Monday, April 14, 2014

The Second American Civil War

It almost happened.

We were one trigger happy finger away from a long and bloody conflict.

And for what? Tortoises? (Or solar farm depending on who you listen to) Individual Rights? States' Rights? Federal Rights?

I'm being deadly serious here, I honestly wish I could have written this as a joke but this is a very scary and sad reality that we live in today in the United States of America.

Earlier this month a long standing dispute between the United States government and one Cliven Bundy came to a head in Nevada. Bundy has refused to pay a cattle grazing fee that the federal government implemented in 1993 to protect the endangered desert tortoise. That's 21 years of fees adding up to around $1.1 million for Bundy. Bundy's refusal to pay these fees mirrors the thoughts of many longtime ranch families and thousands of other Americans; his family has been using this land for over 140 years and he believes he has an inherent right to graze this land that, he claims, is Nevada's land and therefore not an issue for the federal government.

This refusal to comply has led the Bureau of Land Management to begin conducting roundups of Bundy's cattle. As of Monday April 7, the feds' contractors had rounded up nearly 250 of the 908 heads of cattle Bundy owns. You read that right, the feds sent in contractors to do this roundup. The total cost for this roundup comes out to around three million dollars, almost three times as much as the total Bundy owes. (Who ever said the federal government doesn't know how to be fiscally responsible?)
The kicker? The feds were attempting to force this into a federal issue by driving the cattle over the stateline to Utah (thus making it an interstate affair) for auction.

In order to stop Bundy and company from retrieving the cattle, the BLM and FBI sent in agents armed with militaristic weapons and equipment. This armory included everything from automatic weapons and sniper rifles to top communication and surveillance equipment along with multiple vehicles.

And this isn't a small batch of agents sent to oversee this roundup. According to Bundy's wife, Carol Bundy, "We're surrounded. We're estimating that there are over 200 armed BLM, FBI. We've got surveillance cameras at our house, they're probably listening to me talk to you right now."

That's when shit hit the fan for the rest of the nation and lines were drawn. Over the past week and a half, protesters have gathered in many different areas of the public land in an attempt to force the feds out. This two-sided affair has sparked multiple notable events.


The most ludicrous of all of these is, sadly, something that is not new to America: a First Amendment Area.
At first, if you are like me and many Americans you scoff at the ludicrousness of such a concept. We have a "First Amendment Area" that stretches over 50 states and almost 6 million square miles of this great country. However, this is actually a quite common segment of many national parks. The idea behind them is to keep the protests and protesters out of the way of other guests/ workers.
Of course, this reasoning didn't stand long with the protesters gathered at the site and was quickly torn down by BLM.

Among the many protesters gathered, groups of armed individuals surrounded the Bundy family and threatened to respond in kind to any force used by the government on Bundy, protesters or the cattle. This quickly resulted in a standoff between independent militia members/ gun-toting ranchers and the agents of BLM/FBI.

Both sides had the means, both had their reasons.

It looked eerily similar to the Waco standoff in Texas in 1993.

But neither side fired.

The BLM withdrew and the local county sheriff negotiated the terms of the fed's surrender with Bundy. The BLM's forces, including snipers spotted throughout the area, were pulled out and, as of now, the fed's have backed off of the Bundy's ranch.

However, there are still many questions to be answered:

  • Was Bundy right? Does Nevada have claim to that land over the federal government?
  • How long until the feds come back? How will the American people respond next?
  • Is our freedom being threatened for the sake of political gain? (siting theories about Harry Reid's possible involvement)
  • Are we about to reach the edge of the cliff that will send this nation tumbling into a second civil war?
For now, we can all be comforted by the fact that neither side took to the use of firearms to prove their point and that we have not reached that precipice as of yet. It's also extremely comforting to know that the second amendment, one that has been argued for years, is alive and well and does in fact protect our other rights much better than knives, hands, or paper ever could. 

But it's not comforting knowing only days ago we were looking at a full on battle for our freedoms in Nevada.

2 comments:

  1. Once again a well written argument Nate. A few observations from my side:
    1. Technically you should have gone for Third civil war as your title since the American Revolution technically can be considered a civil war too.
    2. Although this is obviously a serious case, it is also a very extreme one. Do you really believe that even if this case were to escalate, you'd end up in a civil war? To me that personally seems a bridge too far.

    That being said, I definitely do agree that this case, once again sparks a discussion on state vs. feds and, in my opinion, the need to bring more clarity as to which responsibilities and rights are whom to exercise.

    Cheers
    Thomas

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you Thomas.
    In regards to your points:
    1. An argument can be made that the American Revolution was a civil war, but, considering the colonies had declared independence, it has always seemed to me to be a country v country war. Of course that might only be because we won ;)
    2. I honestly believe that the American people have become extremely polarized with a smaller than normal group sitting on the fence. I agree this is both a serious and an extreme and even an, arguably, isolated incident. However, due to this polarization of the American people I do believe that had shots been fired this episode could have sparked wider conflict. Of course, how far it went would depend on many different things (who fired first, do we have leaders to look to on both sides, how willing are people to fight, etc).

    I firmly agree that this is another case that brings to light the potential danger that the fed-state gray area has. Of course, personally, I stand with the state's rights side of things, but that's no surprise.

    Thanks again and God bless
    Nate

    ReplyDelete