetpks 5y ago
    This is the same verbal gymnastics confederate sympathizers use when trying to say that the civil war was about "states rights." All you have to do is follow the logic to its conclusion. What was the civil war about? States rights. What rights, specifically? The right of states to allow their citizens to practice slavery. Therefore, the civil war was about slavery. What was jan 6 about? It was about an attempt to undermine the government. An attempt to undermine what, specifically? The election process. Why did they seek to undermine the election process? So that the mob could extra-judicially install a leader of their preference. Another word for this is coup d'etat.
    - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
      I can see where you're coming from. AFAIK, in common use the word coup involves the military taking control of the government.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > AFAIK, in common use the word coup involves the military taking control of the government. That is one common kind of coup, but distinguished from the broader category. That's why the phrase “military coup” exists to distinguish the kind of coup where the military (or some part of it) is the main actor in seizing control outside of normal bounds.
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        You’re using a much more narrow definition of what a coup d’état means. > The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority. Or to use Wikipedia’s definition > A coup d'état (French for "blow of state"), often shortened to coup in English (also known as an overthrow), is a seizure and removal of a government and its powers. Typically, it is an illegal seizure of power by a political faction, rebel group, military, or a dictator. Many scholars consider a coup successful when the usurpers seize and hold power for at least seven days. Yes, the military can be involved in a coup, but the essential definition does not require their involvement. Different terms might be applied if the military is involved, and based on whether or not the military is the primary driver (as in Myanmar) or is backing one side.
    - StanislavPetrov 5y ago
      >What was jan 6 about? Jan 6th was about a small number of ignorant people who bought into a bunch of lies. A protest that got out of control. One that was far, far less violent, with far fewer casualties than dozens of protests that happened around the country the prior year. All mobs are bad, all riots are bad. Unfortunately different partisans have been trying to blow up the implications of one riot while downplaying all the others.
      - 5y ago
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > How about 'attempt to undermine the government'? That is much more accurate than coup. No, attempted coup (specifically, attempted self-coup) is much more accurate. > Words have meanings Yes, they do. And the precise political science terms for the coordinated attempts by the 45th President and his allies to extend his powers beyond their lawful duration by extralegal means is “self-coup” or “auto-coup” (in the original French, “autogolpe”), which is a form of coup carried out by or on behalf of the existing leader. > and using the words inaccurate/the wrong meanings is saying one thing but meaning another, and the word for that is lying. Yes, that is exactly what you are doing when you explicitly refuse to use the correct term in attempt to minimize the act.
  - verve_rat 5y ago
    Just because it wasn't a very good or well organised coup attempt doesn't mean it wasn't a coup attempt.
mojzu 5y ago
The 'without weapons' implies it wasn't violent, which seems a stretch to me when a police officer was beaten to death and plenty of others were injured
- edm0nd 5y ago
  >when a police officer was beaten to death Not single LEO was beaten to death on Jan 6th. You are literally spreading misinformation and fake news lol. SCP Officer Brian Sicknick died after having two strokes aka natural causes.
- mpalczewski 5y ago
  First I'm hearing of this, do you have a source about the officer being beaten to death?
  - webstrand 5y ago
    They're probably referring to this: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/brian-sicknick-police-capitol-dies.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/brian-sicknick-police-...
    - mpalczewski 5y ago
      oh looks like fake news, even the ny times article says. "New information has emerged regarding the death of the Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick that questions the initial cause of his death provided by officials close to the Capitol Police." Wikipedia says "The cause of Sicknick's death was first thought to be from injuries, but months later the medical examiner reported there were none." "The District of Columbia chief medical examiner found that Sicknick had died from stroke, classifying his death as natural" The original commenter said some officer was beaten to death. Maybe another officer, or were they just mistaken?
- StanislavPetrov 5y ago
  >The 'without weapons' implies it wasn't violent There is no such implication at all. "Without weapons" means "without weapons". The vast majority of people at that riot were gun owners, and none of them were armed or fired a shot. I can assure you, people who own guns and are committed to violently overthrowing the government bring those guns and shoot them. For evidence see any of the numerous coups that occur in countries around the world.
Forgeties79 5y ago
>America was never under a coup attempt Oh come now. "Hang Mike Pence." "Stop the steal." The former president calling election officials telling them to "find the votes." I don't care what your politics are, what we saw this last election was like nothing we've ever seen before in this country. It was a failed attempt to overturn a democratic election on the basis of a lie.
coliveira 5y ago
From your words, it seems that history rewriting is in full swing right now.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

An attempt to overturn the results of the election? Yes. A coup? Not really; doesn't fit the definition, though it was far closer than I thought I would ever see. "Very nearly successful"? No.

coliveira 5y ago
A failed coup, since "overturn the results of the election" is pretty much what we may call a coup.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Hmm. I went to dictionary.com, looked up coup d'état, and it said: > a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force. So, I stand corrected. It does meet the definition of "attempted coup".
  - coliveira 5y ago
    Yes, many people are under the impression that a coup is only the result of military or generalized revolt. In fact most modern coups are staged as a political mechanism to avoid the results of the democratic norm.