Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Since the 19th century, the United States government has participated and interfered, both overtly and covertly, in the replacement of many foreign governments. In the latter half of the 19th century, the U.S. government initiated actions for regime change mainly in Latin America and the southwest Pacific, including the Spanish–American and Philippine–American wars.
A coup d'état, often abbreviated to coup, is the overthrow of a lawful government through illegal means. If force or violence are not involved, such an event is sometimes called a soft or bloodless coup. In another variation, a ruler who came to power through legal means may try to stay in power through illegal means, thus preventing the next ...
Specifically the pronunciamiento is the formal declaration deposing the previous government and justifying the installation of the new government by the golpe de estado. One author distinguishes a coup, in which a military or political faction takes power for itself, from a pronunciamiento , in which the military deposes the existing government ...
The order follows – and is closely tied to – a push by the White House to remove the leaders of some independent agencies, including those who are empowered to criticize the president’s agenda.
Regime change may occur through domestic processes, such as revolution, coup, or reconstruction of government following state failure or civil war. [1] It can also be imposed on a country by foreign actors through invasion, overt or covert interventions , or coercive diplomacy .
This is a list of coups d'état and coup attempts by country, listed in chronological order. A coup is an attempt to illegally overthrow a country's government. Scholars generally consider a coup successful when the usurpers are able to maintain control of the government for at least seven days.
Some philosophers argue that it is not only the right of a people to overthrow an oppressive government but also their duty to do so. Howard Evans Kiefer opines, "It seems to me that the duty to rebel is much more understandable than that right to rebel, because the right to rebellion ruins the order of power, whereas the duty to rebel goes ...
Journalist William L. Shirer was skeptical of the trial, writing "no overt act of trying to forcibly overthrow our government is charged ... The government's case is simply that by being members and leaders of the Communist Party, its doctrines and tactics being what they are, the accused are guilty of conspiracy". [32]