Fighting the American Revolution, Again

This year marks the 229^th anniversary of the “Shot heard around the world,” the battle at Lexington and Concord that started the American Revolution.

A small group of American colonists, disturbed that their rights were being slowly but surely eroded, heroically assembled to oppose oppression. They had gathered personal arms and whatever else they had, to stand against what was then the mightiest military force on the planet. They faced odds far greater than those endured by Ukraine today.

That war was successfully concluded, but the fight goes on.

King George has been replaced by home-grown opponents of the freedoms our forefathers won. Many of the issues facing this year’s voters would be familiar to those in 1775.

The colonists were furious at the attempt by the English to impose unfair taxes. As Americans file and pay their excessive taxes this month, they have to wonder whether King George is smiling at the irony.

The distant government in London ignored the needs of its American subjects, placing its philosophy of central power over individual rights and the ability of local communities to address their own needs.

Sound familiar?

The specifics are fascinating. The King wanted to disarm Americans, just as the left, the Biden Administration in particular, seeks to abolish Second Amendment rights.

Expressions of disagreement with London were considered treasonous and punishable. Today, with disturbing regularity, those opposing progressive policies find themselves censored on social media, ostracized in Hollywood, and silenced in academia, and even, in some cases, visited by the FBI.

Bit by bit, the foundational American concept of free speech has been eroded.

Universities silence moderate and conservative voices.

Senator Schumer (D-NY) actually introduced legislation to limit the First Amendment’s application to some political speech. (The measure was, fortunately, defeated.) Numerous campaign regulations limit the ability of the citizenry to openly support candidates without first jumping through bureaucratic hoops.

Some elected officials are not shy about their goals. Rep.
Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) boldly announced that he would “love to be able to regulate the content of speech” He particularly spoke about restricting Fox News. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortex (D-NY) threatened Donald Trump Jr. with a subpoena merely for questioning her economic views.

The underlying principle behind the American Revolution that began on that April day so long ago was that individuals had inherent rights that came not from government but from God (or, if one prefers a different term, nature.)

Even a Supreme Court Justice has expressed a lack of respect for the central principle behind the entire structure of American government and law. During the confirmation hearings of Obama Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, Sen. Tom Coburn had a stern exchange in which he pushed her to state her belief in inherent rights. She evaded answering.

The concept of “inherent rights” is what elevates the American concept of rights above all others. The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were designed to enshrine the concept that the citizenry, not the government, were sovereign. It limits the powers of government, not the freedoms of the people.

Almost the entire Bill of Rights has been under attack. Attacks on the First and Second Amendments are well known. But consider the overriding of the 4^th Amendment right to privacy. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which provides that those rights not specifically given to the federal government belong to the people or the states, is a measure that the left almost universally ignores.

The American revolution was won in 1781, but it can be lost in 2024. The fight this century is at the ballot box, not on a battlefield. Today’s Progressives would prefer the rule of George III, not George Washington.

Quick Analysis

NATO’s Growing Challenges

Gen. Christopher Cavoli, supreme allied commander Europe and the head of U.S. European Command has warned of growing threats facing NATO. “There is a lot of work to be done, and there are big challenges looming — some of them are right in our face, right now,” he warned at the Aspen Security Forum. He is not alone in his concern. the Germany-based Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom notes that “The beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine … marked a deep break … Questions concerning Europe‘s self-image as a voluntary alliance of nation states, its ability to defend itself and the protection though NATO as well as the values for which it stands are further tested by refugees coming to Europe from Ukraine. The democracies of the European Union are vulnerable and their reaction to Putin’s war are carefully watched. Authoritarian states, such as China, predict Europe’s decline and emphasize their own superiority over the ‘Western systems.’” The most interesting fact General Cavoli emphasized was that, in addition to the renewed danger from expansionist Russia, is the growing threat from China. The German Marshall Fund describes the problem.. “Russia and China continue to deepen their partnership, mounting a common challenge to the West. They can advance their strategic objectives better together, undermining perceived Western domination of the global order and impacting Europe’s future security. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has de facto upended the post-Cold War security architecture in Europe and is a direct, existential threat to European security. Beijing plays an important role for Russia’s war efforts, regardless of China’s status as Europe’s largest trading partner or its desire to hedge on Europe to win its geostrategic competition with the United States. “ NATO has continued to concentrate on the potential threat from Beijing. . It developed its concern against the backdrop of China’s designation as a “long-term strategic competitor.” Both the Trump and Biden administrations have sought to expand transatlantic cooperation on China, motivated by the belief that greater European support to US policies is key to effectively addressing the economic, political and strategic challenges associated with China’s growth. While Washington has put much emphasis on discussing with the EU and individual European countries how best to tackle the geo-economic, technological and diplomatic challenges associated with China’s rise and behaviour, NATO has also become an increasingly important partof transatlantic cooperation on China. Some Chinese military threats to Europe are conventional. China and Russia have engaged in joint maneuvers in the Mediterranean, and the Chinese naval presence in the Middle East has grown. Others are of a different variety. The Atlantic Council says that some Chinese threats to European security are merely insidious. For example, China undermines Europe’s military capabilities by stealing defense-related intellectual property and sharing it with its own military and defense industry as China develops new weapons and capabilities. Similarly, Chinese investment in European infrastructure—especially shipping terminals, utilities, and telecommunications networks—provides an excellent platform for intelligence-gathering on NATO military operations. In a worst-case scenario, China could weaponize its ownership or operation of infrastructure in Europe to frustrate, limit, or prevent US or allied use. In other cases, the Chinese threat to Europe manifests in the form of outright attacks. Chinese cyberattacks on European government, industry, military, academic, and civil institutions—including, reportedly, on hospitals during the pandemic—are relentless and massive. In 2014, NATO declared that cyberattacks could trigger the invocation of Article 5, the Alliance’s mutual-defense clause. Increasingly, the links between Russia, China, and now Iran as well, are a source of deep concern to Europe, the United States, and other nations.