Thursday, April 24, 2014

HERE WE GO Cliven Bundy: “I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro."

The New York Times, the paper that prints any distortions that the politically correct will lap up (SEE: Distorting A Champion of Liberty: The Walter Block Controversy), is at it again.

WaPo, as NYT's bitch, has the story:
Cliven Bundy, the Nevada rancher whom some Republicans and tea party activists have rallied around as he fights federal government efforts to restrict the land his cattle can graze on, suggests in a New York Times story that African Americans might be better off as slaves, given their current situation.
In the course of his remarks, Bundy also uses the word "Negro" to refer to 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.”

It should be noted that Bundy is not here calling for blacks to be coerced into slavery. He is simply making the observation that, given distortions caused by government programs, the lives of many modern day blacks may not be as good as it was for blacks when they were slaves. I repeat, he is not suggesting that blacks be put back into slavery. Indeed, his comments could be read to mean that blacks need to be freed from current government regulations that result in them not getting first jobs because of higher minimum wage laws, freed from compulsory schooling at the hands of government "educators" and that government programs, that support (and thus encourage) unwed mothers,should be stopped.

But let's suppose Bundy is in favor of returning blacks to slavery. What does this have to do with the government confiscating his cattle? While the libwaps would likely get their panties in a bunch over this, if they actually wore any, as long as Bundy is not actually coercing blacks, from a PL perspective, he should be free to say anything he damn well pleases. To conflate Bundy's  views on blacks and the recent attempt by the BLM to confiscate Bundy's cattle and prevent him from using "public" land for grazing is simply a propaganda tactic being used by NYT to help support the government when it is desperate for any kind of PR spin that takes the public's eyes off of the only real coercion in this case and that is the coercion by the BLM. The NYT piece is designed to turn the general public against Bundy. But, know this, what is a propaganda tactic for NYT should be turned into a teaching moment by PLs to explain pure libertarianism.


  1. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) apologized today for referring to President Barack Obama as "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect" in private conversations during the 2008 presidential campaign.
    "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words," said Reid in a statement. "I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African Americans for my improper comments."
    The term Negro is old-skool respect.
    There is nothing Racist about it.
    .Only politically-correct pansy boys like Rand Paul claim otherwise.(as per Rands recent press release concerning Mr. Bundy.)

    1. You're correct. Martin Luther King referred to the black man as Negro. Whether he would do so today we'll never know, of course, but I doubt that he would consider it racist. "Negro spiritual" is still used by at least one African-American scholar in her research of the religious/freedom music of slavery to refer to songs created and sung by slaves.

  2. Jeff Tucker and the "humanitarian" libertarians will go into a conniption fit over this. Break out the popcorn

  3. Browsing the comments section over at the Washington Compost and New York Slimes, I noticed a theme emerging: that Bundy is a hypocrite for opposing welfare to blacks. By not paying "his fair share" he is effectively on welfare, as well! For instance:

    "Bundy is a 'welfare queen,' a crook willing to cheat the system and the taxpayers for his own gain." --Comment by AM on NYT

    "So this guy is against welfare, but he grazes his cattle on federal lands for free? What a nut! Put him in jail and take those guns away. I have no tolerance for anything that self-absorbed creep stands for."--CK on NYT

    "Let me see if I have this right... Bundy thinks he somehow doesn't have to pay the government for his cattle grazing on federal land, yet he piles on black people living in subsidized housing.

    The hypocrisy of Bundy and those who support him would be humorous if it wasn't so pathetic."--DaveB1971 on WaPo

    It is the tragedy of the commons in full effect...

    Proper "land management" is, of course, a system of private property rights with no government intervention. There is no reason taxpayers should be mulcted to fund the BLM's (mis)management of federal lands and subsidies to ranchers, as there is no reason for mulcting to provide "social welfare" and subsidies to the impoverished. As Wenzel points out, these are all "distortions caused by government programs". The result is a battle over who is the proper group to be feeding at the public trough, with politicians selling rights to feed to the highest bidder.

  4. So by the New York Times' implied logic, can we expect an editorial calling for a murderous SWAT assault on the offices of the United Negro College Fund?

  5. So, basically, he's saying the same thing as Thomas Sowell in a recently posted article.

    1. It sounds to me like Bundy is his own worst enemy in this speech. At the same time he didn't want to be on the world stage. He just wanted to run a cattle operation. Everyone is better off without slavery. Still to this day people sign up for debt slavery.

    2. Debt slavery? You can default on any loan very easily. Just stop paying it. The person you CHOSE to borrow money from can file a civil suit and hire a collections agent to collect it. The whole time you are given due process. It has nothing to do with slavery.

    3. Wolfie: Aspie Troll

  6. Read the attached article. The least of our worries is some harmless "unPC" farmer grazing his cattle out the the Nevada scrubland. Whereas Bundy talks, these people act.

  7. Bundy was merely parroting a common and very stupid right wing talking point.

    1. And you just parroted a common left wing one. So what?

    2. Maybe he heard Harry Reid say it.

    3. JW: racist troll. All American leftists are racists because they consider negroes to be inferior race uncapable of unassisted living in modern society.

  8. He clearly doesn't believe blacks should be slaves ("often wondered"), but he's making the point that the black family is completely broken these days (mostly because of the "war on poverty"), and the family was actually more in-tact under slavery. It's a legitimate point to make.

    Marriage rates among blacks were actually higher than whites in the first half of the 20th century. Now they're below 30% and 75% of black babies are born out of wedlock.

    It’s no accident that in 1960, according to the Pew Research Center, five years before President Lyndon Johnson signed into law his War on Poverty, 61% of black adults were married. By 2008, this was down to 32%. In 1960, 2% of black children had a parent that had never been married. By 2008, this was up to 41%.

    The results speak for themselves:

    • 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes
    • 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
    • 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes
    • 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes
    • 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes
    • 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes
    • 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes.

    The war on poverty, the drug war, the racist ( minimum wage and other legislative barriers that destroy the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, etc have destroyed the black family. Are they better off today? As terrible as slavery is, it just speaks to the fact of how bad things are right now for the black community. Mostly thanks to the government, again.