(I originally posted this as a reply in another “Guns” thread, but decided it was way off-topic. So here it is as a seperate question.)
Is this really a concern? I’ve seen the idea mentioned several times in these debates, and I’m wondering if people really do feel that such a thing is likely to actually happen.
Don’t those who have the power and influence to initiate a take-over already pretty much have what they want without taking such a risk?
Peace,
mangeorge
I only know two things;
I know what I need to know
And
I know what I want to know
Mangeorge, 2000
Since my “right” to bear “arms” doesn’t allow me to have a surface to air missle battery mounted over my garage, I guess we’re all fucked if they do decide to take over.
This is a question related to this thread for anybody who is or was serving in the military.
Would you really have followed orders if your commanders told you to occupy the Capitol building, round up Congressmen, take over radio and TV stations, shoot your fellow Americans if they resisted?
I have trouble imagining that I would do any of these things if I were in the military, but then again, I’ve never been in it.
I think that in America, and perhaps some other countries with strong democratic traditions, the soldiers would be less likely to follow the orders necessary to pull off a coup. Please tell me if I’m right or wrong.
-Steve
“Heyyyy sexy mama! Wanna kill all humans?” -Bender, Futurama
“Your game shows reward knowledge. Ours punish ignorance!” -The Simpsons
You are absolutely right, Wevets. A strong democratic tradition, a highly educated population, mass communications, a prosperous economy, these are the things standing in the way of of any would-be tyrants from coming to power. Nevermind the unlikelyhood of anyone thinking they could estalish such a regime. Examine the conditions which brought any given authoritarian regime to power and compare them to the conditions which exists–and will almost certainly continue to exist–in the U.S. today
Nazi soldier interviewed after the war stated that “they were only following orders”. Social pressure can be very great to conform with violent or even deadly behavior. Stanley Milgram did experiments in the early part of this century whereby seemingly normal people would willingly shock other people because he forcefully asked them to. Not order, but forcefully ask. A sargeant in the middle of battle is going to do a hell of a lot more than ask you to do something. Plus, if everyone else is doing it, what motivation have you to refuse? Especially with the military’s “we’re all one big conforming group” mentality.
Breck, the German soldier was not created whole-cloth by the military-he was mostly a product of German society. The paranoia, xenophobia, and racism was instilled from birth by family and society. When they entered the military, they became what they were trained from birth to become.
Unless you are drawing parallels between Germany of the 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s, and our society, your argument is pointless.
Eagles may soar free and proud, but weasels never get sucked into jet engines.
How much social pressure is there in the U.S. military to be loyal to Bill Clinton? If Clinton tried to seize power, what would the reaction be? In this context, the loss of prestige he has brought to the presidency (it will never be full regained) is a good thing. Few soldiers, or anyone else, will treat any would-be meglomaniac as anything but a joke.
I think you guys have the wrong idea how stuff happens.
Forget Clinton waking up Monday morning and then just deciding to take over forever. (disclaimer- I do not think Clinton is plotting to take over the USA )
It is an incremental process. If you preserve the appearance of legality, people will follow. We have certainly seen that our government is not afraid to move against citizens.
Check out Seattle and Waco.
All that is really required is that the government control the perception of what is happening.
If people see it on TV, then they figure it is real. So as long as the government has control of the “spin” that the media puts on news, then the perception is that of a free country.
The cops have no problems doing midnight no-knock raids. They trust in the court system to sort out the details. All they want is for you to point them in the right direction and they will bust in the door, kill you if you resist, and drag you off to jail in the middle of the night.
Who really knows what the guy did?
Not you. Not the cops. The guy is gone. If there is not an honest court system for him to find justice in, he is done for.
There doesn’t have to be a soldier at every corner for someone to take over.
I stringly suspect that those who fear a miltary takeover in the USA have never served in the active military. The idea of armed soldiers locking down the congress might make good fiction, but it does not reflect any reality of military service that I came in contact with.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
Those who say a military takeover (of the USA) can’t happen should read the old book “SEVEN DAYS IN MAY”. Though dated, this projects a fairly realistic lokat how such a coup d’etat might happen.
Of course, the military would have a great deal of trouble suppressing communication today, what with the internet and all.
OK, I have to start with my usual 2dn Amendment disclaimer. I am no gun nut. Don’t even own one. However, I do see the wisdom in having the 2nd Amendment as a hedge against tyranny.
I’m afraid we have some historical myopia here.
It seems impossible to those of us who have grown to adulthood in times of relative properity that our political system could ever disintegrate.
But to envision a time when the walls might come tumbling down, you have to envision a time of economic collapse. (Like Germany before WWII.) Doesn’t seem to be on the horizon, but that doesn’t mean it can’t ever happen.
Let’s say you have an economic collapse. There is panic. There are starving people in the streets. There are mobs. There is crime. Washington DC is in a state of chaos. The President gets blamed for the whole mess. The citizenry turns on him. Along comes someone with the backing of some high-ranking members of the military who offers to “restore order”. Sounds good to a lot of folks. There’s your recipe for dictatorship.
Does anyone remember the way MacArthur handled the bonus army (WW I veterans demanding bonus pay) when they marched on Washington? You think the army can’t turn its guns on the citizenry if the right circumstances arise? It has happened here. And when it happens, it’s always in the name of “restoring order”.
Like I said, I’m no gun nut. I lean toward the left side of the political spectrum. I don’t have paranoid visions of an oppressive government. I do, however, recognize that under the right circumstances it could happen.
We almost have to depend on the factors that sqweels mentions. Additionally, an educated, informed populace, a tradition of the rule of law, a free press and a free internet.
If things got bad, I think I would rather trust the army than the private gun owners in this country. The libertarian right and other ordinary, rational citizens are not the problem; I’m worried about the real nutjobs.
The numerous “Christian militias” and White Supremacists are the real problem. These are the people who are using the Second Amendment to justify arming themselves, but then would take advantage of general troubles to implement their agenda of hate and intolerance. They have no respect for the Constitution: Freedom of religion and racial equality are the “evils” they are preparing to fight against.
And there are also the borderline psychos who would take advantage of troubles to just start offing people for the fun of it.
I have a certain degree of confidence in the military and police forces in this country. They have their problems, but I think over the years they have adopted a fundamental loyalty to the concepts of democracy and civilization. In a real crisis, they would be the ones fighting on the side of freedom against the armed extremists.
And we had better hope so, especially in the case of the military. If they ever do decide to unify and take over, I have no doubt in my mind that they could so with relative ease.
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away”. - Phillip K. Dick
I think spoke and Asmodeus have some good points: Kent State and MacArthur’s handling of the Bonus Army provide at least precedent for the military mistreating fellow Americans, and Breckinshire did have a good point about the Milgram experiments, they were performed in the U.S., after all.
Despite this, I don’t believe that the U.S. military would act in a unified manner in a coup. Even if some units did attempt to seize control, others would probably move to oppose them out of loyalty to the Constitution or perhaps just out of self-interest. Most of the people I know who have been in the military would probably fight against such a coup, so chances are we’d have a civil war on our hands, I think. As much as the military encourages simple obedience, many of the people in it are real, honest, honorable patriots.
I don’t see a military coup as a possibility now. Obviously conditions can change drastically and if we ever find ourselves in a political and economic situation like that of 1920s and '30s Germany, we’re in for a world of hurt. But as the situation stands now, I can’t see it happening.
-Steve
)