Re: [sixties-l] coup = forcible overthrow

From: William M. Mandel (
Date: 12/23/00

  • Next message: radman: "[sixties-l] Fwd: Gonzo, where have you gone?"

    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