(Or maybe not: maybe even if everyone bought into the realpolitik analysis, they would still think that democratic institutions were in their personal best interest, and would oppose disruption no less fervently?)
I happen to think that the realpolitik analysis is basically correct, but propagating that knowledge may represent a negative externality.
Why do people oppose disruption?
Maybe:
Personal cost. (Establishing a dictatorship may sound like it’s in a general’s “interest”. But maybe generals value being able to not get murdered in their sleep over the “benefits”.)
Legacy/how history remembers you, or Parenthood*.
No one else is doing it.
The authority of generals comes from somewhere else.
*If a general has kids, their kids getting to live somewhere other than a military dictatorship may have “warm fuzzies”.
I can barely imagine a cabal of the majority of high ranking military officials agreeing to back a candidate that lost an election....
Suppose that … election is widely believed to have been fraudulent[.]
I can’t quite imagine this scenario, but it is interesting to think about a military revolting and demands non-fraudulent elections. (During quarantine, a zero voter fraud plan seems more feasible.)
Why do people oppose disruption?
Maybe:
Personal cost. (Establishing a dictatorship may sound like it’s in a general’s “interest”. But maybe generals value being able to not get murdered in their sleep over the “benefits”.)
Legacy/how history remembers you, or Parenthood*.
No one else is doing it.
The authority of generals comes from somewhere else.
*If a general has kids, their kids getting to live somewhere other than a military dictatorship may have “warm fuzzies”.
I can’t quite imagine this scenario, but it is interesting to think about a military revolting and demands non-fraudulent elections. (During quarantine, a zero voter fraud plan seems more feasible.)