The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Herbert Marcuse, Wile E. Coyote and the Auto-Beclownment of Erik Loomis, Ph.D.

Posted on | December 18, 2012 | 22 Comments

The epic saga of University of Rhode Island Assistant Professor of History Erik Loomis shall live long in blogospheric lore. Twitchy is taking a victory lap over the professor’s unfortunate metaphorical seppuku: He had to delete his Twitter account, but not before Tweeting this:

“I love teaching books on the history of sexuality. I talked about dildos in a completely appropriate way in class today.”

Yeah: The taxpayers of Rhode Island (and the parents of university students) are paying Erik Loomis to teach kids the history of dildos.

Do you need a Ph.D. to do that? Where do you get a doctoral degree in Historical Dildology? Are there federal research grants available?

Humor aside, Instapundit exposes Loomis’s pretzel logic:

The anti-NRA syllogism seems to work this way: (1) Something bad happened; (2) I hate you; so (3) It’s your fault.

This is how people “think” when the object is not to find truth, but to justify their own prejudices. This is the dangerous logic of scapegoating. The characteristic viciousness of the Left stems from a radical certainty of their own moral and intellectual superiority and, by the obverse, the inferiority of the Right:

These destructive tactics are the radical offspring of what Frankfurt School intellectual Herbert Marcuse advocated in his notorious 1965 essay “Repressive Tolerance”:

Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.

Elsewhere in the same essay, Marcuse denounces “pure” or “non-partisan” tolerance, which he describes as the “active, official tolerance granted to the Right as well as to the Left, to movements of aggression as well as to movements of peace, to the party of hate as well as to that of humanity.”

When you think of yourself (as Loomis most surely does) as an apostolic soldier in the Righteous Army of Peace and Humanity, doing battle against the forces of Hate, there is no such thing as “fairness,” nor any rule of conduct that can limit your action. This mentality is expressed in the radical slogan, “By Any Means Necessary.”

This necessarily involves the de-humanization of one’s antagonists, a degradation of moral standards — excusing dishonesty and malicious action, so long as it is done on behalf of the Sacred Progressive Cause — and inevitably results in thuggery on behalf of “social justice,” a movement whose actions exemplify the very opposite qualities of “peace and humanity” that progressives claims to be pursuing.

This was how the idealists of the 1960s ended up, in the 1970s, being apologists for the bloody reign of Pol Pot in Cambodia, and supporting domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers and Kathy Boudin.

Without any real moral principles, judging everything only by its political expediency, they exempt themselves from judgment, even while harshly judging the demonized Other whom they target with transparently invalid smears. The Wheelerization of Steven Crowder was one recent example of this, as is the “argument” offered by Scott Slemmons, a commenter at Erik Loomis’s blog:

Maybe if you Malkinites weren’t such anti-America McVeigh-fanboys, people wouldn’t hate you so much.

Notice the ridiculous name-calling — “Malkinites”? — and the attempt to do a guilt-by-association between (a) critics of Loomis and (b) 1990s terrorist Timothy McVeigh.

Question: When did Michelle Malkin ever endorse the 1995 Oklahama City bombing, or anything like it? The standards of acceptable discourse among Loomis’s admirers are no standards at all. You will perhaps not be surprised to learn that Scott Slemmons is a comic book blogger.

Who could possibly admire someone like Erik Loomis, Ph.D? Who could consider him an acceptable teacher of impressionable youth? His anger issues mark him as an intemperate person with a near-infinite capacity for making a fool of himself, yet see his university duties:

Courses Taught:

  • HIS 141 – History of the United States to 1877
  • HIS 339 – Emergence of Industrial America, 1877-1914
  • HIS 364 – U.S. Environmental History
  • HIS 365 – Civil War and Reconstruction
  • HIS 441 – Topics in U.S. History (U.S. West)
  • HIS 495 – Senior Seminar

This amoral monster is entrusted with instructing student from their freshmen to their senior year. Why was the second-rate intellect hired? Here’s a significant hint:

Flashback: Erik Loomis criticized
Sarah Palin for ‘violent rhetoric’

Hating Republicans is the ultimate resumé-enhancer in academia. Any dimwit can advance if he has the “correct” political views.

UPDATE: He’s a Lumberjack, and He’s OK: The Wobbly Scholarship of Erik Loomis, Ph.D. — Guest Post by Badger Pundit.

 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Hey Erik, where you going with that gun in your hand…well should I say Derringer? It’s certainly not a long gun.

  • Taxpayer1234

    Excellent piece, Stacy. You’ve been firing on all cylinders lately. I should write another graduate essay about your blog!

  • gwheelockvan

    I sent copies of the tweets to several at Loomis’ edu. This afternoon one of them sent me this:

    December 18, 2012

    University Community:

    The University of Rhode Island does not condone acts or threats of violence. These remarks do not reflect the views of the institution and Erik Loomis does not speak on behalf of the University. The University is committed to fostering a safe, inclusive and equitable culture that aspires to promote positive change.

    Dr. David M. Dooley
    President
    University of Rhode Island

    http://www.uri.edu/artsci/his/Erik_Loomis.html

    G. Van der leun

  • Libertarian Advocate

    Yes, I paid a visit to his blog. Little more than a pack of 3rd tier college associate professors marveling at one another’s prowess in “swatting at rightists” while they engage in intellectual circle jerks. Pathetic really.

  • William Lloyd Garrison

    Wow, Stacy hasn’t hated someone this much since he explained how Emmet Till got what he deserved.

  • Libertarian Advocate

    Hahahaha, in other words, we’re tossing him under the bus for now. If he survives, we’ll pull him back into the fold when this shit storm blows over.

  • Libertarian Advocate

    I don’t doubt for a moment you think so Wombat.

  • DonaldDouglas

    Loomis is a bleeding idiot. And thanks for the welcome smackdown, Robert. I have you linked up over night…

  • Wombat_socho

    Not my comment, actually; offending troll has been banned. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

  • http://wombat-socho.livejournal.com/ Wombat Socho

    Not my comment, actually; offending troll blacklisted. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

  • JohnInMA

    I find it a little surprising that we (as a group/culture/population) expect thorough and reasoned work from a modern day History academic. It may be reasonable to demand well formulated writing structure, including grammar. But in my experience many particularly in the fields of History, Literature, and Social studies (lower case) are at best dogmatic and not willing to support their words to any meaningful degree.

    For me it’s not much of a surprise that he runs or contributes to some sophomoric hate-the-other-side website. Maybe it’s a little surprising how it is not very intellectual and more like an adolescent club. I’ve had many a discussion with similar academics that find ways to hide frustration that there is a ‘reasoned other’ in the world. Apparently those on his site and he cannot.

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Well played, Gerald.

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Let’s see…

    EXHIBIT #1:

    … yet see his university duties:
    Courses Taught:
    HIS 141 – History of the United States to 1877
    HIS 339 – Emergence of Industrial America, 1877-1914
    HIS 364 – U.S. Environmental History
    HIS 365 – Civil War and Reconstruction
    HIS 441 – Topics in U.S. History (U.S. West)
    HIS 495 – Senior Seminar

    EXHIBIT #2:

    …He had to delete his Twitter account, but not before Tweeting this:

    “I love teaching books on the history of sexuality. I talked about dildos in a completely appropriate way in class today.”

    Yeah: The taxpayers of Rhode Island (and the parents of university students) are paying Erik Loomis to teach kids the history of dildos.

    QUESTION: Which course would this comment belong to???

  • Pingback: What Kind of Person … | hogewash

  • http://profiles.google.com/rob5136 Rob Crawford

    “paying Erik Loomis to teach kids the history of dildos”

    Is it appropriate for a professor to focus on his personal biography?

  • Pingback: University President Repudiates Professor’s Violent Anti-NRA Messages : The Other McCain

  • Libertarian Advocate

    Wombat. My bad, I should have known better.

  • matthew w

    “I love teaching books on the history of sexuality. I talked about dildos in a completely appropriate way in class today.”

    I majored in History.

    We NEVER had a reason to discuss dildos.

    What a typical liberal, pseudo educated sex pervert.

  • http://twitter.com/richard_mcenroe richard mcenroe

    “We NEVER had a reason to discuss dildos.”

    Unless of course using it in the context of certain professors. Face it, you can overwork “douchebag.”

  • Pingback: #Metaphor: Academics Sign Their Own Death Warrants by Defending Loomis : The Other McCain

  • Bob Almighty

    ” When you think of yourself (as Loomis most surely does) as an apostolic soldier in the Righteous Army of Peace and Humanity, doing battle against the forces of Hate, there is no such thing as “fairness,” nor any rule of conduct that can limit your action.

    This mentality is expressed in the radical slogan, “By Any Means Necessary.” This necessarily involves the de-humanization of one’s antagonists, a degradation of moral standards — excusing dishonesty and malicious action, so long as it is done on behalf of the Sacred Progressive Cause — and inevitably results in thuggery on behalf of “social justice,” a movement whose actions exemplify the very opposite qualities of “peace and humanity” that progressives claims to be pursuing.

    This was how the idealists of the 1960s ended up, in the 1970s, being apologists for the bloody reign of Pol Pot in Cambodia, and supporting domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers and Kathy Boudin”

    Wow, is that ever eloquent. I’m pinning it to my fridge.

  • Pingback: The Vocabulary of Professor Erik Loomis: ‘Motherf–ing F–kheads F–king F–k’ : The Other McCain