By John & Nisha
Whitehead
November 4,
2026
“There
is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t
there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and
oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to
think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and
systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and
soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to
blame?”— V for Vendetta
A revolution can
topple a tyrant without dismantling tyranny.
An
election can replace a president without curbing the powers
of the presidency.
A new political majority can
inherit the instruments of repression and adapt them to
their own purposes.
In other words, what good is a
political change if the weapons of oppression merely change
hands?
After a midterm election that saw billions
of dollars spent on political advertising and a Democratic
wave sweep Republicans out of power in Congress,
Americans have once again been promised a new direction for
the country.
The voters have spoken. The balance of
power in Washington has shifted. A new Congress will have
the opportunity to rein in an imperial presidency and hold
the government accountable for its abuses.
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
But the
question that must rightfully be asked is: what comes
next?
Will Congress finally rein in the surveillance
state, the militarization of the police, the detention
machinery, the endless wars, the government spending spree
and the corporate interests that profit from the American
police state? Or will the politicians settle back into their
comfortable routines while the government machine keeps
right on running?
This is where Hollywood’s
dystopian warnings become disturbingly
relevant.
Twenty years ago, V for Vendetta
offered moviegoers a terrifying glimpse of a future in which
government surveillance was everywhere, dissent was
dangerous, the media served as an instrument of state
propaganda, and the promise of safety had become an excuse
for stripping people of their freedoms.
It was
supposed to be a warning about how easily a free people can
become accustomed to living without freedom—and how little
good it does to replace the people in power if the machinery
of tyranny remains intact.
Two decades later, the twentieth-anniversary
screenings coinciding with Guy Fawkes Day—a pivotal
day in the film’s plot—on November 5 remind us that the
questions the film raises about freedom, fear and government
power have lost none of their urgency or
relevance.
Released in 2006 and set in a future
Britain ruled by Norsefire, a fascist regime, V for
Vendetta depicts a country in which the government knows
all, sees all, controls the airwaves, and promises safety
and security above all. Behind those promises lies a
machinery of surveillance, detention, censorship and
intimidation. People who refuse to conform can be branded
enemies of the state. Others simply disappear.
Sounds
painfully familiar, doesn’t it?
The imagery borrows
from the Third Reich and George Orwell’s 1984.
London is blanketed by surveillance cameras, subjected to
curfews and fed a steady diet of official warnings.
Political prisoners are detained and tortured. The regime
makes enemies of those who refuse to fall in line, while
much of the population retreats into televised entertainment
and the comforting illusion that someone else is in charge
of keeping them safe.
The parallels to the modern-day
American police state’s methods for entrenching its powers
are hard to ignore: exploiting fear, demonizing dissent,
turning security into a blank check and treating
constitutional restraints as inconveniences.
As
director James McTeigue observed in a recent interview
marking V for Vendetta’s twentieth anniversary, the
political circumstances may change, but the
methods used by authoritarian governments remain remarkably
consistent, and the same struggles over executive
authority, government control and the suppression of dissent
continue to resurface.
“It’s
always the same playbook,” McTeigue warned.
Yet
the film’s most unsettling lesson is not that tyranny
arrives all at once but that people can be frightened,
distracted, entertained and worn down until they begin
accepting as normal what once would have been
unthinkable.
That is how a government supposedly
created to serve the people becomes a power unto
itself.
All the while the citizenry is expected to
obey, pay up, keep quiet and show gratitude for whatever
scraps of liberty the government machine permits them to
retain.
In Vendetta, television screens
dominate the film’s public life. Norsefire’s official
broadcasts present the government as the people’s
protector while casting dissenters as dangerous enemies.
What the public hears is not an independent account of
events but a carefully managed version of reality. The
state’s power depends as much on controlling the story as
on controlling the streets.
Then there is Gordon
Dietrich, the television personality who dares to ridicule
the chancellor. For that act of satire, government enforcers
come for him. His fate makes the regime’s message clear:
ridicule the rulers, question the official story, step out
of line, and the machinery of repression will come
knocking.
But propaganda is only one weapon in the
oppressor’s toolbox. Fear does the rest.
Evey
Hammond is confined, interrogated, threatened and presented
with a choice between submission and death. In one of the
film’s cruelest turns, she discovers that V himself staged
her captivity. The man fighting tyranny has adopted some of
its methods. Her ordeal exposes not only how fear can be
used to break a human being, but how easily a self-appointed
liberator can become another tormentor.
That
contradiction should give us pause.
It’s one thing
to recognize that government abuses can drive people to
desperation. It is quite another to assume that anyone who
promises to destroy an oppressive system will replace it
with freedom.
Other dystopian films drive the point
home.
In Land of the
Blind, released the same year as V for
Vendetta, a soldier helps overthrow a brutal ruler, only
to watch the revolutionary leader establish another
repressive regime.
In The Hunger Games,
President Snow’s defeat does not automatically bring
justice. President Coin, who leads the rebellion against
him, proposes another Hunger Games—this time using the
children of the defeated Capitol. Although the
names and uniforms change, the logic of cruelty
remains.
The point is not that elections are
meaningless or that every political leader is the same, but
we cannot vote our way out of tyranny if we keep voting to
hand someone else the keys to the police state.
That
is the cycle at work in V for Vendetta and in my
novel The Erik Blair Diaries.
Authoritarian
regimes manipulate fear, punish dissent and treat critics as
enemies of the state. In doing so, they may breed the unrest
they claim to be suppressing, then point to that unrest as
proof that still more power is needed.
The police
state is a make-works system: it is hard-wired to ensure its
own survival.
For years now, we have suffered the
injustices, cruelties, corruption and abuses of an
entrenched government bureaucracy that has little regard for
the Constitution or the rights of the citizenry.
By
“government,” I’m not referring merely to the highly
partisan, two-party bureaucracy of Republicans and
Democrats. Rather, I’m referring to government with a
capital “G”: the entrenched Deep State, the sprawling
network of agencies, contractors, surveillance systems,
security bureaucracies and accumulated powers that is
largely unaffected by elections and increasingly insulated
from accountability.
The politicians come and go. The
machinery of government remains.
What one president
puts in place, the next inherits. What one political party
condemns when it is out of power, it may find remarkably
useful once it controls the machinery of
government.
Consider what has remained largely
unchanged despite decades of elections, campaign promises
and assurances that this time things will be
different.
The American people are still being
subjected to invasive government surveillance, with
intelligence agencies and law enforcement officials
acquiring ever-greater means of monitoring our
communications, movements, associations and private
lives.
The technology has changed dramatically since
V for Vendetta arrived in theaters, but the
government’s appetite for knowing everything about
everyone has hardly diminished.
Indeed, agencies
within the Department of Homeland Security have purchased
access to commercially collected cellphone-location data
that would allow the government to circumvent constitutional
privacy protections by buying information that would
otherwise require judicial authorization to obtain.
In
other words, the surveillance state no longer needs a camera
on every street corner. Americans carry much of the
technology needed to monitor their movements in their own
pockets.
Meanwhile, the militarization of America’s
police forces continues. Through federal equipment-transfer
programs and other funding mechanisms, local
law enforcement agencies have gained access to military
equipment and capabilities, further blurring the
distinction between policing a community and occupying a
battlefield. The federal government’s own records show
that this transfer apparatus remains active.
Neither
has the government abandoned its increasingly punitive
approach to dealing with the citizenry.
We are still
contending with an enormous system of prisons, jails and
detention facilities; laws that criminalize an
ever-expanding range of conduct; and government agencies
that too often treat due process as an obstacle to
enforcement rather than a constitutional
obligation.
Nor have successive administrations
managed to dismantle the military-industrial complex, end
the government’s dependence on endless military
commitments abroad, curb its appetite for taxpayer dollars
or sever the cozy relationship between government power and
corporate profit.
The war machine keeps
running.
The surveillance apparatus keeps
expanding.
The government contractors keep collecting
their checks.
And the taxpayers keep footing the
bill.
All the while, we are encouraged to believe that
everything will change if only we elect the right
people.
We’re in trouble, folks.
We are viewed
as relatively expendable in the eyes of government: faceless
numbers whose labor and tax dollars keep the government
machine running, while those in power remain largely
insulated from the indignities and injustices inflicted on
ordinary Americans.
This is the illusion of freedom:
that we are free so long as the government permits us to be
free, that our rights are secure so long as those in power
choose to respect them, and that our constitutional
protections can be suspended whenever government officials
utter the magic words “national security.”
But the
Bill of Rights was not intended to be a bill of temporary
privileges, handed out by the government machine and taken
back whenever those in power find them
inconvenient.
And the Constitution was not written to
ensure the survival of the government at any cost. It was
written to restrain government power and protect the
freedoms of the people it was created to serve.
Yet
here we are, being asked to trust that the latest political
victors will somehow use the same extraordinary powers more
responsibly than their predecessors.
That is the great
deception of the American police state.
The citizenry
is repeatedly offered the same rotten bargain: surrender a
little more privacy, accept a little less due process,
tolerate another restriction on freedom, and the government
will keep you safe.
And when those powers are abused,
the public is told to wait for the next election, the next
Congress, the next president, the next political
savior.
Round and round we go.
The predators of
the police state keep right on operating, no matter who wins
an election.
As V for Vendetta, Land of the
Blind and The Hunger Games remind us, replacing
the people who operate the machinery of tyranny is not the
same as dismantling it.
So how do we wrest back
control over a runaway government and an imperial
presidency?
It won’t be easy.
But the answer
cannot be to put our faith in another politician, another
election or another promise that this time the machinery of
government will be used for good.
The Founders
understood something that Americans seem to have forgotten:
the greatest danger to freedom is not simply who holds
power, but how much power government is permitted to
wield.
That is why they established a system of checks
and balances, dividing authority among three coequal
branches of government—the executive, legislative and
judicial branches—and placing constitutional limits on
each.
Unadulterated power in any branch of government
is a menace to freedom.
The Constitution was not
written on the assumption that those entrusted with power
would always be wise, benevolent or restrained. It was
written with the understanding that power corrupts, that
government officials are fallible, and that power once
seized is rarely surrendered willingly.
Yet we have
lingered too long in a strange twilight zone where ego
trumps justice, propaganda perverts truth, and imperial
presidents—enabled by compliant legislatures, deferential
courts and a distracted populace—claim powers that should
never belong to one office alone.
Congress has too
often surrendered its constitutional responsibilities. The
courts have too often deferred to government claims of
authority. And the executive branch has continued to
accumulate powers that the Framers never intended any one
individual to possess.
This is how the machinery of
tyranny survives elections.
The newly elected Congress
has an opportunity to provide a meaningful constitutional
check on executive power. It can investigate government
abuses, demand accountability, exercise its legislative
authority and refuse to rubber-stamp an imperial presidency.
But if the new majority merely substitutes partisan
retribution for constitutional accountability, or defends
the same abuses when they serve its own political interests,
the machinery of tyranny will remain intact.
The test
is not whether Congress can make life miserable for the
president. The test is whether it can make government obey
the Constitution.
When the constitutional checks on
government fail, replacing one set of rulers with another
does little to change the underlying balance of
power.
The answer is not to find a better ruler. It is
to ensure that no ruler—no president, no Congress, no
government agency—is permitted to operate beyond the
restraints of the Constitution.
There is no ten-step
plan for recovering a free society.
If there were,
however, the first step would be simple: stop treating
politics as a spectator sport and do your part to defend
freedom principles in your own community.
Stand up for
your own rights, of course. But more importantly, stand up
for the rights of those with whom you disagree. Defend
freedom when the speaker is offensive, the accused is
unpopular or the person being targeted has a different race,
religion, nationality, immigration status, politics or point
of view. The Bill of Rights is not a reward for good
behavior or a privilege reserved for people who think like
us.
Don’t play semantics. Don’t justify. Don’t
politicize it. Don’t excuse a constitutional abuse because
your preferred party happens to be in power. When officials
sidestep the Constitution, demand that they obey
it.
That’s their job. Make them do it.
When a
neighbor’s rights are threatened, defend them as if they
were your own.
Twenty years after V for
Vendetta reached theaters, its warning is not simply
that a free people can be frightened into submission. It is
that they can be persuaded, again and again, that someone
new will save them if only they surrender a little more
power.
Land of the Blind and The Hunger
Games offer the sequel to that warning: overthrowing one
tyranny means little if the next government inherits its
habits and its weapons.
As I have made clear in Battlefield
America: The War on the American People and in its
fictional counterpart The
Erik Blair Diaries, all freedoms hang together. They
fall together, as well.
The most frightening future is
not one in which the wrong candidate wins or a dictator
refuses to leave office. It is one in which the citizenry
keeps changing the people in charge while allowing the
machinery of tyranny to remain intact.
Freedom
requires more than a vote.
It requires a government
that is forced to play by the rules of the
Constitution—and a citizenry willing to hold those in
public office accountable when they don’t, no matter which
party is in power.
WC:
2622
Constitutional attorney and author John W.
Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford
Institute. His latest books The
Erik Blair Diaries and Battlefield
America: The War on the American People are
available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at
johnw@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive
Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The
Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.
