Skip to main content

On Monday, Cliven Bundy had a lot of support from conservatives; they considered him both a hero and a patriot.  By Thursday he was pretty isolated.  The question is why?  It wasn't just because the guy turned out to be a racist.  Perhaps it began dawning on his former allies that Sedition Is Not a Fashion Statement.

Prior to this week, the only folks named Bundy I was familiar with were the brothers McGeorge (1919-1996) and William (1917-2000), lions of the post-war American foreign policy establishment and charter members of our version of the Alamache de Gotha; serial killer Ted (1946-1989); and the fictional Al, women's shoe salesman, husband of Peg and father of Kelly and Bud. This week I, like everyone else on the planet, have become familiarized with a fifth Bundy: the 67-year old Nevada racist rancher-cum-sovereign citizen-cum-multi decade tax-scofflaw Cliven. This Bundy has achieved his 15 minutes of fame by refusing to pay more than two decades worth of back taxes he owes the federal government for grazing his cattle on federally-owned land. (Note: In 1978, Congress set as the minimum fee for grazing cattle on Bureau of Land Management -- BLM -- lands $1.35 per "animal unit month." An animal unit is the equivalent of a 1,000-pound cow, based on an average consumption of 26 pounds of dry forage per day.) Bundy's reason for not paying more than $1 million in grazing fees at $1.35 per cow? "I believe this is a sovereign state of Nevada. And I abide by all Nevada state laws. But I don't recognize the United States government as even existing."  

(BTW: Am I the only one who finds it a hoot that Mr. Bundy's spread is on the outskirts of "Bunkerville," Nevada?  Wonder if its eponym was Archie?)

Two courts ruled in favor of the federal Bureau of Land Management and against Cliven Bundy; he was ordered to pay his arrearage or suffer seizure of his cattle. This is precisely what the feds did.  This past April 5, agents of the BLM brought in armed federal agents and began removing Bundy's cattle. Bundy's son Dave was arrested for refusing to leave. That night, Bundy sent a message: "They have my cattle and now they have one of my boys. Range War begins tomorrow."  Then the media circus began in earnest.  Bundy supporters picked up their shotguns, loaded up their pickups and made their way to Bunkerville, ready to shoot it out with federal agents if necessary -- all in the name of freedom and liberty.  One of Bundy's supporters, former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack told reporters, "We're actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front. If they are going to start shooting, it's going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers."

At this point, Bundy's supporters began to include the likes of Sean Hannity (who called him " . . . a friend and frequent guest of the show"), U.S. Senator Dean Heller (who called him "a patriot"), and Texas Governor Rick Perry ("I have a problem with the federal government putting citizens in the position of having to feel like they have to use force to deal with their own government").  On April 12, the government announced that it would return the seized cattle because of its "grave concern about the safety of employees and members of the public."  The right cheered the victory.  

Then Cliven Bundy began getting a few other things off his chest . . . like his views on African Americans:

"I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro," he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, "and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids - and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch - they didn't have nothing to do. They didn't have nothing for their kids to do. They didn't have nothing for their young girls to do. "And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?" he asked. "They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And 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."

Following Bundy's racist rant, many of his conservative fans began abandoning ship.  For it turns out, Bundy is not, as many of his allies and supporters claimed, a "true patriotic conservative." It turns out that his words and actions are those of a "sovereign citizen," a member of a group the FBI characterizes as "A growing domestic threat to law enforcement."  People like Cliven Bundy believe that the only legitimate source of authority in America is the local sheriff, and as such, are not required to obey any laws or directives (or pay any taxes) emanating from any other entity. When one researches the "sovereign citizen" movement in America, one discovers, just beneath the surface, racism, anti-Semitism, Christian Identity, violence and a go-it-alone mentality reminiscent of both the Whiskey Rebellion (in which George Washington had to send armed militia to Western Pennsylvania to put down a rebellion) and the posse comitatus, whose roots go back to the late 1870s.  

In short, Cliven Bundy and his ilk are part and parcel of America's domestic terrorist class.  Those who lend even verbal support to them -- as many conservatives did up until recently -- brings to mind William Jennings Bryan's quip about folks who are like the Platte River: "Six miles wide at the mouth and six inches deep."  

The question is, why would anyone with half a brain lend even an ounce of verbal support to people who are terrorists, anti-Semites and seditionists?  Possibly because in modern western society, style often masks substance.

A couple of examples from my old neighborhood:
•Back in the mid-1930s, a group of leading Hollywood stars including Gary Cooper, Victor McLaglen and George Brent sponsored such paramilitary groups as the "Light Horse Calvary," the "Hollywood Hussars," and the "California Esquadrille," all of which professed the intent to "save America" and "uphold and protect the principles and ideals of true Americanism."  (To their way of thinking, the enemy they were seeking to "save America" from were the liberals and socialists, not the Nazis.)  Toward that end, they drilled in their spare time (mostly in Griffith Park), wearing fancy uniforms, riding horses and receiving instruction in military tactics from retired army officers.  But when it came time to actually go to war, few if any of these paramilitary heroes enlisted.  They talked the talk, but didn't have the stones to walk the walk.
•In the early- and mid-1960s, there were three easily recognized social castes at school.  One was either a "greaser," a "surfer" or a "soc" (pronounced 'sosh," and short for "social").  "Greasers" had oily, greaser hair and wore oily Levis, motorcycle boots and "Sir Guy" shirts.  "Surfers" had bleached-blond hair and wore light beige levis, madras shirts and huarachi sandals.  "Socs" wore perfectly pressed khaki trousers, blue oxford cloth button down shirts, and maroon Sperry Topsiders without socks. In cool weather, greasers wore black leather motorcycle jackets, surfers grey hooded sweatshirts and socs blue Brooks Brothers blazers.  And yet, if anyone challenged a greaser to join in a rumble behind the polo field, a surfer to shoot the curl at Rincon, or a soc to ask a Doheny or a Chandler out on a date, we would crumble, for in the end, we were all just privileged upper-middle class Jewish kids playing at being greasers, surfers or eastern preppies.  For us, being a greaser, a surfer or a soc was a fashion statement devoid of substance.  

•Today, lots of otherwise middle-class kids and adults have adopted the dress, the walk and the patois of the ghetto.  I can't begin tell you how many times I have heard people address one another as "dude," "dog," or "homey," or referred to their "posse in the hood." If they're my students, I feel compelled to inform them that living in "the hood" -- for those who do -- is not a fashion statement; it is a grueling impoverished and often highly dangerous reality that would scare the daylights out of them.

 In similar fashion, I have to believe, that those who were giving their verbal "attaboys" to Cliven Bundy and his posse; who thought they had found a patriotic political soul mate in this gun-toting, coyboy-hatted freeloader, crumbled when they began to learn what thought process was actually roiling  just beneath their hero's ten-gallon Stetson.  Sovereign citizenship is not a fashion statement any more than Cliven Bundy is the sort of fellow you'd want to invite to your next political fundraiser.  Bundy and his ilk are dangerous seditionists for whom the government of the United States is an evil enemy that must be overthrown  and whose citizens -- with the exception of certain white Christians -- are spawns of Satan.

From where I sit, there's nothing fashionable  about that . . .

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  virginislandsguy nailed it with: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mostserene1, jan4insight, alx9090, wasatch

    Cosplay Cowboys.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Sun Apr 27, 2014 at 11:50:58 AM PDT

    •  True enough (0+ / 0-)

      What is needed today is a object lesson in what is and what is not protected free speech.
      Sedition is not, it is a serious felony only exceeded by treason.

      Bundy did commit sedition. I saw no evidence he proceeded further than that, but merely became an accomplice to treason.
      Those "militias" did initially commit sedition, for the words to espouse the engagement of federal officers or removal of the government by force of arms is sedition. The action of threatening, or of engaging agents of the federal government or even state government with the goal of enforcing one's will against that government to remove said government from its lawful power and authority is in simple fact treason.
      Indeed, those "militias" were guilty of sedition when they called one another to "mobilize" against the government. They entered into insurrection when they unlawfully assembled while armed. They committed treason when they threatened their governments agents.

      Now, all that remains is to either accept that sedition and treason are now lawful, insurrection is acceptable and ignore future deaths or the mass arrest of every "militia" member

      I use quotations for those "militias", for a true militia is under the command of their county seat, their governor or in time of national emergency, under the command of both Congress and the POTUS. They are never self-commanded, self-mobilized or initiating action on their own. That is per common law, codified law and the traditions of the militias going all the way back to colonial times.
      The real militias know that, the rest of the militia, the largest group never really know that they are militia.
      For, the militia act of 1903 makes every military aged male a member of the unorganized militia, as well as prior service members to age 61. Said militia is mobilized by the selective service system and by recall of prior service members.
      The organized militia being the National Guard.
      One can have a lawful militia. There actually are a few, who work with their government to be ready in time of emergency and typically are called in during emergencies in an unarmed capacity.
      Others maintain traditional units, units founded during the French and Indian war. They're not known to draw up arms, save for reenactments of various battles. Those are not known to suggest removal of our government.

      But then, we're reaping the crops sowed when the tea party threatened the nation with "second amendment remedies" if they lost an election. I'll never forgive them that, as I had men who were very worried about redeploying home to find their homes in flames. The ones that enraged me were men who were going out on patrol.
      They had enough to worry about than to worry about their homes and families!
      Those who threatened "second amendment remedies" should have been immediately arrested for sedition.

      •  So how do you enforce that law (0+ / 0-)

        without a bloodbath?
        Those loons were pumped up and ready for another Waco or Ruby Ridge. They were, like all jihadists, ready to be martyrs (or at least that's the spew coming out of their mouths).
        While I agree that what they did was illegal and should not be allowed to stand, I also don't see a good outcome in meeting their force with force.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Sun Apr 27, 2014 at 03:19:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  None of that first amendment analysis (0+ / 0-)

        is correct.  

  •  Seems like most of the House..... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, Paragryne, AnnieR

    would be guilty of sedition for attempting to bring down the economy during the debt crisis.  

    Not sure why more right wingers are arrested under the charge of sedition, especially those that openly propose overthrowing or undermining the government.  And Issa can be charged with conspiracy.

    Okay, probably never happen, but it is a dream I have.

    Hillary 2016.

    •  Because (0+ / 0-)

      18 USC 2384 is hard to prove, as it should be, and right-wingers are far more likely to violently resist such scrutiny.  

    •  No, sedition wouldn't be what the house did (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Well, certain members of it.

      Treason, yes. For they did intentionally inflict harm upon their government for purely extortive purposes.
      So, 300 million counts of extortion and one count of treason for each.  ;)

      •  I can live with that..... (0+ / 0-)

        bookem' Dano!  I would love to see the entire Tea Party under arrest.  I'm tidy with the thought.

        Hillary 2016.  

        PS:  I just watched most of a C-Span book segment where the author of a Right Wing strategy book (forgot his name but he is with the Heritage Foundation) claimed the real enemy of conservatives is NOT Obama and Pelosi, but rather the Establishment Republicans.

        He claimed "the people' did not want another big government Repub, but rather were itching for a Tea Party leader.  You go girl!  Tear your party apart!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site