There are striking parallels between the British occupation of Boston in the 1760s-70s and the U.S. federal occupation of Minneapolis in 2026. Like pre-Revolutionary Boston, Minneapolis (and Minnesota in general) has become the subject of vindictive retribution for the perceived lawlessness of its inhabitants. To the contrary, through the lens of the inhabitants of colonial Boston and present-day Minnesota, the deployment of outside agents by an intrusive governmental administration from a distant capital has been viewed as a threat to the liberty and safety of its people.
In 1768, British Commissioners of Customs demanded military protection in the course of collecting revenue from unruly Bostonian colonists. General Thomas Gage (commander-in-chief of the British Army in America) agreed; in October 1768, two British regiments—led by British Lt. Colonel William Dalrymple—arrived from Halifax, Nova Scotia, in the Boston harbor. Thus began the British occupation of Boston, which culminated in a series of events that greatly contributed to the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in 1775.
Colonial Bostonians were cast as some of the principle colonial agitators during the Stamp Act Riots, which resulted in the British repeal of the Stamp Act of 1765. Following the passage and implementation of a new series of taxes (customs duties), known as the Townshend Acts of 1767, Boston was vindictively targeted for what can be considered to be political retribution. British leaders sent British Regulars to Boston to occupy the town and restore order in the name of ensuring the enforcement of the Townsend duties.
The Trump administration’s fixation on the Twin Cities can also be viewed as vindictive political retribution. From Trump’s narcissistic political perspective, Minneapolis is a blue city, with a blue governor, in a blue state that did not vote to elect him in 2024. Moreover, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz ran against Trump as a vice presidential candidate and has been open and candid about his opposition to Trump and his post-election policies.
There was a calculated buildup to the federal occupation of Minneapolis. Trump repeatedly rhetorically targeted Minnesota’s Somalian immigrant communities, which has included repeated pre- and post-election personal attacks against Minnesota U.S. House Rep. Ilhan Omar, a former Somalian refugee.
And then came what federal officials have called Operation Metro Surge. In early December 2025, the Trump administration launched this operation, which initially targeted undocumented Somali immigrants.
Escalation was imminent. Just after Christmas, a right-wing influencer seeking to go viral named Nick Shirley, under the guise of “independent journalism,” alleged that he uncovered a massive fraud scandal at Somali-run daycare centers throughout the state. Immediately latching onto the unverified claims made by Shirley, Trump’s administration attempted to freeze millions of federal childcare funds to Minnesota and four other Democratic-led states—California, Colorado, New York, and Illinois—without any proper investigation.
While Trump’s administration refrained from trying to evoke the Insurrection Act, thus sending U.S. military troops to Minneapolis, ICE operations increased even further by the turn of the new year. By early January, the Department of Homeland Security promised to send an additional 2,000 federal agents and officers to Minneapolis in the “largest immigration operation ever” in response to the previously stated allegations of fraud within Somalian communities.
From the Boston Massacre to the Minneapolis Murders
While Minnesotans are not formally under military occupation, the overwhelming presence of federal agents is similar to the pre-Revolutionary British occupation of Boston. Likewise, in both colonial Boston and present-day Minneapolis, resistance to the intrusive presence of an occupying force has led to state-sanctioned violence against the city’s inhabitants.
While Pre-Revolutionary Bostonians may have generally felt disdain for broader British economic and taxation policies, it was the physical presence of British Regulars that caused daily disruption to life in Boston. Bostonians felt as if they were under constant surveillance by an occupying imperial force. They suffered from economic deprivation, the violation of their perceived constitutional rights as British subjects and social chaos.
Among other disruptions, British Regulars patrolled the streets at night, often enquiring about civilians’ identities and their purpose for being out freely after dark and conducted search and seizures operations well beyond their mandate—which was to search merchant vessels in the name of enforcing the Townsend duties. Troops violated the sanctity of private property; they broke into Bostonian homes, stole items and vandalized.
Over time, local civilians responded by bombarding British Regulars with numerous insults and taunted them as they patrolled the streets. Verbal altercations soon became physical; in the streets of Boston, brawls between civilians and British soldiers were common. Unsurprisingly, discontentment only grew louder when Christopher Seider, an 11-year-old boy, was killed amidst a protest in front of the home of a British loyalist in February of 1770.
And then on March 5, 1770, the Boston Massacre happened. In front of the Custom House on King Street, on a wintery Boston day, a rowdy crowd gathered to protest British policies and occupation. As the number of civilians grew on King Street, British soldiers were called over as reinforcement to protect the Custom House. After civilians began pelting the soldiers with snowballs, rocks and even heavier objects, the soldiers fired into the crowd. This seminal event in history textbooks resulted in the death of five working-class Bostonians.
Present-day Minnesotans can relate to their colonial progenitors.
Since Operation Metro Surge began, the list of disruptive incidents involving ICE is so numerous that the Wikipedia page tracking the operation has developed a comprehensive timeline of events that is far too great to recount here. Vice President J.D. Vance is correct when he said through X that “This level of engineered chaos is unique to Minneapolis,” he is just wrong about who manufactured it (it was not the “Radical Left”).
The manufactured chaos, however, should not be measured in numbers, but in fear. Minnesotans have anxiously perceived and expressed the loss of day-to-day safety for themselves, their neighbors and their communities. Schools have been forced to close, business has been disrupted and unnecessary encounters and altercations between ICE agents and civilians have occurred. As recently as January 27, ICE agents deployed tear gas outside a local preschool with kids inside. In Minnesota, fear rules; personal liberty and freedom feel dead.
As in colonial Boston, government surveillance has increased over time in response to occupation resistance. In any other situation outside of the United States, we would consider masked agents roaming the streets with little to no accountability to be domestic terrorism. Equipped with modernized forms of civilian surveillance, ICE has also (ironically) been using facial recognition technologies and social media monitoring to track protesting American citizens in addition to undocumented immigrants.
Even more evident, in terms of the parallels between colonial Boston and present-day Minnesota, is the result of unwanted occupation: violence against civilians. The death of Renée Good, a mother shot in the face after dropping her child off at school in early January, did not result in any change in the behavior of ICE agents.
Just as the death of 11-year-old Christopher Seider fanned the flames of protest in revolutionary Boston, so too did the death of Good. After the unnecessary murder of Good, Minnesotans, and indeed, Americans across the country, rose up in objection to the actions of ICE in Minneapolis.
And then came the murder of Alex Pretti, who was shot multiple times by federal agents in late January 2026. While Pretti was legally carrying a gun, video evidence indicates that this weapon had been removed before the VA nurse was executed on the street. The DHS report does not claim he brandished this gun before his death.
Colonial Media vs. Modern-day Social Media
The main difference between the aftermath of the Boston Massacre and the Minneapolis murders is the media. In pre-Revolutionary Boston, Paul Revere quickly shifted public opinion about the Boston Massacre throughout the thirteen mainland British colonies via propaganda; in newspapers, Revere disseminated an engraving based on an illustration of the event by Henry Pelham that fanned the flames of outrage against the British Empire. Pelham’s illustration depicts a line of British soldiers purposefully firing into an unarmed crowd in front of the State House, thus insinuating that the event was more of a pre-meditated attack rather than the chaotic scene as indicated by historical accounts.
In the modern age of social media, propaganda and disinformation, the Minneapolis murders have not produced the one-sided narrative of the Massacre. Trump’s administration has relied on the MAGA propaganda machine, led by Fox News, to advance narratives in defense of these heinous acts of violence. Despite video evidence to the contrary, the architects of Minnesota’s misery have defended the action of federal agents and refuse to take accountability for their conduct. Both Good and Pratti, for example, have been labeled as “domestic terrorists” by the likes of Stephen Miller and acting ICE director Todd Lyons.
Following the deaths of Good and Pratti, local protests and outcries against ICE have been met with scorn by an unsympathetic Trump administration. Trump (predictably) only cares about how it affects himself. When asked about it in a February NBC News interview, he said, “I hate even talking about ICE. Two people out of tens of thousands and you get bad publicity.” When asked about whether he wanted to apologize to the family of Alex Pratti, Vice President Vance replied, “For what?” The Trump administration, in defense of failing policies, has clearly chosen pride over morality and accountability.
A Nation That’s Red, White, and Blue
Although I do not seek or have the media clout to emulate Revere’s galvanization of inter-colony support for colonial Bostonians, I believe it is instructive to historically contextualize the present-day experiences of Minnesotans. While the Trump administration, just like the British imperial administration in colonial Boston, has attempted to physically and psychologically isolate Minneapolis, these efforts should not and have not worked.
Nonetheless, despite the end of Operation Metro Surge, the Trump administration is continuing its vindictive assault against everyday Minnesotans. During his State of the Union address, Trump appointed Vice President Vance as the “fraud czar” to lead the “war on fraud”; the very next day Vance announced that the federal government is temporarily halting a certain amount of Medicaid funding to the state of Minnesota in the name of rooting out fraud, a decision Minnesota is fighting in court. If the president is so concerned about rampant fraud in our country, why did he recently pardon convicted fraudsters? It is obvious that this administration is “taking the safety social net” in healthcare from thousands of Minnesotans because they stood up to the DHS occupation of their city.
Not only should we support our fellow Americans, but we should all expect and demand good governance at every level of government. Trump is supposed to be the president of all Americans, not just the ones who voted for him or who he likes. Division, isolation and hatred have fueled his entire political persona from the start. The occupation of the Twin Cities, the standoff between Minnesotans and ICE, and the deaths of Good and Pratti are the result.
If your community was occupied by an overreaching, institutionalized federal agency, how would you react?
This MFP Voices opinion essay reflects the personal opinion of its author(s). The column does not necessarily represent the views of the Mississippi Free Press, its staff or board members. To submit an opinion for the MFP Voices section, send up to 1,200 words and sources fact-checking the included information to voices@mississippifreepress.org. We welcome a wide variety of viewpoints.
