In fairness, that's how the commies would normally try to do it. An angry enough mob doesn't need weapons to overthrow a government. You just get an angry enough mob, and a bunch of people to back you, and you're all set.
Truly: Jan 6th could have been a coup if either Trump or the Republicans wanted it to be one, that's what scared the piss out of the Establishment. Difference is Trump preferred to lose, rather than risk the dangers of a coup, probably because he thinks either him or a surrogate will win in 2024, we shall see.
As for weaponless insurrections. When they do happen, it's because it's a genuine "General Uprising", normally the kind that depose Leftists. Like the Romanian Revolution. Not only was there no weapons, they didn't even have a plan.
One of the most amazing things I've ever seen was a Romanian who recorded video from his balcony in a tenement in the Capitol city. Just because people wanted to be there, the streets had swelled with over 300,000 people. No one with a plan to do anything, but no one really wanted to stop. The 'police' were dispatched to disperse the huge crowd that stretched through multiple streets. The police sent two Soviet armored vehicles to remove the crowd. They were fully armed with cannon guns (not even machine guns).
The video shows the literally teaming mass of people that are at least 30 stories below in multiple. At this point, it was late at night, and no one was visible as a person, but you could see all the lights of candles, matches, and flashlights that dotted the street. The protesters were trying get some kind of a chant going. They are trying to yell at the police to either leave or join them. Then, the armored cars open fire. It's not clear if it's into the crowd or over it, but you can see the enormous tracers fly past the crowd.
For a moment there is silence... followed by an enormous roar. The teeming pool of little lights suddenly surged like water towards the direction where the gunfire had come, and the crowd was very load and angry.
Then the scene cuts, and transitions to a seen on the ground. The 2 armored cars have been flipped upside down and are on fire. ... Sometimes, if it's big enough, an insurrection can do a lot of damage even when unarmed.
the Romanian revolution was a farce driven by defectors in the Securitate, probably defecting to the jewish bankers who were angry Ceausescu had paid off all national debt and wanted to start his own world bank to rival the west's, though i don't know that for sure.
they had to pit squads of the same military against each other in the night, telling both that the other squad were revolutionaries, to make it look like a war was actually going on. the incriminating order to kill all those protesters before the revolution was apparently given by Ceausescu... who was out of country and didn't even know about it... and my mother who lived in the capital at the time and went to all the gatherings, as one did, is fairly convinced the first shootings that spurred the revolution on to 100 were done by the Securitate themselves to make it look like it was starting.
the actual people were ferried around like idiots and felt good because now they could buy American burgers and glare at the gold-painted steel handles in Ceausescu's home and say "what a hypocrite" thinking he had golden furniture. barely any of them had anything to do with the revolution and i'm fairly sure none of them outright started it.
you take all that and put it together with a trial more mock than the shit at Nuremberg and things start to look weird. i hate commies with a passion but if commie jews kill a commie maybe that commie wasn't actually a commie. complicated stuff. i'm no expert, just Romanian.
the incriminating order to kill all those protesters before the revolution was apparently given by Ceausescu... who was out of country and didn't even know about it...
The revolution happened literally in front of him at a state mandated rally. I'm not sure what you're going at here.
before the revolution in Bucharest there was a protest in Timisoara where they were fired upon. the blame was 100% on Ceausescu for that despite him not being there to give the order. this doesn't really mean anything in isolation, but if you take everything i said + the sorry state of Romania today after jew capitalism has raped it into a 2nd world Mercedes-buying craphole things start to look fishy as to the actual circumstances and reasons for the revolution.
seriously, don't pin me as a commie, i just don't think the Romanian revolution was such a clear-cut matter given all the context. it's especially weird how most people old enough to remember the regime almost prefer it to post-revolution Romania, and not in a shitty loyalist commie sense either.
Judging from how it looks after years of watching Vee, I wouldn't call Romania anything approaching capitalist. There are hardly any capitalist countries in Europe. Most are, at best, Fabian Socialist. I doubt that the military created the revolution from whole cloth, it seems more to me that Ceausescu was primarily to blame for the conditions that would inevitably lead to a revolution. The military exploiting the revolution, however, seems obvious and is actually one of the biggest problems of an unorganized revolution. Damn near anyone can take power if they have enough of a minimal support system to do so. Which is similar to what happened in Russia as well.
I wish I could believe that but... I don't know all that much about the Romanian Revolution, but I've read (and seen, and heard) a fair bit about the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia in November 1989.
Did you know that Václav Havel, the hero of the Velvet Revolution, the first post-communist president of Czechoslovakia and later the Czech Republic, and a supposedly persecuted dissident, lived at a highly desirable address in Prague and owned a Mercedes in the 80s when most people were on years-long waiting lists to buy a fucking Škoda 120? Did you know his wife was actually happy when he got put in jail, because she hoped they'd stop him from drinking for a while?
Believe me, it was nothing like people think it was, and that leads me to believe the Romanian one wasn't what people think it was, either. Don't trust history books.
I'm well aware that liberalization protests against communism were additionally stimulated by American and Western intelligence agencies to break the Communist governments... but the Communists never did themselves any favors, and constantly contributed to the collapse of their states by genuinely outraging swathes of the population. In some cases, like in Estonia, you had nationalists and liberals working together to unseat what they saw as a Russian Communist occupation.
We know that the CIA was absolutely desperate to kill Castro for decades, and they never did, and Cuba is still Communist. The reason that the rest of the Communist world collapsed is because the Soviet System collapsed, and routinely de-legitimized itself with it's own people and subjects.
In fairness, that's how the commies would normally try to do it. An angry enough mob doesn't need weapons to overthrow a government. You just get an angry enough mob, and a bunch of people to back you, and you're all set.
Truly: Jan 6th could have been a coup if either Trump or the Republicans wanted it to be one, that's what scared the piss out of the Establishment. Difference is Trump preferred to lose, rather than risk the dangers of a coup, probably because he thinks either him or a surrogate will win in 2024, we shall see.
As for weaponless insurrections. When they do happen, it's because it's a genuine "General Uprising", normally the kind that depose Leftists. Like the Romanian Revolution. Not only was there no weapons, they didn't even have a plan.
One of the most amazing things I've ever seen was a Romanian who recorded video from his balcony in a tenement in the Capitol city. Just because people wanted to be there, the streets had swelled with over 300,000 people. No one with a plan to do anything, but no one really wanted to stop. The 'police' were dispatched to disperse the huge crowd that stretched through multiple streets. The police sent two Soviet armored vehicles to remove the crowd. They were fully armed with cannon guns (not even machine guns).
The video shows the literally teaming mass of people that are at least 30 stories below in multiple. At this point, it was late at night, and no one was visible as a person, but you could see all the lights of candles, matches, and flashlights that dotted the street. The protesters were trying get some kind of a chant going. They are trying to yell at the police to either leave or join them. Then, the armored cars open fire. It's not clear if it's into the crowd or over it, but you can see the enormous tracers fly past the crowd.
For a moment there is silence... followed by an enormous roar. The teeming pool of little lights suddenly surged like water towards the direction where the gunfire had come, and the crowd was very load and angry.
Then the scene cuts, and transitions to a seen on the ground. The 2 armored cars have been flipped upside down and are on fire. ... Sometimes, if it's big enough, an insurrection can do a lot of damage even when unarmed.
the Romanian revolution was a farce driven by defectors in the Securitate, probably defecting to the jewish bankers who were angry Ceausescu had paid off all national debt and wanted to start his own world bank to rival the west's, though i don't know that for sure.
they had to pit squads of the same military against each other in the night, telling both that the other squad were revolutionaries, to make it look like a war was actually going on. the incriminating order to kill all those protesters before the revolution was apparently given by Ceausescu... who was out of country and didn't even know about it... and my mother who lived in the capital at the time and went to all the gatherings, as one did, is fairly convinced the first shootings that spurred the revolution on to 100 were done by the Securitate themselves to make it look like it was starting.
the actual people were ferried around like idiots and felt good because now they could buy American burgers and glare at the gold-painted steel handles in Ceausescu's home and say "what a hypocrite" thinking he had golden furniture. barely any of them had anything to do with the revolution and i'm fairly sure none of them outright started it.
you take all that and put it together with a trial more mock than the shit at Nuremberg and things start to look weird. i hate commies with a passion but if commie jews kill a commie maybe that commie wasn't actually a commie. complicated stuff. i'm no expert, just Romanian.
The revolution happened literally in front of him at a state mandated rally. I'm not sure what you're going at here.
before the revolution in Bucharest there was a protest in Timisoara where they were fired upon. the blame was 100% on Ceausescu for that despite him not being there to give the order. this doesn't really mean anything in isolation, but if you take everything i said + the sorry state of Romania today after jew capitalism has raped it into a 2nd world Mercedes-buying craphole things start to look fishy as to the actual circumstances and reasons for the revolution.
seriously, don't pin me as a commie, i just don't think the Romanian revolution was such a clear-cut matter given all the context. it's especially weird how most people old enough to remember the regime almost prefer it to post-revolution Romania, and not in a shitty loyalist commie sense either.
Judging from how it looks after years of watching Vee, I wouldn't call Romania anything approaching capitalist. There are hardly any capitalist countries in Europe. Most are, at best, Fabian Socialist. I doubt that the military created the revolution from whole cloth, it seems more to me that Ceausescu was primarily to blame for the conditions that would inevitably lead to a revolution. The military exploiting the revolution, however, seems obvious and is actually one of the biggest problems of an unorganized revolution. Damn near anyone can take power if they have enough of a minimal support system to do so. Which is similar to what happened in Russia as well.
I wish I could believe that but... I don't know all that much about the Romanian Revolution, but I've read (and seen, and heard) a fair bit about the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia in November 1989.
Did you know that Václav Havel, the hero of the Velvet Revolution, the first post-communist president of Czechoslovakia and later the Czech Republic, and a supposedly persecuted dissident, lived at a highly desirable address in Prague and owned a Mercedes in the 80s when most people were on years-long waiting lists to buy a fucking Škoda 120? Did you know his wife was actually happy when he got put in jail, because she hoped they'd stop him from drinking for a while?
Believe me, it was nothing like people think it was, and that leads me to believe the Romanian one wasn't what people think it was, either. Don't trust history books.
I'm not, I'm watching the crowd.
I'm well aware that liberalization protests against communism were additionally stimulated by American and Western intelligence agencies to break the Communist governments... but the Communists never did themselves any favors, and constantly contributed to the collapse of their states by genuinely outraging swathes of the population. In some cases, like in Estonia, you had nationalists and liberals working together to unseat what they saw as a Russian Communist occupation.
We know that the CIA was absolutely desperate to kill Castro for decades, and they never did, and Cuba is still Communist. The reason that the rest of the Communist world collapsed is because the Soviet System collapsed, and routinely de-legitimized itself with it's own people and subjects.