pro tip 1: there has never been a coup in Latin America where the president being overthrown wasn't, um, "problematic." (yes, not even Allende)
pro tip 2: there has never been a coup in Latin America that didn't have some degree of popular support (ie, not linked to CIA or international capital) . (yes, not even the one against Arbenz, or the two against Aristide, or Zelaya, Lugo -- remember him?).
pro tip 3: if the military intervenes after the president agrees to protest demands (as what happened in Bolivia, when Evo agreed to new elections), its a coup. Pretty much anytime the military intervenes to change regimes, its a coup.
pro tip 4: the main driver of destablization need not be the CIA or international capital -- it could very well be honest fed up grassroots non-christian white supremacists -- for the outcome of the coup to benefit international capital (and lowland white supremacists).
pro tip 5: on the above, read Hegel on the "cunning of reason."
pro tip 5: when assessing comparable negatives of either side, don't forget to weigh in the future (ie, see Brazil, where, remember, the PT was massively corrupt and, in many places, cut off from its base)
I think the above should be number six....
