University of Rhode Island labor historian Erik Loomis has garnered a lot of conservative attention in the last few days.
After the Newtown shootings, Loomis tweeted that he wanted “Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick.” (LaPierre is the head of the NRA.) Though this statement was obviously metaphorical, some high-profile conservatives pounced on it, and gave it a lot of attention. Loomis has since been visited by the police and called in for a meeting with his dean. You can find the whole story — along with an ever-growing list of Loomis’s academic supporters — here.
The whole thing would be silly if it weren’t potentially so damaging to Loomis’s career.
How silly? Well, there’s this, for starters. Robert Stacy McCain has been one of the more vocal conservative bloggers on the Loomis beat. As part of his campaign, he invited someone named “Badger Pundit” to guest post about Loomis’s dissertation — a history of union organizing among loggers in the Pacific Northwest.
That post wound up giving prominent play to a few paragraphs in which Loomis discussed homosexuality among early 20th century loggers. Unsure what to make of the discussion, but eager to pass it along, Badger Pundit quoted liberally from the brief passage, linked to the Monty Python “Lumberjack Song,” then tossed in an aside about how reading the material left him feeling like “I needed a shower.”
Classy.
But not as classy as commenter Danby, who opined that given the sleeping arrangements in logging camps of the era, any “homosexuals” among the loggers “would soon be found out and beaten with axe handles within an inch of their worthless lives.”
That comment has at the time of this writing received nine upvotes and just one lonely downvote. It’s also attracted a reply from Badger Pundit himself, who called it “fascinating,” “a great read,” and “a real contribution to the understanding of U.S. history.”
To recap: Calling for a political enemy’s “head on a stick” is a firing offense. Imagining gays “beaten with axe handles within an inch of their worthless lives” is just good writing.
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 20, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Iris
And so it goes…our American culture predictably and sadly continues to glorify violence to solve our differences.
December 20, 2012 at 10:58 pm
Badger Pundit
Mr. Johnston, I commend you for rising to the defense of your fellow labor historian (who needs all the defenders he can get). Your analysis is much better formulated than yesterday’s statement by the eight Crooked Timber professors, and for the most part fair commentary that I need not address.
However, I take issue with — to the extent I even understand — your suggestion that Mr. McCain and I have somehow chosen Professor Loomis as a “target” for criticism because he is, supposedly, gay. In fact, when one of McCain’s readers erroneously got the impression, from McCain’s quoting of “Lumberjack Song” lyrics, that McCain was making fun of Loomis for behavior typically associated with gays, both he and I quickly made clear that wasn’t his implication. In particular, I pointed out that Loomis is married, and that no one’s suggested (at least to my knowledge) that he’s ever engaged in deviant behavior. See tweet here: http://bit.ly/Zn16Zb. For example on one of Loomis’s blogs he refers to his wife from time to time (e.g., http://bit.ly/WyuXMp).
I have to confess that I was unfamiliar with your work before Mr. McCain called your post to my attention. I look forward to doing a review of your own Ph.D dissertation on how union activists sought to radicalize tens of thousands of American university students from 1947-1978. As with Professor Loomis’s dissertation, I imagine there will be a few Marxists in there — but hopefully no lumberjacks. I’ve already downloaded your dissertation, and noticed it goes on for 498 pages, so it looks like I’ve found a way to keep busy over the long holiday break.
Sincerely,
“Badger Pundit”
December 21, 2012 at 6:04 am
Angus Johnston
I have no idea whether Erik Loomis is gay, and I never suggested you targeted him on that basis. The “targets” of my headline were the targets of Danby’s comment — the “worthless” gays “beaten … within an inch of their … lives.”
Hope you like the dissertation. (Sneak preview: You’ll find fewer union activists, and more conservatives, than you’re expecting. Enjoy!)
December 21, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Kevin T. Keith (@KTKeith)
It’s telling that you think reading is a threat.
Try to learn something as you go along.
December 23, 2012 at 2:39 pm
Ray
No, violence against people for being gay is wrong, if indeed Loomis is, but violence against Marxist propagandists who are destroying America from within is laudable.
December 23, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Kal
As a Marxist, Ray, I want to take your comment as an encouraging sign – apparently right now we’re winning! Except, unfortunately, I have to suspect you really have no idea what Marxism is or how to identify a Marxist.
Similarly, I want to be cheered that you are so intimidated by Marxist ideas that you think the only way you can win an argument is with force. Except, I have to suspect that you are intimated by a lot of ideas, so I can’t feel too proud.