Agreed -- though I'd argue it was ultimately successful, just taking too long of a windy process (Napoleon, back to monarchy, back to another Napoleon, and so on).
My point is given the grievances that started the French Revolution, and even the Russian Revolution, there seems to be a tipping point where this happens. Are we there here? I doubt it, but it's the mindset that I'm looking at. These things shouldn't happen, but I'd imagine you get it -- people are feeling ground down, with no legal recourse being available because greed is keeping power where it is, and things begin to snap and buckle.
We both swore an oath to defend the Constitution, with the difference being you were trained to actually do so if the need arose, and another being we might not agree on what a domestic threat to the Constitution might be. I think we're at a point where people are seeing a threat to our country and are willing or taking action to defend it, whether you or I agree that is the case, and a large part of it is the unwillingness to compromise on issues that should be of zero importance or those that propagate unmitigated greed -- however one defines that. And this is a rare case where Both Sides suck.
So, yeah, these corporate assassination and political violence shouldn't be happening. But I get it.