The ringing in of the new year brings with it several cherished traditions: the outbreak of mirth, merry, renewed commitments to being a better human being, the joyful return of children and young adults to school… the takeover of a federal wildlife refuge by an armed militia in Oregon? Gadzooks!
For those of you who spent the beginning of the new year the way decent human beings are supposed to — hungover, with the company of good friends and family serving as the only thing keeping the pain at bay — there is a strong possibility you missed the first reports concerning the Bundy family’s latest antics. Whether this is because buzzwords like “terrorist” or “siege” were passed over in news reports in favor of “armed protestors” and “occupation” remains up for debate.
However, now that the “occupation,” “siege” or what have you of the national wildlife reserve is in its fifth day, this latest incident in the ongoing saga of the Bundy family’s idiocy has expectedly revealed itself to be a quintessentially American story. Although it is a near certainty the Citizens of Constitutional Freedom (yes, they call themselves that with straight faces) only meant to have their fun playing the most riveting round of cowboys and Indians the U.S. has ever seen, their misguided notion of playtime has managed to touch upon several hot-button issues. Truly, this one has it all: From the debates over appropriate policing tactics to gun control, this story leaves no controversial stone unturned.
The most interesting aspect of the whole affair has proven to be the “militia” one. Until now, the myriad right-wing paramilitary operations that pervade the U.S. have remained largely out of sight from public eyes. But, as the past few days have reinforced, real they are, and so is the threat they pose to democracy and civility. Despite this, the treatment of this crew has amounted to little more than eye rolls and cute Twitter hashtags like #yallqaeda.
Don’t get us wrong, it is fine and healthy to mock those who pose threats; there’s a reason Charlie Hebdo remains in publication a year onward from the assault on their offices. With that said, the lack of uproar inspired by armed gunmen holding a piece of federal land hostage is especially noticeable when compared to, oh, let’s just say reactions to Black Lives Matter protests.
As several think pieces have echoed, the treatment of these gunmen by the media, the larger social sphere and law enforcement would be vastly different were they individuals of color. Yes, these men are 30 miles away from the nearest town and have not taken any hostages. Still, it’s a hell of a large statement to take over government-controlled land with guns and publicly announce you’re prepared to take lives. Given the relative severity of the situation, why has America at large been content to roll our eyes and laugh off the silly rednecks?
Is it because they look like “us”? Is it because we have managed to severely underestimate the threat of violence by anti-government folk? Or is it because we’re afraid to acknowledge that much of American violence — or at least the implication of it — comes not from urban streets and ghettos, or even from abroad, but from our own heartland? If nothing else, it’s something worth pondering.
