3 ms·

I don't think so. "Nearly half of dictatorships start as a military coup, though others have been started by foreign intervention, elected officials ending com

by kbrkbr 2y ago

I don't think so. "Nearly half of dictatorships start as a military coup, though others have been started by foreign intervention, elected officials ending competitive elections, insurgent takeovers, popular uprisings by citizens, or legal maneuvering by autocratic elites to take power within their government. Between 1946 and 2010, 42% of dictatorships began by overthrowing a different dictatorship, and 26% began after achieving independence from a foreign government. Many others developed following a period of warlordism." [1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship (see "Formation")

pjmlp 2y ago
I might be wrong on being most, and eventually they might even be in minority, still some well known across Europe, have started with people that originally were democratically elected deciding that it was about time to change everything from inside.
throw0101d 2y ago
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship (see "Formation") Maybe worth considering: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup Also "How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days": * https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/hitler-germany-constitution-authoritarianism/681233/ https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive...
chii 2y ago
> Nearly half of dictatorships start as a military coup do you see jan 16 as a military coup? Coz i do. Just because the people involved are poorly equipped, and badly organized, doesn't mean it isn't. We, as a nation, did not punish them hard enough. We as a nation, did not cut the hydra at their head, and allowed it to fester. It is done, perhaps, as a form of peace keeping and appeasement. But history has taught us that appeasement does not work. So once again, those who failed to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
- kelnos 2y ago
  By definition it was not a military coup, because the US military did not participate in it. Sure, some people were private militia members, but that is not the same thing.

by kbrkbr 2y ago

pjmlp 2y ago

I might be wrong on being most, and eventually they might even be in minority, still some well known across Europe, have started with people that originally were democratically elected deciding that it was about time to change everything from inside.

throw0101d 2y ago

> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship (see "Formation") Maybe worth considering: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-coup Also "How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days": * https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/hitler-germany-constitution-authoritarianism/681233/ https://archive.is/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive...

chii 2y ago

> Nearly half of dictatorships start as a military coup do you see jan 16 as a military coup? Coz i do. Just because the people involved are poorly equipped, and badly organized, doesn't mean it isn't. We, as a nation, did not punish them hard enough. We as a nation, did not cut the hydra at their head, and allowed it to fester. It is done, perhaps, as a form of peace keeping and appeasement. But history has taught us that appeasement does not work. So once again, those who failed to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

kelnos 2y ago
By definition it was not a military coup, because the US military did not participate in it. Sure, some people were private militia members, but that is not the same thing.