Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently asserted that the American Revolution was directed against the 'billionaires' of the era, sparking a debate over the historical accuracy of her claims and their political implications.

眾議員 Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 最近聲稱美國革命是針對當時的「億萬富翁」，引發了關於其說法是否符合歷史事實及其政治影響的爭論。

During a discussion at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, Representative Ocasio-Cortez characterized the American Revolution as a movement against the 'billionaires of their time' and an 'extreme marriage of wealth and power and the state.' This interpretation posits that the nation's heritage is rooted in an anti-capitalist sentiment. However, critics argue that this narrative is inconsistent with the economic philosophies of the Founding Fathers. It is noted that the founders were influenced by Adam Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations' and John Locke's theories on the natural right to property, as evidenced by the inclusion of property protections in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and the writings of James Madison.

在芝加哥大學政治學院的一次討論中，Ocasio-Cortez 眾議員將美國革命描述為一場反對「當時億萬富翁」以及「財富、權力與國家極端結合」的運動。這種詮釋認為國家的傳承根植於反資本主義情緒。然而，批評者認為這種敘事與開國元勳的經濟哲學不一致。據指出，開國元勳深受 Adam Smith 的《國富論》與 John Locke 關於財產自然權的理論影響，第五與第十四修正案對財產權的保護以及 James Madison 的著作便證明了這一點。

Stakeholders from the opposing political spectrum, including Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, contend that the Revolution was primarily a response to oppressive government authority and taxation without representation, rather than a movement against private wealth. They highlight that several signers of the Declaration of Independence possessed wealth equivalent to modern billionaires, citing Robert Morris Jr. as a primary example. Furthermore, some analysts suggest that the promotion of these historical revisions serves a strategic purpose: the facilitation of 'economic factionalism' to justify the implementation of wealth taxes at both the state and federal levels. The discourse suggests a tension between the 'liberty-enhancing economy' envisioned by the founders and the collectivist objectives currently advocated by the progressive left.

來自對立政治光譜的人士，包括參議員 Mike Lee 與 Ted Cruz 主張，美國革命主要是對壓迫性政府權威與「無代表不納稅」的回應，而非一場反對私人財富的運動。他們強調，《獨立宣言》的數位簽署人擁有相當於現代億萬富翁的財富，並以 Robert Morris Jr. 作為主要例子。此外，部分分析師認為推動這些歷史修正具有策略目的：即透過促進「經濟派系主義」，為州政府與聯邦政府實施財富稅提供正當理由。此論述顯示出開國元勳所構思的「提升自由的經濟」與目前進步左派所主張的集體主義目標之間存在緊張關係。

The current situation involves a fundamental disagreement over the historical intent of the American founders, with Representative Ocasio-Cortez advocating for a revisionist view to support contemporary socialist policies while critics maintain that the republic was founded on the principles of free-market capitalism.

目前的狀況涉及對美國開國元勳歷史意圖的根本分歧：Ocasio-Cortez 眾議員主張採取修正主義觀點以支持當代社會主義政策，而批評者則堅持共和國是建立在自由市場資本主義原則之上。