Could a Coup be successful in the US?

[peterbound]

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Short answer, no.

Longer answer, no way.

More generally (not specific to the USA) I think in pretty much every modern democracy that is used to having robust and free political debate and regular elections relatively free from corruption since at least WWII a proper military coup that sets up an undemocratic military government is a virtual impossibility. There is simply far too much pro-democracy inertia both within the govt bureaucracy and among the people for a coup to actually seize power. The greatest defence against a coup is a politically aware populace. Even if that populace is relatively politically apathetic, they are normally only apathetic because they are comfortable with the democratic status quo. Upset the status quo and they soon lose their apathy.

Again, I'm not sure you understand how it could happen.  Most conservatives believe that the democratic process is going the way of the dodo, that the majority of the population now consists of individuals who don't pay taxes, want things for free, and will continue to elect officials that 'ruin' the democratic system.  With that in mind, a strong central leader, a military leader, could easily sway folks into forcing a hard reset to the american democratic system.  Add to all of that a politically /un/aware populace like the world we know is becoming, and it could happen. 

[TheKitttenGuard]

56 minutes ago, peterbound said:

Again, I'm not sure you understand how it could happen.  Most conservatives believe that the democratic process is going the way of the dodo, that the majority of the population now consists of individuals who don't pay taxes, want things for free, and will continue to elect officials that 'ruin' the democratic system.  With that in mind, a strong central leader, a military leader, could easily sway folks into forcing a hard reset to the american democratic system.  Add to all of that a politically /un/aware populace like the world we know is becoming, and it could happen. 

So, basically a coup is more likely under Bernie Sanders then Donald Trump.

[peterbound]

34 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

So, basically a coup is more likely under Bernie Sanders then Donald Trump.

I think it's more likely in response to his being elected, yes.  

[The Killer Snark]

1 hour ago, peterbound said:

I think it's more likely in response to his being elected, yes.  

Exactly.

[The Mance]

i could see some sort of local power grab as an extension of the sort of insurrectionist ideals we saw at the Malheur sanctuary in Oregon earlier this year.  

 

I really have no idea what the crossover is with Trump supporters among the Sovereign Citizens, Oath Keepers, and 3 Percenters movements (I'm assuming it's high), but if the GOP screws Trump out of the nom in a contested convention and then Hillary wins the general, Peter may be more right than I'd like to think.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

In this hypothetical coup d'etat, are we talking about the military just removing a sitting president or a full scale military take over?

11 hours ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Wait.  Kennedy and...? I'm blanking on the other possibility. 

Free clue:

[DanteGabriel]

7 hours ago, peterbound said:

I think it's more likely in response to his being elected, yes.  

Wait, the military might rebel against a socialist Jew when they didn't rebel against the Kenyan-born Muslim socialist Black Panther?

[maarsen]

43 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

In this hypothetical coup d'etat, are we talking about the military just removing a sitting president or a full scale military take over?

Free clue:

Actually, I was thinking about Gen.Alexander Haig after the assassination attempt on Reagan.

[Fez]

So I can't find it right now, but I swear I saw a Gallup poll showing that something like 15% of Americans would support a military coup against the government. Which is very low, but Gallup has been tracking this question since the early '90s, and back then it was under 5% and it has been slowly tracking upwards.

This is separate from the YouGov poll last September which found that 29% of Americans answered 'Yes' to the question "Is there any situation in which you could imagine yourself supporting the U.S. military taking over the powers of federal government?" which is a bit different since that includes stuff like the hypothetical I laid out. That poll also had 30% of Americans answer 'Unsure.'

More relevantly, that YouGov poll found large majorities of Americans supporting the idea that the military should disobey civilian orders if they think those orders are 'misguided.'

[Jaxom 1974]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

In this hypothetical coup d'etat, are we talking about the military just removing a sitting president or a full scale military take over?

Free clue:

 

15 minutes ago, maarsen said:

Actually, I was thinking about Gen.Alexander Haig after the assassination attempt on Reagan.

Okay. Got it. I didn't think if either of these.  Of course one isn't a coup so much as a usurpation. The other would be more of an example on how to fail in a coup. 

[sologdin]

10 hours ago, peterbound said:

Again, I'm not sure you understand how it could happen.  Most conservatives believe that the democratic process is going the way of the dodo, that the majority of the population now consists of individuals who don't pay taxes, want things for free, and will continue to elect officials that 'ruin' the democratic system.  With that in mind, a strong central leader, a military leader, could easily sway folks into forcing a hard reset to the american democratic system.  Add to all of that a politically /un/aware populace like the world we know is becoming, and it could happen. 

yeah, this is kinda the old ayn rand/von hayek silliness wherein economic rights are not real rights, but are rather ocholocratic impositions on the white godfearin citizens of rock ridge.

[Darzin]

Quote

Again, I'm not sure you understand how it could happen.  Most conservatives believe that the democratic process is going the way of the dodo, that the majority of the population now consists of individuals who don't pay taxes, want things for free, and will continue to elect officials that 'ruin' the democratic system.  With that in mind, a strong central leader, a military leader, could easily sway folks into forcing a hard reset to the american democratic system.  Add to all of that a politically /un/aware populace like the world we know is becoming, and it could happen. 

It could I'm certain many trump supporters would support one now. Heck I read the comments on the Blaze sometimes and people speak favorably of one sometimes there. The language is something like wondering how long the military can stand Obama's hatred of them. I still think it's very very unlikely though and if it ever did happen it would either fail quickly or lead to the break up of the US. 

Vox also wrote an article about how our government system might fail because of the inherent weakness of the American presidential system.

[MerenthaClone]

19 hours ago, Fez said:

This is separate from the YouGov poll last September which found that 29% of Americans answered 'Yes' to the question "Is there any situation in which you could imagine yourself supporting the U.S. military taking over the powers of federal government?" which is a bit different since that includes stuff like the hypothetical I laid out. That poll also had 30% of Americans answer 'Unsure.'

This is simply a question that tracks how good someone's imagination is, though.  Is there a situation where I could imagine supporting the US military leading a coup?  Of-fucking-course, but that doesn't mean its a plausible situation.  

[Fez]

2 hours ago, MerenthaClone said:

This is simply a question that tracks how good someone's imagination is, though.  Is there a situation where I could imagine supporting the US military leading a coup?  Of-fucking-course, but that doesn't mean its a plausible situation.  

Yep. Which is why that is the least relevant of the three paragraphs I wrote, and said as much.

[DireWolfSpirit]

I wouldnt be opposed to seeing the country split into 4 smaller countries. Something akin to a North, a South, a East and a West. I think Lincoln was the great emmancipator but the tragic consolidator and wonder if that sucession as well as future ones couldn't be sucessful divisions. I think of it in terms like splitting up monopolies, breaking apart the Ma Bells and Standard Oils if you will.

Such a development would make a question over a coup null and void, but then maybe one of the 4 new smaller nations might go rogue or have its own civil war or coup, who knows what could happen then? A currency crisis could be a key factor in any of these hypothetical situations playing out. Never is a long time and nations change all the time, the U.S. hasnt achieved permanent immunity to destabilization any more than Genghis Kahn or Rome or Napolean or Alexander the Great did and we all know their empires changed eventually. For me it's more of a question of when, not if, the U.S. experiences it's great shake up.

[sologdin]

ZOMG no way, dude.  don't split the US.  the left needs to control it and use its military to destroy all of the rightwing regimes out there. think of a bernite presidency as a decapitation strike against the entire world.

[Horza]

Also, splitting that unified strategic weapons command would be a hell of a job.

Sorry guys: the country that MADs together, sads together.

[sologdin]

horza, you know that since the ANZUS, y'all are like the 65th and 66th states, aye?

[Horza]

As I understand that crude rating system was suspended in 1988 in favour of a joint 51st designation shared between all approved countries, with a rotating senior representative position with four year terms and a dedicated office facility in the sub-basement of a highly influential State Department facility in Cleveland.

[SkynJay]

8 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

I wouldnt be opposed to seeing the country split into 4 smaller countries. Something akin to a North, a South, a East and a West. I think Lincoln was the great emmancipator but the tragic consolidator and wonder if that sucession as well as future ones couldn't be sucessful divisions. I think of it in terms like splitting up monopolies, breaking apart the Ma Bells and Standard Oils if you will.

Such a development would make a question over a coup null and void, but then maybe one of the 4 new smaller nations might go rogue or have its own civil war or coup, who knows what could happen then? A currency crisis could be a key factor in any of these hypothetical situations playing out. Never is a long time and nations change all the time, the U.S. hasnt achieved permanent immunity to destabilization any more than Genghis Kahn or Rome or Napolean or Alexander the Great did and we all know their empires changed eventually. For me it's more of a question of when, not if, the U.S. experiences it's great shake up.

I think of what that would do to me professionally and shudder.  HQ is out East, main Warehouse that affects me is in California, and as a Colorado native I would probably be sucked into New Texas.  To the country as a whole?  Now I am scared.

I say we keep our country together.