3 ms·

These personal reasons would always exist. I’m curious about the justification they would provide to the rest of the world about why they intervened? That gives

These personal reasons would always exist. I’m curious about the justification they would provide to the rest of the world about why they intervened? That gives the moral basis for their use of power. I personally think, even if good rewards existed without a justification to provide that is consistent with their morality/ history of the country it would be very hard for the military to depose a government like they do in Pakistan. Though I suppose now that it has happened so many times in Pakistan, there is good precedent and this justification is less necessary.

johntiger1 3y ago
Does it matter? Hitler/Stalin/Mao also had 'good reasons' that they claimed for for doing the things they do. End of the day, the military is clinging to power
- sashank_1509 3y ago
  No, I’d say you’re completely wrong on that part. Hitler/ Stalin/ Mao is a very bad example of institutions clinging to power through pure force. Each of those examples, had grand visions of what was right and why they were justified to completely take over the government. I would even venture that in each of those cases there was broad popular support at the start which led to the complete overthrow of the government. An incident where power was taken to rule a country just because you could without any great moral basis was probably Pinochet in Chile, not many examples of this case exist.
  - ethbr0 3y ago
    Slobodan Milošević in Yugoslavia As near as I can tell, he started from "Take over the government" and surfed his way there by reading (and stoking populist energy) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xscsu_QGbLg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xscsu_QGbLg
vishnugupta 3y ago
> there is good precedent and this justification is less necessary I guess this is more or less the reason. They probably see themselves as the first line of defence in internal security unlike at other democratic countries. The repeated military intervention in internal matters has set off a positive feedback loop where those capable enough and wanting to bring positive impact join the military. So remaining institutions (civil services, police, law& order, politics etc.,) continue to erode and get more corrupt.

johntiger1 3y ago

Does it matter? Hitler/Stalin/Mao also had 'good reasons' that they claimed for for doing the things they do. End of the day, the military is clinging to power

sashank_1509 3y ago
No, I’d say you’re completely wrong on that part. Hitler/ Stalin/ Mao is a very bad example of institutions clinging to power through pure force. Each of those examples, had grand visions of what was right and why they were justified to completely take over the government. I would even venture that in each of those cases there was broad popular support at the start which led to the complete overthrow of the government. An incident where power was taken to rule a country just because you could without any great moral basis was probably Pinochet in Chile, not many examples of this case exist.
- ethbr0 3y ago
  Slobodan Milošević in Yugoslavia As near as I can tell, he started from "Take over the government" and surfed his way there by reading (and stoking populist energy) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xscsu_QGbLg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xscsu_QGbLg

vishnugupta 3y ago

> there is good precedent and this justification is less necessary I guess this is more or less the reason. They probably see themselves as the first line of defence in internal security unlike at other democratic countries. The repeated military intervention in internal matters has set off a positive feedback loop where those capable enough and wanting to bring positive impact join the military. So remaining institutions (civil services, police, law& order, politics etc.,) continue to erode and get more corrupt.