Do you agree with this quote?

[CatsAttack]

"you can make a coup with the army, without an army, but never against the army"

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Uhm ... well practically speaking, the army has more guns ... but it seems more just a generally reasonable piece of advice for a coup plotter than an absolute law of history.

[Brutus]

A coup, by definition, is sudden and violent. Only the army have the means for a sudden seizure of power.

[CatsAttack]

A coup, by definition, is sudden and violent. Only the army have the means for a sudden seizure of power.

What about the Bolshevik coup? And whats the difference between 'putsch' and 'coup"?

[Brutus]

What about the Bolshevik coup? And whats the difference between 'putsch' and 'coup"?

Putsch is german for coup, and what happened in Russia wasn't a coup.

[CatsAttack]

Putsch is german for coup, and what happened in Russia wasn't a coup.

How come there's a German and French word for 'coup' but no English word for it? What is the origin of both terms?

And Trotsky had no problem using the word coup for the Russian Revolution. Actually, after the revolution most boshiveks used the Russian word for 'coup' to describe what happened, more than the word "revolution." Whats the big deal?

[Brutus]

Please give quotes from Bolsheviks showing where they called it a coup. The revolution was planned at the first all Russian congress of soviets and ratified at the 2nd all Russian congress of soviets.

[GerrardWinstanley]

Please give quotes from Bolsheviks showing where they called it a coup. The revolution was planned at the first all Russian congress of soviets and ratified at the 2nd all Russian congress of soviets.So what was the Tamarod? A rubber stamp furnished by 22 million people?

[TheRedRose]

"you can make a coup with the army, without an army, but never against the army"

Isn't a coup always done by the army?

[Sotionov]

What happened in Russia was a state-capitalist coup, yes.

[#FF0000]

What happened in Russia was a state-capitalist coup, yes.

Er, how so?

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Meh, I suppose so. Not like it's an absolute truth and would very much depend upon the material conditions of the place and time.

[Skyhilist]

I thought a coup was just a violent seizure or power. Could someone please explain to me why they therefore wouldn't consider the Bolshevik seizure of power to be a coup?

[Sotionov]

Because they consider it a "revolution".

[#FF0000]

I thought a coup was just a violent seizure or power. Could someone please explain to me why they therefore wouldn't consider the Bolshevik seizure of power to be a coup?


Because they consider it a "revolution".

I was under the impression that a coup was specifically military. The Bolshevik Revolution was wildly popular and had wide support. Even the other parties in the Duma (The Socialist Revolutionaries, etc.) were like "welp, that's alright I guess" and supported it.

Up until the Bolsheviks came out with word on how the revolutionary government was gonna be organized, with Bolsheviks in power in every office. But even then, I don't really know what the Bolsheviks' aims were -- whether they intended to hold onto state power or expected the State would "close up shop" after a short period of time (I remember Trotsky expressed this expectation, saying he expected to issue a couple of statements and then "close up shop" when he was made Commisar of Foreign Affairs)

[Sotionov]

I was under the impression that a coup was specifically military. The Bolshevik Revolution was wildly popular and had wide support. Even the other parties in the Duma (The Socialist Revolutionaries, etc.) were like "welp, that's alright I guess" and supported it.
Elections in november of 1917: (party-votes-percent)

Socialist-Revolutionary Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist-Revolutionary_Party) (SRs) 17,943,000 40.4
Bolsheviks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshevik) 10,661,000 24.0
Ukrainian Socialist-Revolutionary Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Socialist-Revolutionary_Party) 3,433,000 7.7
Constitutional Democratic Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Democratic_Party) (Cadets) 2,088,000 4.7
Georgian Social Democratic (Menshevik) Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian_Social_Democratic_%28Menshevik%29_Party) 662,000 1.5
Musavat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musavat) (Azerbaijan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijan)) 616,000 1.4
Armenian Revolutionary Federation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Revolutionary_Federation)
(Dashnaktsutiun) (Armenia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenia)) 560,000 1.3
Left Socialist-Revolutionaries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Socialist-Revolutionaries) (Borotbists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borotbists)) 451,000 1.0
Alash Orda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alash_Orda) (Kazakhstan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan)) 407,000 0.9

And even this support that the bolshevik had, they had because of the decieving slogans they used- "land to the peasant", "factories to the workers", "all power to the soviets", and "peace to the people" of which they fulfilled only the last one by exiting the world war.

[#FF0000]

Elections in november of 1917: (party-votes-percent)

And even this support that the bolshevik had, they had because of the decieving slogans they used- "land to the peasant", "factories to the workers", "all power to the soviets", and "peace to the people" of which they fulfilled only the last one by exiting the world war.

I'm well aware of the election results -- but in actual practice the workers of Russia were much more militant and radical than the parties they voted for. "All Power To The Soviets", for example, wasn't a "Bolshevik" slogan -- it was used by workers in generals across all the parties, as a general slogan and also partly as a challenge to the Communist parties who were reluctant to try and seize power for the Soviets.

Keep in mind, I'm no Marxist-Leninist, but the Bolsheviks were certainly right for seizing power as they did -- even though the revolution was an abject failure.

[connoros]

...even though the revolution was an abject failure.

I'm getting a little sick of seeing this parroted around RevLeft, especially sans any shred of evidentiary support.

[Sotionov]

Yeah, how can we deny the abolition of oppression and exploitation that was achieved in the USSR. [/sarcasm]

[Flying Purple People Eater]

How come there's a German and French word for 'coup' but no English word for it? What is the origin of both terms?



English has a large array of French-derived vocabulary due to the British Isles having a long history of Norman rule (Normans spoke a language extremely similar to French, but not quite the same). I'd imagine that the term 'Coup' entered into the language during those periods.

I actually think that the original Old-English word for 'coup' was just 'overthrow'. There are many examples of Old-English's germanic equivalents being superseded by their Romance-derived equivalents (an example being the Modern English term 'Purgery' versus the Old-English synonym 'Oathbreach').

As for the actual term 'coup' (which means 'strike' or 'hit' - Coup D'Etat means literally 'strike against the state') I don't actually know if it has a Latin equivalent. French was also heavily influenced by Frankish languages, so it may have come from a relative of Dutch. The closest word I could find is the Greek term κτύπημα (ktýpi̱ma), which carries the same meaning.

[Rafiq]

It depends on what is meant by "against the army". Firstly one thing should be clear: Armed infantrymen are much more insignificant today than they were one hundred years ago, or during the cold war etc.

In that sense, members of the army would have to join the ranks of the revolutionary proletariat in order for a communist seizure of power to exist. However this still is "against the army" in the sense that it is against the existing organized arm of the bourgeois state, but also in the same way a revolution is against businesses. Today the question is much broader. The army as an isolated interest is most of the time a conservative force. Notable exceptions include burkina faso and afghanistan, but modern examples allow us to look at Egypt and some central asian republics among other states.