Love, Joy, Feminism
They told us we were supposed to change the world. They told us to run for office. They told us not to say racist things on Facebook. No wait, they didn’t tell us that, and Robert Saunders, running for state legislature, is learning this the hard way.
Saunders and I were both raised in an environment that mixed evangelicalism and conservative politics to the extent that the two became indistinguishable. And we were both homeschooled. For many, homeschooling is simply a method for giving their child an individualized, flexible, and/or hands-on education. For evangelical Christians, though, it’s more than that. It’s a way to raise up a new generation to retake the country for Christ, both culturally and politically.
Saunders attended Patrick Henry College, which was founded by Michael Farris in 2000. My parents gave money to this college, and sent me to a summer program there while I was in high school. While we sat in a lecture hall, Farris gestured this way and that, telling us that those sitting on the left would become Congressmen, and those on the right would become Senators, and those in the center would sit on the Supreme Court or be future presidents. This was his dream—to launch young evangelical conservative homeschool graduates into politics. Saunders is the fruit of that dream.
Except that scandal has now enveloped Saunders’ campaign for state legislature in Billings, Montana. The controversy surrounds remarks Saunders has made in person and on Facebook while at Patrick Henry College and in the following years. Yesterday the allegations grew worse, and surrounded not reports of things he’d said in private but rather posts he’d made on Facebook.
Reacting to a black peer’s allegation that in 2005 Saunders told her he would have owned her 100 years ago, alumni of Patrick Henry College posted the Republican’s offensive remarks about the 2014 race riots in Ferguson, Mo.
Of the riots sparked by the police shooting of a black teenager, Saunders posted on Facebook: “I am thankful that justice prevailed in this situation and was not swayed by the tide of racism against whites.
“However, I’m disappointed that the citizens of Missouri didn’t protect the livelihoods of their own from rioters and looters. That, after all, is one of the principal reasons for the Second Amendment.
“The citizens of Missouri should have loaded up and protected each other, shot anyone who attempted to vandalize, and made sure to finish them off with two rounds through the brain.
“Elimination of those people in self-defense would probably have cut Missouri’s welfare handouts — and long-term crime rate — considerably.”
Saunders’ statements were posted to The Gazette Facebook page by Patrick Henry College alumni Carman Green, who was commenting on an article about allegations made last week by former Saunders classmates Erin Eskew and Stuart Lundy.
These remarks are damaging enough that Montana Republican Party Chairman Jeff Essmann repudiated them and Saunders has issued an apology. The language of both the repudiation and the apology is troubling—more on that in a moment—but I feel the need to note that this language is not that far outside of what I heard growing up. I was taught that all people were equal, regardless of race, but I was also taught that white people are the ones who face discrimination in the present. I was also taught that it was “black culture” that held black people back, and that this culture included an ethic of crime and dependence.
My father used to say that white males were the most discriminated against group in our society, and he would tell my brothers that black people and women would always be hired over them. Once he complained about a black female colleague at work, calling her incompetent and claiming that she had only been hired because of her race and gender. I was also raised in a culture that embraced guns for self-defense, not only of one’s person but also of one’s home. My parents told us that if an intruder ever stepped foot in our house, we were to shoot and shoot to kill—and that’s a standard Republican position.
I’m getting tired of Republicans repudiating remarks and comments that aren’t substantially out of line with what they’re already saying, if at all. The repudiated remarks and comments are simply more blunt—blunt enough to make the ultimate result of mainstream Republican policy and rhetoric clear. Republicans concerned about comments like Saunders’ need to get at the root of the problem rather than flailing about with individual branches.
Let’s look at Montana Republican Party Chairman Jeff Essmann’s repudiation:
This is a textbook example for young people for taking a pause in the heat of the moment before posting comments like these on social media. Taking a life is only justified as a means of defending a life. Mr. Saunders’ outburst, which he himself has repudiated, does not represent the values of the Montana Republican Party. Mr. Saunders has stated his error, repudiated his own statement, and asked for forgiveness. It will be up to the voters to decide if he’s learned from the experience.
Wait wait wait. Is Essmann honestly saying that the problem was that Saunders put his comments down in print, rather than that he had those thoughts to begin with? Look, I’m not comfortable with people having hella racist thoughts even “in the heat of the moment,” whether or not they later think better of making their thoughts public. I wouldn’t want to elect an official who thinks those things but doesn’t say them any more than I’d want to elect an official who both thinks and says those things. Methinks Essmann’s priorities are askew.
[Note: Yes, everyone sometimes thinks bad thoughts. Most of us learn how to manage these thoughts and not let them effect our behavior. But Saunders’ thoughts, even if he had kept them mere thoughts and not stated them publicly, put his racism on stark display, and he has said nothing at all that would suggest that he is aware of or combatting these internal biases. Think about it this way—would you want to elect a man who was constantly thinking about women as nasty bitches, regardless of what his stated policy on women’s issues was?]
Beyond this, all Essmann’s objections aside, a quick look around the internet suggests that Saunders’ comments may be exactly in line with the values of the Montana Republican Party. Perhaps Essmann is trying to change these values, but change is difficult if one can’t admit that there’s a problem that needs changing there to begin with.
How did Saunders’ respond to his comments becoming public?
Saunders took ownership of the Ferguson comments Tuesday in a conversation with The Gazette. He also published a lengthy explanation on his campaign Facebook page.
“It’s something I said when I was upset. I had just read an article about a business owner, a black lady. It was vandals who destroyed her business,” Saunders said. He logged onto to Facebook and posted what called a “snarky potshot.”
First, throwing out that one of the business owners who suffered vandalism was black does not make the comments not racist (as Saunders appears to think). Second, it’s not okay to say hella racist things even when you’re upset. And finally, Saunders’ long Facebook apology is actually an explainy not-apology. It’s also completely clueless as to why people are upset. It hammers home both Saunders’ racism and his complete lack of introspection or understanding of why his beliefs are wrong, problematic, and downright dangerous. It only makes things worse. I mean for goodness sake, he begins it “The secret is out: I am a flawed person.” That language is intentional, because we all know that everyone has flaws. So basically, he’s just like us. Except not.
Interestingly, I started out on the same path Saunders is on. I planned to go into politics and change the world, championing conservative values and conservative principles. When I won my first political office, I was barely old enough to vote. It was a small, local office that was party-affiliated, but it was to be just the first step of my career as a political change maker. Longterm, I hoped to marry a good, upstanding politically active conservative evangelical man like Saunders and support his political career, because something something gender roles. But I attended a college that challenged me to think for myself and examine my premises. Saunders did not. Instead, Saunders attended Patrick Henry College.
Patrick Henry College Chancellor Michael Farris told The Gazette the comments attributed to Saunders are reprehensible, and don’t represent the young man who as an undergrad played racquetball with Farris.
“I knew Robert as a student and all I can say is I have never heard him say anything that is inappropriate or would be troubling to me as a voter,” Farris said. “He’s a very passionate guy and he says what he believes. We’ve all said things as students that we wish we wouldn’t have said.”
Someone needs to tell Farris he isn’t helping with his “he says what he believes” bit. But also, does Farris realize that never having been made uncomfortable by anything Saunders said speaks badly of Farris, and not well of Saunders? Saunders’ views were so notoriously bad while he was at Patrick Henry College that he gained the nickname “Little Hitler” among his own classmates. He advocated in favor of involuntary servitude and a return to serfdom. He argued that Muslims should be deported, forced to convert to Christianity, or executed. Farris was either not listening very closely, or his views are worse than I’d thought.
In thinking back on what I learned from Farris and other conservative political figures, I’m struck by the role race played in political rhetoric and position-making. As far as I can tell, the only time race was discussed was to deride affirmative action or to call for cutting welfare. We were taught that all races are equal before God, yes, and magazines with an evangelical bent sometimes put a spotlight on black churches or black ministries. But when it came to politics, what we were taught about race—and the way race was discussed—fed directly into the racist mindset held by Saunders.
Blacks were dependent on welfare, blacks were criminal, blacks were preferred over whites in hiring and in higher education—how could rhetoric like this not create racist views? Farris told us to run for office, yes. But he never told us to not be racist. Hopefully, come election day, Saunders will learn that the hard way.
I have a Patreon! Please support my writing!
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In