Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryson
Essentially, what would be the chances of the population at large accepting that this crackpot scheme is a legitimate means of seizing power, rather than just a terrorist attack?
|
I don’t think they’re high. For one, I don’t think there’s a sizeable population that thinks our elections are rigged. And in a broader sense, I think even among the far right — or far left, for that matter — “we need to radically change the system” isn’t a common opinion. The far right thinks we should let fewer foreigners in and be less intertwined with the EU. The far left thinks we should be more intertwined with Russia and less with the US. (I’m grossly oversimplifying here. The ranges are more diverse.) But neither seems to voice “the very concept of a parliament, chancellor, etc. is bad” or “Scholz stole this election”.
But, I will say that while the current system will always try to defend against them, coups and revolutions per se don’t have to be bad. It’s how the US came to be in the first place. Germany also, in 1848, had a failed attempt to set up a republic (it already had some level of democratic reforms, but some people felt they didn’t go far enough and were an appeasement strategy); some of those ideas were eventually recycled a century later into the republic that still exists today.
So… I think what it takes is a sentiment that the very system isn’t working for the citizen any more. Instead, in Germany, it’s more like various levels of “I disagree with these policies; they are dumb/go too far/go not far enough/whatever”.
Whereas, the US increasingly seems to have “I don’t even believe the election took place in an orderly manner”.