Hatred can actually be a pleasant feeling. Otherwise, people would not hate so much. But like an addictive drug, if consumed with uninhibited enthusiasm hatred eats up those who partake of it.

Just the same, propagandists find hatred useful. Hence, headlines such as these should not have surprised us.

Will the almighty state allow a mere rancher backed by his neighbors and sympathizers to defy it? Not likely. So Bundy must be separated from any support. He must become an object of hatred.

Is Cliven Bundy a racist? That’s doubtful. It’s likely he is an inexperience public speaker, and he did say something the Socialist Democrat news media thought extremely disagreeable.

In fact, what’s ironic is that even the excerpt (who knows what’s missing?) posted by the Washington Post makes it clear Bundy doesn’t hate blacks and Mexicans.  Instead, his question is pertinent.

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” Bundy said, according to the video. “I’ve often wondered: Are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom. (emphasis added)” (from here)

As wards of a welfare state, are blacks better off? Is dependency upon manipulative politicians equal to freedom? Is a culture that encourages abortion and fatherless children (and crime — the statistics are quite clear on this) what Martin Luther King fought for during the heyday of the Civil Rights Movement? If Bundy, out in wilds of Nevada, thinks he is suffering from too much government, is it racist for him to ask whether urban blacks might be suffering more?

Times change, but men remain the same. Apparently, the Socialist Democrat news media thinks Bundy is a racist, and they are determined to cow any Republican who supports him. So with feral vigor they spout that hate word, “racist”. Once men cowed their political opponents by calling them Jew or nigger lovers. Now the same sort of man calls his opponents racists and religious bigots, but isn’t what defines a real bigot someone who just wants a handy excuse to hate and bully people?

Instead of being cowed into submission with a word, perhaps we should remember that all men have rights, even so-called racists. Just because hate-mongers want us to join in their hatred does not mean Bundy’s ranch should not have grazing rights on government land. Even if Bundy is a racist, that does not give the government the right to abuse him.

We don’t have to agree with Bundy, but we do have an obligation to protect his right to speak.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. — Evelyn Beatrice Hall  (from her book, The Friends of Voltaire (1906))

Otherwise, we risk losing our own right to speak our minds.



  1. scout

    The fact that Bundy said these things indicates that his right to say them wasn’t in issue. The commentary I have seen is not that he couldn’t speak his mind, but more on the condition of his mind as revealed by what he spoke. Apparently a lot of folks don’t agree with him. That seems pretty normal and unremarkable, isn’t it? And isn’t it more than the “Socialist Democrat news media that found Bundy’s remarks “disagreeable”? I suspect that there’s a very broad swath of public opinion, not particularly locked into any given position on the American political spectrum, that has never wondered for a moment whether the African American community is better off now than it would have been if it were still enslaved, picking cotton etc as per Mr. Bundy’s vision of plantation life in the ante-Bellum South.


    1. Actually, you are playing the same game as our propagandizing news media.

      Supposedly, Bundy said something racist. So the news media posts some excerpts and says “see, that’s racist,” However, if we actually take the time to think about what Bundy said, we cannot find anything hateful. Awkwardly worded? Perhaps, but not hateful.

      What do we find? We find those with no forgiveness in their hearts. We find people who quite enthusiastically want Bundy tarred and feathered. These don’t want to talk about the merits of Bundy’s case with the BLM. Instead, they want to create a caricature of the man they can assail and savage to their heart’s content.


      1. scout

        It matters less whether Bundy said something motivated by racism than that he said something palpably stupid. While he may wonder whether “the Negro” is better off now than he would have been if he were enslaved working in the cotton fields and having the benefits of enslaved “family life”, I very much doubt many Americans, black, white, or purple, have been furrowing their brows wondering the same thing. It was an idiotic statement that, at best, revealed not the slightest understanding of the history of the slave culture that besmirched the Republic in its first years – what someone (I wish I could get the attribution right but it escapes me at the moment) correctly called “America’s birth defect”.


        1. For the sake of argument, let’s say you are right. Bundy did not say anything hateful, just dumb and ignorant.

          Did Bundy say slavery was a good thing? No. He just doubted the welfare state had helped to improve the condition of blacks. He also call blacks Negros. That’s not PC, but I have no idea what is wrong with that word. So I guess I am ignorant too.

          So what happened? Because he said something stupid, the national news media called an ordinary citizen a racist. Why isn’t that more stupid and hateful than what Bundy said?



  3. I heard his entire comments. His statement may be misunderstood because he may have been comparing family life of a negro family on welfare with nothing to do compared to illegal Mexican families he worked with that are not on welfare and work hard on farms to support their families.

    The commentator on the radio program was accusing MSN news for distorting his message which was about how negative effects of government subsidies stymie work incentives and family values.in the USA.

    Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Inciting hatred can result in more votes. .

    Regards and good will blogging.


      1. My pleasure to comment on your insightful posts.

        The cattle man would have been wiser if had sold a few head of cattle to pay some professional PR editors that are more savvy how words can be manipulated by news sources when he became a national news figure.

        Regards and good will blogging..


        1. The cattle man would have been wiser if had sold a few head of cattle to pay some professional PR editors that are more savvy how words can be manipulated by news sources when he became a national news figure.

          Sad, but true.


  4. Pingback: BPI reblog Daily Archives: April 26, 2014 | Boudica BPI Weblog

Comments are closed.