History and Analysis of Right-Wing attempts at Coup d'etat

by smkovalinsky | August 30, 2009 at 07:28 am
783 views | 54 Recommendations | 58 comments

Photos

obama_joker

obama_joker

see larger image

uploaded by ayres44

Videos

Obama's Presidency Leads to Right Wing Militia Revivial (MSNBC)

see larger video

sourced by smkovalinsky

Obama's Presidency Leads to Right Wing Militia Revivial (MSNBC)

As a writer with an academic past in philosophical analysis of political events,  one of the issues which captures my attention is the idea of government overthrow:  Its feasibility, the causes of its ideology,  its agenda and its members.  In my internet trawlings,  I found this poignant piece,  excellent in its backward look at an era paralleling our own in sensibilty and tone.  From ObamersDotCom:

More and more each day, we hear people like Michelle Bachman inciting conservatives to stock up on guns and ammo and launch the revolution against Obama. Will they really do it?


It wouldn’t be the first time. The first rightwing attempt to overthrow the government was driven by an alliance of big business and army veterans. The Liberty League consisted of very rich men in the 1930s who loathed FDR. They included leaders from DuPont, GM, EF Hutton, General Foods, GM, Montgomery Ward, JP Morgan, the Hearst newspapers, Lehigh University, Princeton, Yale, U.S. Steel, Standard Oil (Exxon), Chase National Bank, Goodyear, Birdseye Foods, Colgate, Heinz, Mutual Life...and Prescott Bush. Some Democratic leaders belonged. The group was so powerful that even New York Times gave them dozens of positive front-page stories. Prefiguring today’s rightwingers, they screeched that FDR’s policies betokened "a trend toward Fascist control," and “the end of democracy." Their aim was to use WWI veterans to overthrow FDR so the fatcats could put their own man in. Their first choice to lead the charge was Douglas MacArthur, but the veterans hated him because he had crushed the Bonus Army march a year or two earlier, so they turned instead to another general, Smedley Butler, who (luckily for us all) had the good sense to blow the whistle on these loons in Congress.

Source http://www.obamaers.com/will-the-rightwing-loons-try-a-coup-detat/

Apparently there are groups who think seriously on the idea of coups,  not only in the FDR era,  but in our own time:  

Another enabler which makes both small groups and large groups dangerous is the internet. The net can help lone wolves set up their own operations and acquire materials, and it can help larger groups organize without as much external scrutiny. A site to watch is Stormfront, owned by a former Klan leader. Stormfront encouraged their followers to join the army to learn military skills, and set up stories for kids, and computer games allowing kids to “kill” blacks and Jews. They skilfully use texts from the U.S. Founding Fathers, the Bible, and even Darwin for their survival-of-the-fittest philosophy. They are a better fit for the new century that the Liberty-League model or the Klan model would have been. In April 2009 one of its members killed three Pittsburgh cops and tried to kill nine more. Even if Stormfront is not the vanguard for an outbreak of violence, it might be the model for whoever does launch the Crazy Season..
 

The real brilliance to be found in this analysis in the understanding,  set forth by Howe and Strauss in 1997,  of the very real chance of a return to the idea of secession of states:  

Also, secessionists: last year 22 percent of Americans believed that a state has a right to secede from the United States. Sarah Palin supported an Alaskan secession group, and Mike Huckabee’s most valued supporters include secessionists as well. Some militia groups have been involved.
Watch the northwest in particular: when white separatists start mooning about setting up their own all-white utopia somewhere, separate from the United States, the talk usually revolves around any state within shouting distance of Montana. Also, obviously, watch the South. For a while there, some New England liberals were talking secession, but a lot of that was a reaction to Bush and Iraq, and now that the Iraq issue is resolving itself, such tree-hugging folk are unlikely to get in bed with the Obama-haters of the loony right.

One thing to watch on the map: spikes in unemployment. When you have a small army of poor white trash sitting at home with no jobs and lots of guns, the recruiters for the nut-fudge groups roar into action. Look for one-factory towns that are losing their factories, and obvious places like the Auto Belt in Michigan and throughout the Midwest.

Also, watch the gun shows. They are not known (yet) as hotbeds of extremist activity but they have been known to sell the Turner Diaries and they are linked to criminal activity as well. Easy networking tool. .


Looking ahead to the real possibilities of right wing coups and secessionist revivals,  the author is wise enough to analyse the stressors and the reality-based factor of timing.  Having read  -  and taken seriously  -  the epic book by Harvard historians and futurists,  Howe and Strauss,  "The Fourth Turning:  What History Has to Say about America's Next Rendezvous with Destiny"  (Broadway Books,  1997),  I learned that the saeculum of histoy indeed reveals cyclical and return events and motifs.  Ergo,  the Civil War is never really over;  resentments from the FDR reign rage on,  surviving in the right wing blogosphere,  etc. . . . 

Normally I would also watch for stressor events, but right now Obama himself is the stressor, like FDR before him: essentially the entire Obama administration is clearly going to set off gongs at Tin Foil HQ until the day he leaves office. He’s a black guy who is being forced by economic circumstances to expand the scope of government, and he’s pro-choice and sympathetic to gays; although Obama (and his AG, also black) have repeatedly affirmed his support for the Second Amendment, and have tiptoed away from Obama’s earlier rhetoric on assault weapons, the loons simply don’t believe them, and are already collapsing into hysterics and stocking up on guns and ammo.

One thing working against the extremists, is that they may have waited too long. The popularity of Reagan’s mix of snake oil – tax cuts for the fatcats, holy wars for the anti-abortion and anti-gay forces, brain-dead militarism and gun worship, contempt for the government – began its arc across the sky in 1980 and crashed to earth in 2008. The exact mid-point – the high-point – of that parabolic arc was 1994, when they conquered Congress. At that point they should have launched the revolution. Instead, they launched Oklahoma, which backfired badly, and ensured Clinton’s landslide reelection. Now it’s a bit late in the day. The paradox of revolution is that when your ideas are in the ascendant, whipping up the anger among your hard-core adherents is difficult, but once your ideas are exposed as fallacious, everyone but the hard-core abandons you – and the revolution won’t go anywhere unless a million Joe Blows buy into it.
recommend Add a comment
8
Karen Hatter

The birthers, who tenaciously continue to fill up court dockets with frivilous lawsuits and challenges to the Obama presidency, are a more bizarre example of an attempt at coup d'etat, which would be the hoped for outcome by those promoting this discredited notion.

When this began, Barack Obama was a senator and a candidate. Now, he is President of the United States.

Any and all activity around the issue of his birth seeks to unseat him after he was elected, by majority vote and an overwhelming electoral vote count.

 

3
Roy C

All Obama has to do is produce the long-form birth certificate with the doctor and hospital on it, the legal witnesses to the birth.

"Bizarre"?

Bizarre is Obama spending a million buck to do something that could be stopped with a few bucks for the long-form.

Just why did his mother leave Hawaii in just two weeks with her newborn son to go to the university she attended in Washington state to study anthropology? Something doesn't jibe there.

It is called "ACCOUNTABILTY"., and it is the bane of narcissists.

2
Rhonda J Mangus

Karen, I direct your attention to the fact that the 'Obama Camp' has spent over one million dollars to keep his birth certificate from being examined. Why?



6
Karen Hatter

Rhonda, this link proves nothing, certainly not any fact.

It merely makes the claim that millions have been spent. Where is the paper trail that would substantiate the money spent?

 

 

1
Rhonda J Mangus

Where is the paper trail that would substantiate the money spent? Good question! Perhaps an idea can be found in this read: OBAMA: WHERE HAVE ALL HIS RECORDS GONE? 



5
Karen Hatter

This link sheds no light on the money question, Rhonda.

So, as birthers chase down documentation in an effort to prove their obsession, leaving an ever growing trail of deadends in doing so, this is what's being offered as proof that millions were spent to prevent them from proving their claim?!?!

That is classic criterion for a conspiracy theory; it can't be proven.

Also at NowPublic :

The 'Right Wing' Conspiracy

1
Rhonda J Mangus

Karen, I think this one will: Obama Birth Certificate Lawsuits.


6
Karen Hatter

Rhonda, this is more of the same, with the Conservapedia link you've posted listing a monetary figure that is not substantiated at the World Net Daily link provided by Conservapedia. The link offers speculation as to costs from some others.

The birther nonsense is viral. Someone says somebody said something about this, that or the other and BAM! They're off to the races and its gospel.

No one can disuade those who will continue this crusade. There is no logical response or method of reasoning that can be offered to those who embrace this cause. 

1
Rhonda J Mangus

"There is no logical response or method of reasoning that can be offered to those who embrace this cause."

What then is the logical response or method of reasoning that can be offered for those who do not embrace this cause?





2
Karen Hatter

Rhonda, I have pondered this query and concluded there is no way I can provide an answer to it without further offending those who may embrace the birther movement.  

0
Rhonda J Mangus

I understand, Karen. It is unfortunate that anyone would be offended at all. More unfortunate ( I think) is that you think you can not respond because it might offend some people. Thanks for getting back though!


2
Karen Hatter

No, Rhonda, this is more of a choice, like some of our mothers told us, if you don't have anything nice to say ....

Any response would have to contain lots of adjectives, maybe some adverbs, of the demeaning variety, to describe the birther movement and those still adhering to it, as my patience for this foolishness has reached way beyond its limit and therefore, I feel no need to discuss or debate this as if there is anything sensible about any of it.

Any future comments may also fall outside of NowPublic's Code of Conduct.

0
Rhonda J Mangus

Understood:) Nevertheless, I suppose time will tell "if there is anything sensible about any of it."


1
Rhonda J Mangus

PS And is only one of many articles on this fact.


1
Barry Artiste

But Karen, you should know Whiny Losers both Left and Right never like the outcome of the vote results, preferring their elected choice as president.  The left threw a fit when Gore Lost out to Bush, the Birth Certificate thing is about the only thing they (grasp on straws) have on Obama.

3
Karen Hatter

Okay, Barry, without additional comment, I'll cede to you on the ' It's the only thing they got!' point. : ) 

0
smkovalinsky

Yes,  true:  And I have long felt that the real futility of the Birther movement is this:  Precisely because Obama was elected so roundly,  even if it were true -  which it is not  -  but were it true that he was not born in the US,  it would be far easier to ammend the US Constitution to accomodate this fact,  than to unseat him,  ha!  ;) 

6
rng

He has produced enough evidence apparently to please the authorizing bodies. None of the highly paid lawyers or right think tanks in the Beltway are seemingly either supporters of or willing to litigate on the Birther conspiracy theory. There is so much money and power in the beltway, if someone thought there was one hide of truth to this it would be in the courts.

The Birther movement is simply borne out of fear, and in some, not instances, subconscious racism. Some of a simple mind are fearful of any change. Some cannot accept that the country chose to take a step to the left, it caused apoplexy in them. Some can't believe a black man is in the Whitehouse, to them it represents the final corruption of their ideal of America. They couldn't beat him in the election so the only possible explanation is he must have cheated, hence the Birther movement

You see it when you see the comments like belwo, if there hadn't been an economic crisis then McCain would have one. They feel cheated. There was a recession, it forced people to actually take a look at what was on offer and they made a choice. The angry right, the race, religion and rifle crowd, can never accept this hence the Tea Parties, the Birthers etc. However, they are fringe in today's America, not even centrist. It will take them some time to get used to the idea.

0
Hugh Askew

Don't think you could actually pass a retroactive amendment do you?

What is done, was done under existing law. Getting an amendment thru 37 states would take years, even then it could only cover future candidates. If it were found that Obama was not in fact, a native born citizen, the chances of an amendment of that nature getting thru congress would be at or near zero.

By the bye....53% in a two candidate race is hardly being "roundly" elected. At least he did manage a majority...something Clinton never did.

2
Rory Cripps

I don't think that members of organizations such as StormFront, Skin Heads, Klan, etc. on their own pose as much of a threat as some believe--although they do pose quite a threat no doubt. And it's true that they have plenty of weapons--many of which are illegal--and that they hate the U.S. government and would just love to bag Obama and any Jew that got in the way (notice the emphasis on the word Jew). But I think that the real threat is when these groups team up with other extremists throughout the world. Call me crazy, call me a nut, or call me whatever you will: I have my suspicions that Timothy McVeigh was aided to an extent by middle eastern terrorists and that many  home grown extremist organizations are in contact with members of over seas terrorist organizations.


4
Karen Hatter

Rory, if any links to any movement or ideology could be conjectured to have been an ideology with which Timothy McVeigh or Terry Nichols may have had an affinity or possible links, it would be with those that shared a similar mindset about the United States and the federal government, like the beliefs held by those in the Freeman Movement of Montana.  

Timothy McVeigh's beliefs appear to have aligned with the beliefs of many of those involved in the sovereignty, militia and patriot movements.

Many are aware that when he was arrested in 1995, on the tee shirt he was wearing was pictured a tree with blood droplets, with the Thomas Jefferson quote that refers to martyrdom written on it:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

1
smkovalinsky

Well,  it would certainly make sense,  wouldn't it?  The McVeighs of America,  having lost all respect,  and believing this America to be false and an imposter of the original Republic  - in my own way,  I agree and sympathize  -  would have no hesitation in hooking about with Islamic terrorists and others;  the latter would be more than happy to oblige them! 

2
Roy C

McVeigh was responding to the FBI and ATF in their role in Ruby Ridge and the Clinton attack on the Davidian ranch in Waco, Texas, a completely unnecessary attack that led to the death of the very children that Reno and Clinton were trying to protect.

The Ruby Ridge attack has been decided against the FBI, though the FBI/ATF marksman who killed the man's wife has never been charged.

In the wake of the Oklahoma bombing, membership in right-wing militias went down, a sure sign that his actions were not what most of them wanted.

"Coups" come from the military. There will be no coup in the US. There will be a revolution at the ballot box.

And, by the way, many of you don't seem to know that the "left", if a social conservative and believer in the literal truth of a Holy Book can be called "leftist", that Farrakhan did call for the death of Malcolm X.

Here is Louis Farrakhan admitting to his role in the assassination of Malcolm X with his "incendiary rhetoric".

5
Karen Hatter

As Ministers Malcolm X and Farrakhan had nothing to do with any attempt at a coup d'etat in the United States or anywhere else, did not/have not called for the overthrow of the U.S. government, what does any of that have to do with anything being discussed here? 

4
Karen Hatter

As discussed here, a coup or coup d 'etat would be the unlawful, sudden overthrow of a government, according to  Merriam Webster.

A coup does not necessarily have to originate from the military, as the Cuban Revolution, led by Fidel Castro, did not emanate from the military. They trained and employed guerrilla warfare tactics.

However, the previous leader of Cuba prior to the Castro led revolution, Fulgenicio Batista, did stage a military coup against the former Cuban leader Carlos Manuel de Céspedes y Quesada.

0
smkovalinsky

I understood that McVeigh was concerned with the attacks on Waco.  I had always thought he represented a group of the disenfranchised but saw that no followups occurred and reassessed him as symbol of a large group.  Malcom X was killed in an "inside job" ,  that is clear,  and it does not surprise me that Farrakhan would be part of the will to be rid of him.  Why was there no "revolution at the ballot box"  to prevent the election of Obama?  

2
Roy C

If there had been no economic crisis, McCain would have won. He was leading until the collapse of Wall Street, an issue that the low-ranking graduate of Annapolis knew next to nothing about.

And McCain did not represent the anti-bailout wing of the republicans and the independents at all.

Obama presented himself as a candidate acceptable to centrists and independents. His first choices went counter to his campaign, keeping Gates as secretary of defense, for example.

But, dealing with the unpopularity of his monster bust-out deficits has denied him the "narcissistic supply" that he got by touting his mixture of centrist and leftist rhetoric. Retreating, it turns out that he is actually just an incompetent who has the rhetoric of change down but who understands nothing of economics and is too vain to admit to being wrong, as he was on the Surge, for example.

What we see is not change, but the usual politics to help Wall Street, with "regulatory capture", as Goldman Sachs people take over the SEC.

The combination of incompetence and vanity has pushed him to fall back on his more radical side, but the ironic effect has been to galvanize the middle against him, in effect organizing the independents, let alone the disenfranchised right that has been upset with the republican free trade and immigration amnesty policies for a long time.

What is really happening is that both parties are dying. Their leadership is being replaced. Then the people, the sovereign people of the US, will get their way on issues such as energy independence, legal controls on immigration and very, very possibly the return of our troops from places such as Germany, Kosovo, South Korea and Japan.

We will set up something viable for social security and health care and have it be "local" while we think "global".

6
rng

If there had been no economic crisis, McCain would have won.

Also, he may have won if he had have been black or younger or a democrat. You make it sound as McCain has the election somehow unfairly stolen from him. There was an economic crisis, at least in part induced by the Bush Administration. The Democrats won the election, which is a different mindset to saying the Republicans lost. It was a choice the country made.

...pushed him to fall back on his more radical side

Not so, he is more centrist than many on the left want or thought they were getting. His policies on Afghanistan, his failure to push through health care, Guantanamo closure etc are a failure as some on the left see it as he is being centrist and attempting to be bipartisan. A lot on the left think getting things done is more important that pandering to an obstructionist opposition. Obama is being too centrist, not too radical

..he is actually just an incompetent who understands nothing of economics and is too vain to admit to being wrong

Emotional and opinion points. he has different policies to the ones you believe in, it doesn't mean he knows nothing. A lot of us believe he may know more than the old  blunt macro economics you and your ilk are proposing. What you advocate got us here in the first place, we need a different approach to get out.

You may well see a frustrated protest vote at the ballots, but absent an alternative set of policies being presented from the right, and they haven't yet, there really is no other option.

2
Rory Cripps

Why was there no "revolution at the ballot box"  to prevent the election of Obama? 

Probably because Americans are not as racist as some would have us to believe . . . 

Also, after eight years of Bush, the Republican party would have had to pull a rabbit out of a hat in order to get one of  its own elected. 

Yes! McVeigh was pissed off over what went down at Waco at the hands of Dowe Burnem and How. That was a new  cabinet post formed under Janet Reno's direction. LOL!


2
QueensHart

"I may have been complicit in words that I spoke leading up to February 21 [1965]," Farrakhan tells Shabazz and Wallace. "I acknowledge that and regret that any word that I have said caused the loss of life of a human being."

Shabazz later issued a statement thanking Farrakhan for acknowledging his role and said: "I wish him peace." However, she did not forgive him.

Malcolm X was only 39 years old when he was killed. This month, he would have been 75.

The former Malcolm Little was Farrakhan's mentor in the Nation of Islam—for a time, they both believed that the white man was evil and that the black and white races should live separately.

In 1964, Malcolm X revealed publicly that Elijah Mohammed, the leader of the Nation of Islam, was guilty of impregnating several of his teenage secretaries, in direct violation of his own preachings against sex outside of marriage.

Farrakhan was outraged. He called Malcolm X a traitor and wrote, two months before the killing, that "such a man is worthy of death."

Three men with ties to the Nation of Islam were convicted in the slaying in the Audubon Ballroom in Harlem on Feb. 21, 1965.

Shabazz, then 6, witnessed the shooting, as did Malcom X's wife and other children.

Farrakhan has denied ordering the assassination but later admitted to having "helped create the atmosphere" that led to it.

 

Have time to tell why he was killed Roy?

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

Karen Hatter
First Flagged at 7:50 AM, Aug 30, 2009 by Karen Hatter
These members have powered this story:

Related Stories

Recommendations (54)

Most recently recommended by:
 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from