President Barack Obama–or at least Neil Kornze, the director of the Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM)–has some serious lessons to learn about the uses of power.
For more than 20 years, Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher, has refused to pay fees for grazing cattle on public lands, some 80 miles north of Las Vegas.
BLM says Bundy now owes close to $1 million. He says his family has used the land since the 1870s and doesn’t recognize the federal government’s jurisdiction.
In 2013, a federal judge ordered Bundy to remove his livestock. He ignored the order, and in early April, 2014, BLM agents rounded up more than 400 of his cattle.
Over the weekend of April 12-13, armed militia members and states’ right protesters showed up to challenge the move.

Bureau of Land Management logo
Rather than risk violence, the BLM did an about-face and released the cattle.
Right-wing bloggers and commentators have portrayed the incident as a victory over Federal tyranny.
According to Alex Jones’ Infowars.com: “Historic! Feds Forced to Surrender to American Citizens.”
Right-wingers have depicted Bundy as a put-upon Everyman being “squeeaed” by the dictatorial Federal government.
They have deliberately ignored a number of inconvenient truths–such as:
- He claims that his grazing rights were established in 1880 when his ancestors settled the land where his ranch sits.
- But the Nevada constitution–adopted in 1864 as a condition of statehood–contradicts Bundy’s right to operate as a law unto himself.
- The constitution says: “The people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.”
- In 1934, the Taylor Grazing Act gave existing ranchers permits allowing them to run their herds on federal land.
- In turn, ranchers paid user fees, which were lower than what most private landowners would have charged.
- In 1993, the Federal government launched an effort to protect the endangered desert tortoise.
- Certain grasslands were placed off-limits for grazing, and the government bought out the permits of some ranchers.
- Among others, Bundy refused to sell and kept grazing his cattle on restricted federal land without a permit.
- Amidst mounting fees and fines, Bundy repeatedly slugged it out in court against government lawyers. He lost.
- In 1998, a federal judge permanently barred him from letting his cattle graze on protected federal land.
- In early April, 2014, BLM agents–charged with overseeing grazing rights–began rounding up Bundy’s cattle to remove them from federal property.
Bundy’s family and other ranchers–backed up by a motley assortment of self-declared militiamen armed with rifles and pistols–confronted the agents.
Fearing another Waco–regarded by Right-wing Americans as a second Alamo–the BLM agents backed down and released Bundy’s cattle. And then retreated.
While Right-wingers hail this as a victory for “states’ rights,” the truth is considerably different.
Bundy’s refusal to recognize the federal government’s jurisdiction amounts to: “I will recognize–and obey–only those laws that I happen to agree with.”
And the BLM’s performance offers a texbook lesson on how not to promote respect for the law–or for those who enforce it.
As Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of modern political science warned more than 500 years ago in The Prince:
[A ruler] is rendered despicable by being thought changeable, frivolous, effeminate, timid and irresolute—which [he] must guard against as a rock of danger….
[He] must contrive that his actions show grandeur, spirit, gravity and fortitude.
As to the government of his subjects, let his sentence be irrevocable, and let him adhere to his decisions so that no one may think of deceiving or cozening him.
Niccolo Machiavelli
In his master-work, The Discouorses, he outlines the consequences of allowing lawbreakers to go unpunished:
...Having established rewards for good actions and penalties for evil ones, and having rewarded a citizen for conduct who afterwards commits a wrong, he should be chastised for that without regard to his previous merits….
For if a citizen who has rendered some eminent service to the state should add to the reputation and influence which he has thereby acquired the confident audacity of being able to commit any wrong without fear of punishment, he will in a little while become so insolent and overbearing as to put an end to all power of the law.
The conduct of the agents of BLM has violated that sage counsel on all counts.
BLM agents should have expected trouble from Right-wing militia groups–and come fully prepared to deal with it.
The FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, for example, have created SWAT teams to deal with those who threaten violence against the Federal Government.
Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman had a formula for dealing with domestic terrorists of his own time.
Writing to his commander, Ulysses S. Grant, about the best way to treat Confederate guerrillas, he advised:
![]()
General Willilam Tecumseh Sherman
“They cannot be made to love us, but they may be made to fear us. We cannot change the hearts of those people of the South.
“But we can make war so terrible that they will realize the fact that . . . they are still mortal and should exhaust all peaceful remedies before they fly to war.”

ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ANWAR AL-AWALAKI, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, D-DAY, DAVID BARRON, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, FACEBOOK, GEORGE S. PATTON, HEINZ GUERIAN, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, LIBERALS, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NOCCOLO MACHIAVELLI, RAND PAUL, REPUBLICAN PARTY, STALINGRAD, TERRORISM, THE PRINCE, TWITTER, WAFFEN-SS
WHY THE RIGHT WINS AND THE LEFT LOSES
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on May 12, 2014 at 12:00 amMost Americans believe Nazi Germany was defeated because “we were the Good Guys and they were the Bad Guys.”
Not so.
The United States–and its allies, Great Britain and the Soviet Union–won the war for reasons that had nothing to do with the rightness of their cause. These included:
On this last point:
German soldiers at Stalingrad
In short: The Allies won because they dared to meet the brutality of a Heinz Guderian with that of a George S. Patton.
This is a lesson that has been totally lost on the liberals of the Democratic Party. Which explains why they lost most of the Presidential elections of the 20th century.
It also explains why President Barack Obama has found most of his legislative agenda stymied by Right-wing Republicans.
Consider this latest example: Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has warned Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that he will place a hold on one of President Obama’s appellate court nominees.
Rand Paul
David Barron has been nominated to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. And Paul objects to this because Barron authored memos justifying the killing of an American citizen by a drone in Yemen.
The September 30, 2011 drone strike killed Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric notorious on the Internet for encouraging Muslims to attack the United States.
So President Obama authorized a drone stroke against him, thus removing that danger. Paul is demanding that the Justice Department release the memos Barron crafted justifying the drone policy.
Anwar al-Awlaki
Imagine how Republicans would depict Paul–or a Democratic Senator–if he behaved in a similar manner with a Republican President: “Rand Paul: A traitor who supports terrorists. He sides with America’s enemies against its own lawfully elected President.”
To Bepublicans, “lawfully elected” applies only to Republican Presidents. A Democrat who runs against a Republican is automatically considered a traitor.
And a Democrat who defeats a Republican is automatically considered a usurper, and thus deserves to be slandered and obstructed, if not impeached.
Unable to defeat Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Republicans tried in 1998 to impeach him for getting oral sex in the White House.
Similarly, 2012 Presidential candidate Herman Cain, asked in a conference call with bloggers why Republicans couldn’t just impeach President Obama, replied: “That’s a great question and it is a great–it would be a great thing to do but because the Senate is controlled by Democrats we would never be able to get the Senate first to take up that action.”
In Renegade: The Making of a President, Richard Wolffe chronicled Obama’s successful 2008 bid for the White House. Among his revelations:
Obama, a believer in rationality and decency, felt more comfortable in responding to attacks on his character than in making them on the character of his enemies.
A graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, Obama is easily one of the most academically gifted Presidents in United States history.
But for all this, he failed–from the onset of his Presidency–to grasp and apply this fundamental lesson taught by Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of modern political science. In The Prince Machiavelli warns:
From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved than feared, or feared more than loved.
The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved….
And men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligations which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails.
Because Obama has failed to heed this advice, his enemies–which is what Republicans consider themselves to be–have felt free to demonize and obstruct him at every turn.
Nor is Obama alone in failing to learn Machiavelli’s lesson. For Democrats to win elective victories and enact their agenda, they must find theiir own George Patton to take on the Waffen-SS generals among Republican ranks.
Share this: