The hardest part of establishing a socialist state isn’t dealing with material conditions… it’s dealing with the US constantly trying to overthrow it even if you’re on the other side of the planet.
Here’s just the ones CIApedia is willing to admit to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change
This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. (February 2024)
Jesus.
Dang! We’ve been everywhere!
We’ve got it down to a science. The blueprint of regime change operations
The list was compiled in 2002 so it’s missing a lot of contemporary ones.
with the purpose of effecting “regime change,” attempted or materially supported by the United States—whether primarily by means of overt force (OF), covert operation (CO), or subverted election (SE):
1893 – Hawaii (Liliuokalani; monarchist): success (OF)
1912 – China (Piyu; monarchist): success (OF)
1918 – Panama (Arias; center-right): success (SE)
1919 – Hungary (Kun; communist): success (CO)
1920 – USSR (Lenin; communist): failure (OF)
1924 – Honduras (Carias; nationalist): success (SE)
1934 – United States (Roosevelt; liberal): failure (CO)
1945 – Japan (Higashikuni; rightist): success (OF)
1946 – Thailand (Pridi; conservative): success (CO)
1946 – Argentina (Peron; military/centrist): failure (SE)
1947 – France (; communist): success (SE)
1947 – Philippines (; center-left): success (SE)
1947 – Romania (Gheorghiu-Dej; stalinist): failure (CO)
1948 – Italy (, communist): success (SE)
1948 – Colombia (Gaitan; populist/leftist): success (SE)
1948 – Peru (Bustamante; left/centrist): success (CO)
1949 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): success (CO)
1949 – China (Mao; communist): failure (CO)
1950 – Albania (Hoxha; communist): failure (CO)
1951 – Bolivia (Paz; center/neutralist): success (CO)
1951 – DPRK (Kim; stalinist): failure (OF)
1951 – Poland (Cyrankiewicz; stalinist): failure (CO)
1951 – Thailand (Phibun; conservative): success (CO)
1952 – Egypt (Farouk; monarchist): success (CO)
1952 – Cuba (Prio; reform/populist): success (CO)
1952 – Lebanon (; left/populist): success: (SE)
1953 – British Guyana (; left/populist): success (CO)
1953 – Iran (Mossadegh; liberal nationalist): success (CO)
1953 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1953 – Philippines (; center-left): success (SE)
1954 – Guatemala (Arbenz; liberal nationalist): success (OF)
1955 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1955 – India (Nehru; neutralist/socialist): failure(CO)
1955 – Argentina (Peron; military/centrist): success (CO)
1955 – China (Zhou; communist): failure (CO)
1955 – Vietnam (Ho; communist): success (SE)
1956 – Hungary (Hegedus; communist): success (CO)
1957 – Egypt (Nasser; military/nationalist): failure (CO)
1957 – Haiti (Sylvain; left/populist): success (CO)
1957 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): failure (CO)
1958 – Japan (; left-center): success (SE)
1958 – Chile (; leftists): success (SE)
1958 – Iraq (Feisal; monarchist): success (CO)
1958 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1958 – Sudan (Sovereignty Council; nationalist): success (CO)
1958 – Lebanon (; leftist): success (SE)
1958 – Syria (Kuwatli; neutralist/Pan-Arabist): failure (CO)
1958 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): failure (SE)
1959 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1959 – Nepal (; left-centrist): success (SE)
1959 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): failure (CO)
1960 – Ecuador (Ponce; left/populist): success (CO)
1960 – Laos (Phouma; nationalist): success (CO)
1960 – Iraq (Qassem; rightist /militarist): failure (CO)
1960 – S. Korea (Syngman; rightist): success (CO)
1960 – Turkey (Menderes; liberal): success (CO)
1961 – Haiti (Duvalier; rightist/militarist): success (CO)
1961 – Cuba (Castro; communist): failure (CO)
1961 – Congo (Lumumba; leftist/pan-Africanist): success (CO)
1961 – Dominican Republic (Trujillo; rightwing/military): success (CO)
1962 – Brazil (Goulart; liberal/neutralist): failure (SE)
1962 – Dominican Republic (; left/populist): success (SE)
1962 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): failure (CO)
1963 – Dominican Republic (Bosch; social democrat): success (CO)
1963 – Honduras (Montes; left/populist): success (CO)
1963 – Iraq (Qassem; militarist/rightist): success (CO)
1963 – S. Vietnam (Diem; rightist): success (CO)
1963 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): failure (CO)
1963 – Guatemala (Ygidoras; rightist/reform): success (CO)
1963 – Ecuador (Velasco; reform militarist): success (CO)
1963 – United States (Kennedy; liberal): success (CO)
1964 – Guyana (Jagan; populist/reformist): success (CO)
1964 – Bolivia (Paz; centrist/neutralist): success (CO)
1964 – Brazil (Goulart; liberal/neutralist): success (CO)
1964 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/marxist): success (SE)
1965 – Indonesia (Sukarno; militarist/neutralist): success (CO)
1966 – Ghana (Nkrumah; leftist/pan-Africanist): success (CO)
1966 – Bolivia (; leftist): success (SE)
1966 – France (de Gaulle; centrist): failure (CO)
1967 – Greece (Papandreou; social democrat): success (CO)
1968 – Iraq (Arif; rightist): success (CO)
1969 – Panama (Torrijos; military/reform populist): failure (CO)
1969 – Libya (Idris; monarchist): success (CO)
1970 – Bolivia (Ovando; reform nationalist): success (CO)
1970 – Cambodia (Sihanouk; moderate/neutralist): success (CO)
1970 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/Marxist): failure (SE)
1971 – Bolivia (Torres; nationalist/neutralist): success (CO)
1971 – Costa Rica (Figueres; reform liberal): failure (CO)
1971 – Liberia (Tubman; rightist): success (CO)
1971 – Turkey (Demirel; center-right): success (CO)
1971 – Uruguay (Frente Amplio; leftist): success (SE)
1972 – El Salvador (; leftist): success (SE)
1972 – Australia (Whitlam; liberal/labor): failure (SE)
1973 – Chile (Allende; social democrat/Marxist): success (CO)
1974 – United States (Nixon; centrist): success (CO)
1975 – Australia (Whitlam; liberal/labor): success (CO)
1975 – Congo (Mobutu; military/rightist): failure (CO)
1975 – Bangladesh (Mujib; nationalist): success (CO)
1976 – Jamaica (Manley; social democrat): failure (SE)
1976 – Portugal (JNS; military/leftist): success (SE)
1976 – Nigeria (Mohammed; military/nationalist): success (CO)
1976 – Thailand (; rightist): success (CO)
1976 – Uruguay (Bordaberry; center-right): success (CO)
1977 – Pakistan (Bhutto: center/nationalist): success (CO)
1978 – Dominican Republic (Balaguer; center): success (SE)
1979 – S. Korea (Park; rightist): success (CO)
1979 – Nicaragua (Sandinistas; leftist): failure (CO)
1980 – Bolivia (Siles; centrist/reform): success (CO)
1980 – Iran (Khomeini; Islamic nationalist): failure (CO)
1980 – Italy (; leftist): success (SE)
1980 – Liberia (Tolbert; rightist): success (CO)
1980 – Jamaica (Manley; social democrat): success (SE)
1980 – Dominica (Seraphin; leftist): success (SE)
1980 – Turkey (Demirel; center-right): success (CO)
1981 – Seychelles (René; socialist): failure (CO)
1981 – Spain (Suarez; rightist/neutralist): failure (CO)
1981 – Panama (Torrijos; military/reform populist); success (CO)
1981 – Zambia (Kaunda; reform nationalist): failure (CO)
1982 – Mauritius (; center-left): failure (SE)
1982 – Spain (Suarez; rightist/neutralist): success (SE)
1982 – Iran (Khomeini; Islamic nationalist): failure (CO)
1982 – Chad (Oueddei; Islamic nationalist): success (CO)
1983 – Mozambique (Machel; socialist): failure (CO)
1983 – Grenada (Bishop; socialist): success (OF)
1984 – Panama (; reform/centrist): success (SE)
1984 – Nicaragua (Sandinistas; leftist): failure (SE)
1984 – Surinam (Bouterse; left/reformist/neutralist): success (CO)
1984 – India (Gandhi; nationalist): success (CO)
1986 – Libya (Qaddafi; Islamic nationalist): failure (OF)
1987 – Fiji (Bavrada; liberal): success (CO)
1989 – Panama (Noriega; military/reform populist): success (OF)
1990 – Haiti (Aristide; liberal reform): failure (SE)
1990 – Nicaragua (Ortega; Christian socialist): success (SE)
1991 – Albania (Alia; communist): success (SE)
1991 – Haiti (Aristide; liberal reform): success (CO)
1991 – Iraq (Hussein; military/rightist): failure (OF)
1991 – Bulgaria (BSP; communist): success (SE)
1992 – Afghanistan (Najibullah; communist): success (CO)
1993 – Somalia (Aidid; right/militarist): failure (OF)
1993 – Cambodia (Han Sen/CPP; leftist): failure (SE)
1993 – Burundi (Ndadaye; conservative): success (CO)
1994 – El Salvador (; leftist): success (SE)
1994 – Rwanda (Habyarimana; conservative): success (CO)
1994 – Ukraine (Kravchuk; center-left): success (SE)
1996 – Bosnia (Karadzic; centrist): success (CO)
1996 – Russia (Zyuganov; communist): success (SE)
1996 – Congo (Mobutu; military/rightist): success (CO)
1996 – Mongolia (*; center-left): success (SE)
1998 – Congo (Kabila; rightist/military): success (CO)
1998 – United States (Clinton; conservative): failure (CO)
1998 – Indonesia (Suharto; military/rightist): success (CO)
1999 – Yugoslavia (Milosevic; left/nationalist): success (SE)
2000 – United States (Gore; conservative): success (SE)
2000 – Ecuador (NSC; leftist): success: (CO)
2001 – Afghanistan (Omar; rightist/Islamist): success (OF)
2001 – Belarus (Lukashenko; leftist): failure (SE)
2001 – Nicaragua (Ortega; Christian socialist): success (SE)
2001 – Nepal (Birendra; nationalist/monarchist): success (CO)
2002 – Venezuela (Chavez; reform-populist): failure (CO)
2002 – Bolivia (Morales; leftist/MAS): success (SE)
2002 – Brazil (Lula; center-left): failure (SE)Hi Brazilian here
The Americans eventually succeeded in 2014 :3c
Remember! The US backed the biggest genocide after the Holocaust - the Bangladesh massacre of 1972, where 30 million people are estimated to have been murdered. The reason was that the Pakistani dictator who instigated the genocide was their ally. And they didn’t like Mujib-ur-Rehman, the newly elected East Pakistani (Bangladeshi) leader, because he was a socialist! The US even tried to intervene militarily to help the war criminals, nearly starting a nuclear world war.
Democratic leaders tend to be pro-people. And that makes them US’s enemies. The antidemocratic tag that the US has is well-deserved.
Bangladesh was also going to become a socialist state, hence the name People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
One of the countless socialist movements across the world that were crushed with the USSR’s overthrow…
Fun fact, I’m actually in one of the few countries they thought of couping, that they didn’t. Portugal in 1974 had a military staged coup against the dictatorship that ruled back then. It looked a lot like we were going to turn red, and Kissinger even said “let them be, it’ll remind Europe why communism doesn’t work”. Long story short, after a few nationalisations, an attempted coup by radical left, and some general weirdness, we managed to get ourselves a mostly working republic that still lasts to this day
It’s almost like letting a people decide how to run their country for themselves leads to a more stable government. Who would have fucking thought
The US thought, but then they changed their mind about 150 years later
And only for a certain kind of people prior to that.
I mean, most revolutions end up pretty badly, maybe we just got lucky
It’s all those legal drugs that keep things going 👌
Decriminalised != Legal
United States: I’ve even tried to coup myself a few times, calm down.
Oh yeah, the business plot… I mean er, the brooks brothers riots, i mean er… Jan 6th.
Huh, funny how it’s always coming from a specific segment of society.
Occupy wall street
BLM
JFK(?)
(Adding for balance, not equivalence)
With the exception of JFKs assassination, I don’t believe any of those were coup attempts (which I think is why you’re getting downvotes).
Leftwing coup examples in the US are limited as the authorities are not going to let any left wing movements get anywhere near coup stage. But both those examples are anti-authority.
My point was that political violence is not confined to the right.
…and everyone elses point was “that’s not the topic”.
You’re addressing a statement “there’s never been any violence from any leftwing movement ever” that no one was making… And doing so across multiple comments so it makes it look like you’re trying to make it the topic, but still just wasn’t the topic or a things anyone was claiming.
I responded to comment implying that coups only occur from the right.
I gave details of protests similar to 6th jan considered to be left wing, and an actual US coup.
In hindsight I should have listed
October Revolution (1917)
Cuban Revolution (1959)
Carnation Revolution (1974)
Grenadian Revolution (1979)
Iranian Revolution (1979)
Sandinista Revolution (1979)
The meme’s about America loving coups so much (even having caused some of the ones you’ve listed) and the thread is about a user joking that it’s even attempted a coup of America its self a couple of times.
It’s not “balance” when they’re not even the same things, much less the severity of the actions.
They are all examples of violent protests.
JFK was (maybe) a coup on American soil.
That’s some actual clown show shit, bro, what.
And if JFK was a coup, it wasn’t by the left, lmao.
Standing up to people stealing your money or very life. Does not equal or even resemble a “coup”…
And wtf is JFK in there for? Some insane conspiracy take?
Standing up to people stealing your money or very life. Does not equal or even resemble a “coup”…
Mentioned because violent protests occurs at all points on the political spectrum.
And wtf is JFK in there for?
Because we are discussing coups. That one occurred on American soil.
“The HSCA conducted its inquiry until 1978 and issued its final report the following year, concluding that Kennedy was likely assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. They concluded that there was a “high probability” that a fourth shot was fired from the grassy knoll, but they stated that this shot missed Kennedy.”
A protest is not the same as a coup. A coup is a coordinated attack to replace one regime with another, a sudden, violent overthrow of political leadership by a relatively small group of people. The business plot, Jan 6, Brooks Brothers Riot, were all about that.
Even if it turns violent, a protest is not the same as a coup. A protest is basically where you try to affect change or public opinion through large public demonstrations. It’s trying to appeal the public or leadership to listen to you. Meanwhile, a coup doesn’t really need the public. You’re forcefully attacking the levers of power or the process to change leadership itself (ex: stopping elections, disrupting people counting votes, stopping electors from voting or swearing in, etc.). Meanwhile, even if some hooligans burn a police car during a BLM protest, that doesn’t suddenly turn the protest into a coup.
Occupy was mostly peaceful anyway. The whole joke at the time was that it was a bunch of dirty hippies doing drum circle in the park and in front of finance buildings, like that they were peaceful to the point of not being effective, just annoying. That and their demands weren’t clear. There was no criticism of them because violence that I remember at all.
A protest is not the same as a coup. […] Even if it turns violent, a protest is not the same as a coup. A protest is basically where you try to affect change or public opinion through large public demonstrations.
I think most people on Jan 6th would agree. They were protesting (some violently and unlawfully). How could the 6th “coup” succeed?
I’m not even American, but by intercepting the ballot count before it could be certified by the Senate, which was being done in the exact place they were directed to protest at (and that a particular security guard, one individual alone, was smart enough to lead them away from). As I recall they came as close as just a few hallways away from where the count box was being transported.
Had they successfully intercepted it, that could either lead to Trump having more time to position/submit false electors or their ballots… The plot of which was already rolling.
He could either stand up appearing to save the day with fraudulent duplicates of the ballot counts (pushing his ballot count via the loaded supreme court, where bribery scandals are both currently ongoing and rife) , or try to convince Pence that this interruption/destruction in ballot count certification made things more constitutional.
That particular day was legally significant as it was the final step in the authentic chain of custody over the as yet uncertified ballot count. Interrupting that chain of custody would have raised questions, as I believe the constitution provides room for ballot counts to be given on the elector’s authority alone, and that it’s the process of the VP and Senate verifying and authorising them as the official/valid count results that actually certifies them as the true and only valid Presidential Election results (the True account of who is President).
So Trump both had been attempting parts of this plot already, had already asked Pence to do it (I believe he called him a “pussy” for not doing it), and it was really only Pence’s refusal that prevented it being a coup. Interrupting the ballots may have been a “Plan B” to recover from Pence’s refusal.
Very lucky that Pence is a staunch constitutionalist and wasn’t pressured into going along with it, and then in lieu of that, that one security guard lead protestors away from the as yet uncertified ballot count box. That may have been all there was between having a sanctified election result, and one that was constitutionally, and legally, in doubt.
There was nothing violent about 90% of either of those protests. And what violence there was, there is a fair amount of evidence it was plants to undermine the protest goals.
JFK was an assassination. There isn’t a shred of evidence there was an attempt to seize power.
There was nothing violent about 90% of either of those protests.
Same with the first list.
And what violence there was, there is a fair amount of evidence it was plants to undermine the protest goals.
I don’t doubt there were agent provocateurs. Similarly, on Jan 6th there were police who dismantled barriers and the FBI lost count of the number of informants it had in the crowd.
JFK was an assassination. There isn’t a shred of evidence there was an attempt to seize power.
Nor does the CIA attempt to seize power in coups created in other countries.
Lol what? Point 1 The Jan 6th insurrection was founded with violence as a goal. Their whole purpose was to force their way into the Capitol building by any means necessary.
Point 2 ROFL, I can’t even, conflating an informant with a provocateur…
Point 3 Please, please look up the term “coup” the CIA installed puppet governments under their control…
We really should rename “centrists” to “brainlets”.
The same meme but it’s the UK and one of the many countries that was left fucked up after British imperialism.
“Too bad, that’s all you’re getting.”
