From King George III to NSPM-7: How Governments Radicalize Dissent

In 1775, King George III issued “A Proclamation for Suppressing Rebellion and Sedition,” accusing the American colonists of being manipulated by “dangerous and ill-designing men” engaged in “open and avowed rebellion.”In 2025, the Trump administration issued NSPM-7, “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence,” framing modern political extremism through similarly broad ideological language.This episode explores the historical parallels between those two moments — and why governments often unintentionally radicalize opposition movements when they begin interpreting political dissent primarily through counterterrorism frameworks.Drawing on his background as a former Navy SEAL officer and graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, Nate Charles examines:* The escalation dynamics that transformed colonial resistance into revolution* How heavy-handed state responses often act as force multipliers for radicalization* The historical legacy of COINTELPRO and domestic intelligence overreach* Why broad ideological profiling creates long-term instability* The constitutional tension between public order and political dissentThis is not merely a discussion about free speech.It is a discussion about how governments create the very insurgent identities they fear.What happens when governments stop viewing dissent as political disagreement and start viewing it as domestic extremism? History suggests that approach rarely ends well. Get full access to The Rule of Law Brief at natecharles.substack.com/subscribe