What is another word for dethronement?

91 synonyms found


[ diːθɹˈə͡ʊnmənt], [ diːθɹˈə‍ʊnmənt], [ d_iː_θ_ɹ_ˈəʊ_n_m_ə_n_t]

Dethronement, the act of removing someone from a position of power or authority, can also be expressed through various synonyms. These include "deposition," "overthrow," "displacement," "toppling," "ousting," or "unseating." Each term implies a forceful removal from a position of power, either through an organized revolt, a legal proceeding, or an underhanded scheme. These synonyms can be used interchangeably in different contexts, whether it be discussing political regimes, corporate leadership, or even a monarch's reign. Regardless of the situation, the act of dethronement signifies a significant shift in power dynamics, and its synonyms all emphasize the magnitude of that change.

What are the hypernyms for Dethronement?

A hypernym is a word with a broad meaning that encompasses more specific words called hyponyms.

What are the hyponyms for Dethronement?

Hyponyms are more specific words categorized under a broader term, known as a hypernym.

What are the opposite words for dethronement?

Dethronement, which means the removal of a monarch from power, has several antonyms that refer to the opposite of dethronement or reinstatement of the monarch. Some of the antonyms of dethronement are ennoblement, coronation, inauguration, investiture, and elevation. These words imply the bestowing or reinstalling of power, glory, and honor to a monarch or leader. Dethronement refers to the fall of one's rule, while its antonyms symbolize the rise of power and authority. Words and phrases such as "enthronement," "restoration," and "reinstatement" have positive connotations, while dethronement has negative implications.

What are the antonyms for Dethronement?

Usage examples for Dethronement

But the Major's feeling that he was now at liberty to try Death after Life, to make for port after stormy seas, had scarcely a trace in it of dethronement or exclusion from privileges once possessed.
"Somehow Good"
William de Morgan
The time is come, not only for the dethronement of a tyrant, but for establishing in dear old England the only form of government that-is not a mockery of common sense-the only one upon which Liberty may rely-the Republic!"
"The White Gauntlet"
Mayne Reid
No possibility of failure upon the heights; every possibility of failure upon the level; every possibility of disaster down there, but upon the peaks there can be no disaster, no mistake, no accident, no dethronement; there must be inevitable and unconditional achievement.
"The Jericho Road"
W. Bion Adkins

Famous quotes with Dethronement

  • The most important scientific revolutions all include, as their only common feature, the dethronement of human arrogance from one pedestal after another of previous convictions about our centrality in the cosmos.
    Stephen Jay Gould
  • The most important scientific revolutions all include, as their only common feature, the dethronement of human arrogance from one pedestal after another of previous convictions about our centrality in the cosmos.
    Stephen Jay Gould
  • I am old enough to remember well the depression years of the middle 1930s, when economists were quite unable to agree on what public policy should be, and when President Hoover, in need of advice, turned by preference to sociologists to study and illuminate recent social trends. The circumstances of the 1980s seem similar; perhaps contemporary confusions and dismay will mark the dethronement of economics from its privileged place among the social sciences — but perhaps not.
    William H. McNeill
  • I have never believed that the securing of material resources ought to form the central interest of human life—but have instead maintained that is an independent flowering of the intellect and emotions wholly apart from the struggle for existence. Formerly I accepted the archaic dictum that only a few can be relieved of the engulfing waste of the material struggle in its bitterest form—a dictum which is, of course, true in an agricultural age having scanty resources. Therefore I adopted an aristocratic attitude; regretfully arguing that , in any degree of fulness, is only for the fortunate few whose ancestors' prowess has given them economic security and leisure. But I did not take the bourgeois position of praising struggle for its own sake. While recognising certain worthy qualities brought out by it, I was too much impressed by its stultifying attributes to regard it as other than a necessary evil. In my opinion, only the leisured aristocrat really had a chance at —nor did I despise him because he was not forced to struggle. Instead, I was sorry that so few could share his good fortune. The condition was Millions of men must go to waste in order that a few might really live. Still—if those few were not upheld, no high culture would ever be built up. I never had any use for the American pioneer's worship of These things are necessary in their place, but not ends in themselves—and any attempt to make them ends in themselves is essentially uncivilised. Thus I have no fundamental meeting-ground with the rugged Yankee individualist. I represent rather the mood of the agrarian feudalism which preceded the pioneering and capitalistic phases. My ideal of life is , but simply . . . Well—so much for the past. Now we live in an age of easy abundance which makes possible the fulfilment of all moderate human wants through a relatively slight amount of labour. What shall be the result? Shall we still make resources when there is really a plethora of them? Shall we allow antique notions of allocation—"property," etc.—to interfere with the rational distribution of this abundant stock of resources among all those who require them? Shall we so fatuously as to on people who do not need to bear them, through the perpetuation of a set of now irrelevant and inapplicable rules of allocation? What objection is there to an intelligent centralised control of resources whose primary object shall be the elimination of want in every quarter—a thing possible without removing comfortable living from any one now enjoying it? To call the allocation of resources something "uncontrollable" by man—and in an age when virtually natural forces are harnessed and utilised—is simply infantile. It is simply that those who now have the lion's share don't want any fresh or rational allocation. It is needless to say that no sober thinker envisages a workless equalitarian paradise. Much work remains, and human capacities differ. High-grade service must still receive greater rewards than low-grade service. But amidst the present abundance of goods and minimisation of possible work, there must be When society give a man work, it must keep him comfortable without it; but it must give him work if it can, and must compel him to perform it when it is needed. This does not involve interference with life and habits (contrary to what some reactionaries say), . . . But of course the real need of change comes not from the mere fact of abundant resources, but from the growth of conditions making it impossible for millions to have any chance of getting resources under the present outworn set of artificial rules. This development is no myth. Machines had displaced 900,000 men in the U. S. the crash of '29, and no conceivable regime of "prosperity" (where by a people will have abundant and flexible resources and successfully exchange them among one another) will ever make it possible to avoid the permanent presence of of unemployed, so long as old-fashioned laissez-faire capitalism is adhered to. . . . And so I have readjusted my ideas. … I have gone almost reluctantly—step by step, as pressed by facts too insistent to deny—and am still quite as remote from Belknap's naive Marxism as I am from the equally naive Republican orthodoxy I have left behind. I am as set as ever against any upheaval—and believe that nothing of the kind is necessary in order to achieve a new and feasible equilibrium. The best of culture . Hitherto it has grown out of the life of the aristocrat. In future it may be expected to grow out of the secure and not-so-struggling life of whatever citizens are personally able to develop it. There need be no attempt to drag culture down to the level of crude minds. That, indeed, be something to fight tooth and nail! With artificially regulated, we may well let interests follow a natural course. Inherent differences in people and in tastes will create different social-cultural classes as in the past—although the relation of these classes to the holding of material resources will be less fixed than in the capitalistic age now closing. All this, of course, is directly contrary to Belknap's rampant Stalinism—but I'm telling you I'm no bolshevik! I am for the preservation of all values worth preserving—and for the maintenance of complete cultural continuity with the Western-European mainstream. Don't fancy that the dethronement of certain purely economic concepts means an abrupt break in that stream. Rather does it mean a return to art impulses typically aristocratic (that is, disinterested, leisurely, non-ulterior) rather than bourgeois.
    H. P. Lovecraft

Word of the Day

united action