I’ve heard a lot of comments on “coups” recently from all sides. I’ll admit I’m running from memory that is rather old, but if I remember, this is what pretty much defines authoritarian coups.
- Take advantage of, or create, a crisis/emergency.
- Use the crisis to build a state of unrest.
- Using that state of unrest, subvert or undermine the political process to take power. This need not be through violence, though it often is.
- Create at least a veneer of legality to justify the actions.
- Criminalize the prior governing body.
- Take control of the means of public information.
- Criminalize the expression of dissent and opposing opinion.
- Suspend civil liberties for the duration of the crisis.
- Establish authoritarian rule as a necessity to manage the crisis.
These are bullet points rather than numerical sequences because they don’t necessarily have to occur in order. However, I’m thinking back through history and I can’t think of any case outside of one outlier back through Roman times where these aren’t the elements of a coup.
The one outlier is Cromwell in the early/mid 17th century. Of course, that part of history is a rather bizarre bit of history. Something only the British could have. 🙂
Anyway, I would suggest looking at what group(s) are following this model. Hint: it’s not Donald Trump, libertarians (lower case “ell”), or classical liberals. I’m watching actively for those later points to start showing.