The Founding Fathers were patriots, because America is now the dominant world superpower. But there are a number of groups that attempted to do to America exactly what America did to the British. Daniel Shay, Tecumseh, Sitting Bull, the entire Confederacy, the Anarchist movement of the early 1900s, the Business Plot of 1933, McCarthy, Vietnamese nationalism, Osama bin Laden. How does history remember them now?
If the British Empire had the technology and infrastructure of today's intelligence agencies, the founding fathers would have been arrested as terrorists before they could get 10 people in a room together. There would have been some undercover agent of the Crown showing up to meetings trying to convince George Washington that they needed to go kill the king - and history would remember them all as nothing more than evil terrorists justly apprehended for plotting violence against the state.
> Entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent or agent of the state induces a person to commit a "crime" that the person would have otherwise been unlikely or unwilling to commit
> Depending on the law in the jurisdiction, the prosecution may be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped or the defendant may be required to prove that they were entrapped as an affirmative defense.
You've picked a set of figures whose historical legacy spans a very wide spectrum. At one end (largely positive) are Tecumseh and Sitting Bull, and at the other are (largely negative) are Osama and the Confederacy. Shays sits somewhere in the middle, mostly because other than history buffs no one even knows who that is.
Tecumseh and Sitting Bull have positive legacies because Native Americans are not realistic threats to the United States at this point. They weren't always viewed as such: see for example the (fraudulent) Speech at Tuckabatchee, which indicates how people might've viewed Tecumseh in 1860:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tecumseh#Speech_at_Tuckaubatch...
Take the American Civil War, for example. If you (still) believe in the cause, it was a true positive. If you don't, then it was a false positive.
Or, to be less inflammatory, consider the French Revolution. Was that a true positive or false positive, especially considering the aftermath?
You will find absolutely nothing in "equality before the law" which falls victim to the paradox.
Perhaps not historically significant, yet, but clear as night and day when you have lived here over the course of that time.
What has happened in Sweden during this time? It was until very recently almost impossible to have any public, critical opinion about migration without risking being labeled racist. Why? Not sure. But seems to me, a reaction due to fear that Sweden could evolve to something like Nazi Germany. Which of course was not going to happen.