Not a good definition. What's "forcible," if no violence is used? To me, a coup
is an illegal seizure of power. Taking power by mass disfranchisement and
Supreme Court usurpation is a coup. The fact that most of the people don't want
to do anything about it does not make it any the less a coup.
Bill Mandel
Jesse Lemisch wrote:
> Trying to advance this discussion, I looked up coup d'etat in my Webster's
> New World Dictionary, 4th ed., 2000:
>
> "the sudden FORCIBLE [emphasis added] overthrow of a ruler, government,
> etc., sometimes with violence, by a small group of people already having
> some political or military authority."
>
> I suspect that there are people here who will want to argue that, damn it,
> it was forcible. I'll leave you to look up "forcible." Once again, if we are
> to figure out how to fight against these things, we can't be taken in by our
> own hyperbole. The left is in trouble if it can't tell the truth.
>
> Jesse Lemisch
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/30/00 EST