As the United States marks the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, marking the official birth of the new nation, it is worth remembering some of the reasons the document offers as just cause for making war on the British monarchy.

“No taxation without representation” is the slogan that is best known as the core complaint of the colonists, a reference to the colonists’ objections to the 1765 Stamp Act and a series of taxes levied by the British crown thereafter over which Americans had no means of objecting in parliament. But such taxes were not the only provocation to war.

Another significant objection to the crown’s control over the colonies was its insertion of military troops into civilian life. The Declaration details the fact that King George had sent British officers to harass the people; that he had kept standing armies among the people during peacetime without the consent of colonial legislatures; that he had attempted to place the military in control of civilian governments; that he had forced civilians to house British officers (“quartering”) in their own homes; that he had forced Americans taken prisoner to take up arms against their own countrymen; and finally that he had provoked domestic insurrections among the people and even incited Native Americans against the colonists.

This list of complaints is striking in light of events of the present day. Substitute ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for the British officers sent to harass the people; substitute federalization and deployment of the national guard and the marines to US cities in 2025 for keeping standing armies; substitute using federal troops over the objections of Democratic governors; and substitute portraying protests in Portland in 2020 and Minnesota in 2026 as violent civil unrest warranting federal force, and the pictures are dismayingly similar.

In one sense, there is nothing new here. Kings and dictators naturally search for ways to consolidate their power and shield themselves from accountability

Given the oath members of the US military swear to defend the constitution upon enlistment, and their general adherence to that oath, the campaign critics say presses federal troops into service against political opposition and weakens checks and balances has not been entirely smooth sailing for Donald Trump.

It has required the removal of top Pentagon lawyers and internal pressure against those who voice objections to the Department of Defense’s policies. Slowly but surely, this pressure campaign has been working to undermine integrity in the services and encourage or compel compliance with legally questionable policies, such as the strikes on drug boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific.

Ultimately, current expansive interpretations of commander-in-chief authority increase the likelihood of military compliance with presidential directives, even in domestic deployments where such compliance might be least expected.

Using the military to undermine traditional civilian modes of governance, the signatories to the Declaration remind us, is one of the preferred tools of dictators. If the military can be brought along, the........

© The Guardian