History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.
The discussion between David Rivkin and Robert Levy seems irrelevant. If as many as five percent of the citizenry decide to resort to technological measures, and the president cannot dissuade them, the NSA will simply drown in encrypted static. The task facing the president is to convince his political opponents that he is willing to play by the constitutional rules, and that they do not need to resort to defensive measures. And if he fails, the result will be a technologically updated version of Lexington and Concord.
I discussed the issue here a few days ago:
http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=73451&;bheaders=1#73451
( http://hnn.us/articles/19928.html
http://hnn.us/board.php?id=19928 )
You can debate until the cows come home about whether the Royal Prerogative extends to seizing the stores of powder and shot at Concord, or arresting John Hancock and Samuel Adams, but, as it developed, the underlying realities were somewhat different. David Rivkin, with his large claims, impossible of enforcement... well, if he is the President's friend, then who needs enemies?