Revolutions & Violence

Found these comments on BAEXPATS dot org and I think they are pretty good.

EdRooney: ... Coups that are accepted by the majority do not need mass disappearances and states of siege as did Videla, Pinochet, Ríos Montt et al. Certainly there is always an element of the monied interests that welcome a coup d'état, as was the case in Czechoslovakia, Iraq, Poland, El Salvador and Argentina, and just about anywhere else., but they are the MINORITY, and that is why the perpetrators needed violence to enforce their rule. You will always have somebody welcoming a non-popular conqueror, as has happened every time in every invasion or coup in history. This does not make them popular governments. ...

Newcomer: Kudos to your comment. Money and opportunity always play a role in the perceived support of a regime.
Every government, good or bad, left or right, military or pacifist, has supporters and detractors. And history has shown every government also has the ability to lose these supporters quite quickly. Violence does not regain popular support, it just makes this support unnecessary and irrelevant, inducing in the population a sense of sheer impotence. When things go wrong, any change is welcome (just as any treatment feels good when you're sick). People do not welcome violence, they welcome change when they feel they need it. When the remedy is proven to be worse than the disease, well, then they just stop drinking the kool-aid.