My favorite side of Bluesky
![A coup d'état (/ˌkuːdeɪˈtɑː/ ⓘ; French: [ku deta] ⓘ; lit. 'stroke of state'),[1] or simply a coup,[2] is typically an illegal and overt attempt by a military organization or other government elites to unseat an incumbent person or leadership.[3][4] A self-coup is said to take place when a leader, having come to power through legal means, tries to stay in power through illegal means.[4]
General Napoleon Bonaparte during the Coup of 18 Brumaire in Saint-Cloud, detail of painting by François Bouchot, 1840
By one estimate, there were 457 coup attempts from 1950 to 2010, half of which were successful.[3] Most coup attempts occurred in the mid-1960s, but there were also large numbers of coup attempts in the mid-1970s and the early 1990s.[3] Coups occurring in the post-Cold War period have been more likely to result in democratic systems than Cold War coups,[5][6][7] though coups still mostly perpetuate authoritarianism.[8]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6yb2poojz2jsnbqn7jqhpvtv/bafkreicqemraw4jn4bb5kvcudegv22hj4gaagpv3geryvjyw7odhzzsfiy)
![A soft coup, sometimes referred to as a silent coup, is an illegal overthrow of a government. Unlike a classical coup d'état, it is achieved without the use of military force.[1]
Definition
The concept of a soft coup as a strategy is attributed to the American political scientist Gene Sharp, a Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth and Nobel Peace Prize nominee, who has been a theorist and author of works on the dynamics of nonviolent conflict. He studied the potential to spark, guide, and maximize the power of sometimes short-lived mass uprisings, as he tried to understand how unarmed insurrections have been far more politically significant than observers focused on military warfare have cared to admit.[2]
According to Axel Kaiser, a Chilean lawyer member of the Mises Institute, the soft coup is often part of a conspiracy theory used by Latin American populists who seek the centralization of power but do so under the pretense of improving democracy. Kaiser argues that the Latin American leaders' rationale is that democracy should be a system where the general will must be absolute, and that the populist leader describes himself as the representative of the general will by virtue of having been elected by the people. Kaiser says that these leaders feel that the will of the leader equals the general will, and that any limits on the will of the leader would be also a limit to the general will itself.[3] In this scenario, opposition to the leader is treated as an act against democracy, justifying persecution of the opposition, forced nationalizations and limits to the freedom of the press.[4] This notion of democracy is opposed to the one traditionally held in the United States, which considers that rulers must have limits to their power;[4] it also conflicts with minority rights.[5]
Several military coups took place in South America during the 20th century, in particular during the Cold War. There is a perception of tho…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6yb2poojz2jsnbqn7jqhpvtv/bafkreicdfwansng72davubxbha6cujjbddfh56vrm2bwyppekkeygd4r24)
My favorite side of Bluesky