In the first episode of his new podcast, UFC fighter Bryce Mitchell, who is from Arkansas, made controversial statements that have sparked outrage. During the episode, which he recorded with Roli Delgado for the podcast called ArkanSanity, Mitchell praised Adolf Hitler and denied the reality of the Holocaust.
The conversation began with the two discussing Elon Musk’s actions, including a gesture that some people interpreted as resembling a Nazi salute. This led Mitchell to praise Hitler, claiming that based on his own research—not what he had been taught in school—he believed Hitler was a good person. Mitchell even went as far as saying that Hitler was someone he would go fishing with, implying that he thought highly of the dictator before he allegedly became addicted to methamphetamine.
Mitchell continued to make disturbing remarks, stating that Hitler’s goal was to “purify” Germany by removing what he described as the “greedy Jews” who were supposedly destroying the country. He also made homophobic remarks, claiming that Hitler wanted to turn people into “gays.” This rhetoric, which is offensive and rooted in harmful stereotypes, did not stop there. When Delgado mentioned that putting an entire race of people into camps was wrong, Mitchell denied the reality of the Holocaust, suggesting that the six million Jewish people who died during that time could not have been burned or cremated in the way the Holocaust is historically documented. Mitchell suggested that the Holocaust was a hoax and that it “ain’t real.”
This denial of the Holocaust contradicts widely accepted historical facts. From 1941 to 1945, under Hitler’s regime, the Nazis systematically murdered six million Jews in extermination camps, as well as millions of others based on their ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, disabilities, or political beliefs. Holocaust survivors and historians have extensively documented these atrocities, which are recognized as one of the darkest chapters in human history.
Mitchell’s comments have drawn widespread criticism, not only because they are factually incorrect but also because they promote dangerous and offensive ideas. Despite his praise of Hitler, Mitchell claimed that he didn’t hate Jewish people and that he wasn’t a Nazi. He defended his position by saying that Jewish people were simply “in a bad spot” when Hitler came to power, but this explanation does little to absolve the severity of his statements.
Mitchell also defended the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, particularly focusing on the camps in Arkansas. He argued that the practice was justifiable because it was “a different time” and even suggested that the U.S. might repeat such actions if necessary. This line of reasoning dismisses the deep harm caused by the internment, which unjustly imprisoned thousands of innocent Japanese Americans based on their race, without due process or evidence of disloyalty.
In response to Mitchell’s podcast, UFC president Dana White called Mitchell “one of the dumbest human beings” after hearing his remarks. White strongly condemned Mitchell’s praise of Hitler, emphasizing that Hitler was responsible for the deaths of six million Jews and the attempt to annihilate an entire race of people. White’s comments reflect the outrage many people feel in response to Mitchell’s statements.
However, despite White’s strong condemnation of Mitchell’s words, he stated that Mitchell would not face any punishment for his remarks. White explained that, while he did not agree with Mitchell’s views, he respected the concept of free speech and believed that people should be able to express their opinions, even if they are offensive or ignorant. White added that, for those who disagree with Mitchell’s views, they would have the opportunity to see him compete in the UFC, where his actions would be on display for the world.
This situation raises important questions about the boundaries of free speech, responsibility, and accountability. While free speech is a protected right, many people believe that there should be consequences for promoting hateful or harmful ideas, especially when they are factually incorrect or dangerous. In this case, Mitchell’s comments about Hitler, the Holocaust, and other sensitive topics have sparked debate over the limits of free speech, particularly when it comes to public figures who have a platform and influence.
While some may argue that Mitchell’s right to free speech should be upheld, others believe that promoting harmful or false narratives, such as Holocaust denial or praise for a genocidal dictator, should not go unchecked. Critics argue that such views have the potential to inspire violence, prejudice, and division, especially when expressed by someone with a large following.
Ultimately, this incident highlights the complex and often contentious relationship between free speech, accountability, and the role of public figures in shaping public discourse. It also serves as a reminder of the importance of critical thinking and education in combating misinformation and harmful ideologies. As society continues to confront issues of hate speech, history, and responsibility, conversations like these will likely remain a focal point in discussions about how to navigate the digital age and the power of social media platforms.