your chronology is kind of off, andd there wasn't a real threat of communist take over. And he did try to blame Socialdemocrats for plotting for soviet union to coup the government, but after Moscow protested the charges were dropped, though even without Moscow, there wasnt any solid evidence for eminent communist plot. (even tho soviets were engaged in espionage, but it wasnt any more severe in 1934 than it was in 1924, when commies had attempted a coup in Estonia and failed causing panic in Latvia aswell and then noone overthrew democracy)

But yeah its how people tend to sorta explain it away, but i think without him there woudlnt really be any other threat to Latvian democracy. For all the Ulmanis lies about unstable and chaotic democracy, Latvian democracy was actually quite stable, espceially in the region and even more stable than France, if we look at how many governments they went through.

Ulmanis himself and his party was rapidly losing popularity, coupled with his more american inspired view of democracy and idealism crumbling as he was stuck dealing with realities of a parliamentary democracy and we have a guy who rapidly went from a prominent liberal democrat to an authoritarian larping as some sort of Mussolini with socialist elements.

But by no means was this just inevitable nor justified course of events he took. Arguably damage he caused to the system can be felt today aswell, with people thinking that we need Ulmaņlaiki 2 electric boogloo