Has there ever been a coup in America where soldiers conspired to take over?

Typically, it is led by the highest military commanders or generals, manifesting as a form of overthrowing the government and seizing power.

Historically, the two coups that occurred in Korea are well-known....

They have frequently happened in Latin America, Africa, and some Asian countries, often arising in conjunction with political instability, corruption, and economic crises.

Despite possessing the world's strongest military, there has never been a case in which the military directly overthrew the government in the United States.

This is because the U.S. Constitution has established the principle of strict civilian control of the military.

However, that does not mean there have been no "coup attempts."

A notable example is the 'Business Plot' incident of 1933.

At that time, the country was in turmoil due to the Great Depression, and President Roosevelt's New Deal policies faced strong opposition from large corporations and the banking sector.

During this process, some financial and corporate interests allegedly sought to recruit retired generals to establish a fascist-style military regime.

The figure they intended to promote was Smedley Butler, a subordinate of General Pershing and a hero of World War I.

Butler was a popular figure at the time, and he received a proposal to "lead the soldiers to Washington and effectively make Roosevelt a puppet president."

However, General Butler rejected this and instead exposed the plot to Congress, causing the incident to fall apart.

While its actual feasibility was assessed to be low, it is recorded as the only coup conspiracy involving a high-ranking officer in American history.

Since then, there have been no attempts by the military to overthrow the government in the United States.

Of course, political tensions within the military have always existed. For example, conflicts between Secretary McNamara and field commanders during the Vietnam War, and instances where generals expressed discomfort with the administration during the Iraq War, have occurred.

However, these did not lead to a coup.

This is because the U.S. military has strongly internalized the identity of "defending democracy," and there is almost no political or social foundation in the U.S. to justify a military coup.

In fact, the reason military coups have been repeated in South American or Third World countries is that institutional democracy was weak, and the perception that the military should act as a political entity was socially accepted, whereas the U.S. has embedded the philosophy of "civilians control the military" in its constitution and institutions from its inception.

An interesting aspect is that U.S. generals have exerted influence more through entering politics after retirement rather than through coups.

Dwight Eisenhower is a prime example. As the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in World War II, he was a symbol of war heroism, but he did not reveal his political ambitions during his military service and ran for president after retirement, legally becoming the president.

He chose democratic procedures of "voting and elections" instead of a coup. Recently, figures like former Secretary of Defense Mattis have also joined the government after retirement, but they did so at the invitation of civilian authority, not by forcibly seizing power.

U.S. generals can always be seen as "faithful executors of democracy."

Therefore, even today, the possibility of a military coup is rarely seriously discussed in American society.

Instead, the reputation and leadership built by generals often naturally continue in politics after retirement.

Ultimately, the United States has maintained nearly 250 years of democracy without a history of military coups, thanks to the mechanisms that keep the military under civilian control.