Editor’s Note: Retired Army Lietenant Colonel Dave Cloft as you would imagine, is a student of military history. In this 5-part series, he brings forth an old concept of revolution and sets it in modern times, with hyper-rapid communication. As the mid-term elections draw nigh, it behoves all of us to consider his words.
Ed.
After three articles about fifth-generation warfare, election legitimacy, information operations and keeping the Republic from committing suicide, we’ve finally arrived at a fairly important question.
What exactly are we trying to save?
Because somewhere along the way Americans started using the word “right” to describe practically anything they really, really want.
Healthcare is a right.
College is a right.
Internet access is a right.
Serving in whatever military position you desire is a right.
Apparently, if enough people want free nachos at halftime, eventually somebody will discover them hiding in the Fourteenth Amendment.
That’s not how rights work.
And if we’re going to defend the Human Domain, we’d better remember the difference between a constitutional right, a legal entitlement, a privilege, an opportunity and something we’d simply like government to provide.
The most important rights are often the ones exercised by people we don’t particularly like.
Freedom of speech isn’t terribly impressive when everybody agrees with you.
Freedom of religion isn’t difficult when everyone attends the same church.
Due process isn’t challenging when the defendant is obviously a wonderful person.
Freedom of assembly doesn’t require much courage when the protesters are supporting your cause.
The Second Amendment isn’t controversial when the person possessing the firearm shares your politics.
The entire point of constitutional liberty is that these protections don’t disappear simply because your neighbor annoys you.
That’s the test.
Take religion.
You have the right to believe some pretty extraordinary things.
You may believe adultery is a mortal sin. You may believe eating pork is forbidden. You may believe Saturday rather than Sunday is the Sabbath. You may believe there is no God whatsoever.
America doesn’t require a theological entrance examination.
But suppose your religion teaches that adulterers should be executed.
You may believe it.
You may preach it.
You may attempt peacefully to persuade others that your interpretation of scripture is correct.
You don’t get to kill the adulterer.
Religious liberty protects conscience.
It isn’t a homicide permit.
That’s the boundary we continually have to understand: your liberty is extraordinarily broad, but it doesn’t automatically give you authority to violate somebody else’s life, liberty or property.
Speech works much the same way.
You can say the president is an idiot.
You can say Congress is corrupt.
You can advocate changing the Constitution.
You can advocate communism.
You can advocate capitalism.
You can advocate ideas so spectacularly stupid that your high-school civics teacher feels a disturbance in the Force.
Government generally doesn’t get to outlaw an idea because it considers the idea dangerous or offensive.
But constitutional law has recognized narrow categories outside ordinary First Amendment protection, including true threats and incitement directed toward producing imminent lawless action.
Again:
Protect the idea.
Punish the crime.
That’s a pretty good operating principle.
The same applies to assembly.
Americans have a constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition government.
Notice that little word the Founders slipped in there:
Peaceably.
You can march down the street carrying a sign saying practically anything.
You don’t acquire the constitutional right to burn down Bob’s Hardware because you’re really passionate about zoning reform.
Bob still has rights too.
Then there’s the Second Amendment.
Keeping and bearing arms is expressly identified in the Constitution as a right.
That doesn’t mean owning a firearm grants immunity from laws against murder, robbery, assault or reckless conduct.
The distinction shouldn’t be complicated.
Owning the rifle can be constitutionally protected.
Shooting your neighbor because his Labrador keeps crapping in your yard remains frowned upon.
This brings us to something Americans increasingly confuse with rights:
Privileges and opportunities.
There is no general constitutional right to receive a driver’s license simply because you enjoy driving.
Government can require testing, licensing and compliance with traffic laws.
There is no constitutional guarantee that you will be admitted to West Point because you really want to attend.
There is no constitutional guarantee that you will receive a security clearance.
And there is no general constitutional entitlement to serve in whichever position in the United States military you choose.
Congress has constitutional authority to raise and support armies and make rules governing the Armed Forces, and the Supreme Court historically has given the political branches substantial deference in military affairs. That doesn’t place the military outside the Constitution. It means military service involves qualifications, standards, assignments and institutional requirements that simply don’t operate like an ordinary individual liberty.
Male or female, the principle is the same.
Nobody has a constitutional right to command an infantry battalion.
You qualify.
You meet the standards.
The service determines its requirements.
You get selected.
Or you don’t.
That isn’t remotely the same constitutional question as whether government may prohibit you from criticizing the president.
This distinction matters enormously in the Human Domain because the easiest way to destroy the meaning of “rights” is to make everything a right.
If everything I desire becomes a right, eventually my “rights” require somebody else to provide me with something.
Now government isn’t merely protecting liberty.
Government is deciding whose competing demands receive priority.
And suddenly every political disagreement becomes an existential struggle over “rights.”
That’s wonderful terrain for fifth-generation warfare.
Tell every group that losing a policy argument means somebody has taken away their human rights.
Tell them compromise equals oppression.
Tell them political opponents aren’t merely wrong; they’re attacking their existence.
Congratulations.
You’ve converted ordinary democratic disagreement into tribal warfare.
A constitutional republic requires something more mature.
We protect your freedom of religion even when we think your theology is ridiculous.
We protect your speech even when we’d rather you shut up.
We protect peaceful protesters whose signs make our blood pressure rise.
We give due process to defendants we’re convinced are guilty.
We protect political dissent from people who want to fundamentally change the country.
We protect those liberties because tomorrow the unpopular person might be us.
But protecting liberty doesn’t require pretending every desire is a constitutional right.
Nor does it require tolerating violence, coercion, destruction or criminal conduct merely because someone wraps those actions in religion, politics or ideology.
That balance isn’t weakness.
That’s the Republic.
The Human Domain ultimately isn’t defended by making everyone think alike.
Quite the opposite.
It’s defended by maintaining a society where Americans can disagree profoundly—sometimes obnoxiously—without deciding that disagreement requires destroying one another.
Your neighbor doesn’t need your permission to worship.
He doesn’t need your permission to speak.
He doesn’t need your permission to criticize the government.
And he doesn’t need you to agree with him.
He does, however, have to leave you alive while doing it.
Perhaps that’s the constitutional bargain we’ve forgotten.
You have rights.
So does the other guy.
Government’s job isn’t to make either of you happy.
Its first job is to protect the space where both of you can remain free.
And perhaps the most American thing we can relearn in the Human Domain is also the simplest:
I don’t have to agree with you.
I don’t even have to like you.
But I’ll defend your right to be wrong.
Just stay off my lawn.
This article is 4th in a 5 Part Series on 5th Generation Warfare. Links below go active on the dates indicated for this and subsequent parts:
September 28, 2026:5th Generation War Part 1: Don’t Capture the Capitol—Just Convince Half of them it’s Corrupt and Illegitimate
September 29, 2026: 5th Generation War Part 2: When the Chickens Come Home to Roost
September 30, 2026: 5th Generation War , Part 3: How Do We Save the Republic Without Committing Suicide?
October 1, 2026: 5th Generation War, Part 4: Rights, Privileges, and the Fine Art of Leaving Each Other Alone
October 2, 2026: 5th Generation War, Part 5: Who Gets to Decide What Is True?
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA