bookmark_borderThe disgusting bigotry and sadism of David Leavitt

In one of the most disgusting, appalling, and hypocritical series of actions that I have ever seen, a so-called “journalist” named David Leavitt decided to viciously insult a political candidate, and subsequently to call Child Protective Services on said candidate, for the crime of having attended a Columbus Day ceremony with her daughter.

Leavitt instigated this conflict with Virginia state senate candidate Tina Ramirez by attacking her, asking on Twitter: “Why are you celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement?”

When Ramirez dared to defend herself, Leavitt sicced his 330,000 followers on her by asking them, “Can someone please call child care services on Tina Ramirez who’s teaching her child to be a racist?”

Leavitt then proceeded to retweet dozens of mindless, sycophantic comments insulting both Ramirez and Christopher Columbus. And then, apparently too impatient to wait for his followers to do so, Leavitt called Child Protective Services himself and detailed his experience waiting on hold in a lengthy tweet thread.

And then, because this horrendous behavior apparently wasn’t horrendous enough, Leavitt complained when a Twitter user actually had the guts to stand up to him. “I’m being the subject of targeted harassment by someone who’s celebrating the torture, rape, murder, and enslavement of indigenous peoples,” he preposterously wrote. This after he instigated a conflict with an innocent person, who was minding her own business, by viciously insulting her and then urging his 330,000 followers to call CPS on her. For someone to complain that he is “being the subject of targeted harassment” immediately after himself instigating a campaign of targeted harassment is so hypocritical that it boggles the mind. I repeat: Leavitt is the one instigating a campaign of targeted harassment. He is the perpetrator of targeted harassment, not the victim.

Unbelievably, what I have described does not capture the full extent of Leavitt’s disgusting behavior. Throughout Columbus Day, he posted tweet after tweet characterizing the holiday as “celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement.”

These comments are profoundly wrong. As I explained in an earlier blog post, obliterating a historical figure’s existence by removing their statues, monuments, and holidays inflicts harm and suffering on those historical figures and is the equivalent of torturing them to death. Given the enormous harm that has already been inflicted on Columbus through the grotesque dismemberment of his statues, celebrating “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” is the equivalent of going up to a person who is lying in a hospital bed in critical condition, and stomping on his face. To celebrate Indigenous Peoples’ Day is to celebrate and honor people who are brutally dismembering, and torturing to death, a historical figure.

So, no, Tina Ramirez was not “celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement,” nor was she “teaching her child to be a racist.” She was celebrating Christopher Columbus. She was comforting, helping, and expressing solidarity with a person who has suffered enormous harm. And Leavitt chose to attack her for this. Leavitt chose to attack Ramirez because she helped a person in pain as opposed to stomping on his face.

No, the individual falsely accused by Leavitt of “targeted harassment” was not “celebrating the torture, rape, murder, and enslavement of indigenous peoples.” He was celebrating Christopher Columbus. He was expressing solidarity with a person who is suffering, as opposed to stomping on his face. And Leavitt chose to attack him for this.

“To all the companies “celebrating” torture, rape, murder, enslavement, and exploitation with the Happy Columbus Day posts: I see you #IndigenousPeoplesDay,” wrote Leavitt. But no companies were celebrating torture, rape, murder, enslavement, or exploitation. The companies were celebrating Christopher Columbus. These companies chose to express solidarity with a person who is suffering, as opposed to stomping on his face. And Leavitt chose to attack them for this.

“Why is the @GOP celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement?” Leavitt asked. But the GOP was not celebrating torture, rape, murder, or enslavement. They were celebrating Christopher Columbus. They were expressing solidarity with a person who is suffering, as opposed to stomping on his face. And Leavitt chose to attack them for this.

“I just had to report a death threat from someone who’s who’s celebrating the torture, rape, murder, and enslavement of indigenous peoples,” wrote Leavitt. But no, this person was not celebrating the torture, rape, murder, or enslavement of indigenous peoples. The person was expressing solidarity with someone who is suffering, as opposed to stomping on his face. And Leavitt chose to attack him for this.

“I’m not religious, but people who celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement surely don’t go to heaven,” Leavitt wrote. But no one was celebrating torture, rape, murder, or enslavement. The people in question were celebrating Christopher Columbus. They were expressing solidarity with someone who is suffering. And in my opinion, helping a suffering person makes one much more worthy of going to Heaven than stomping on his face.

To sum up, comforting, helping, and expressing solidarity with a suffering person is not the same thing as “celebrating torture, rape, murder, and enslavement.” In reality, David Leavitt and all those who celebrate “Indigenous Peoples’ Day” have been celebrating the infliction of harm, suffering, and pain. They have been celebrating the fact that a historical figure is being dismembered and tortured to death. For a person to celebrate something so unworthy of celebration is despicable enough, but Leavitt takes things even further by aggressively and viciously attacking anyone who has the audacity not to join him in his “celebration.” Leavitt chose, again and again, to aggressively and viciously attack people because they comforted, helped, and expressed solidarity with a suffering historical figure instead of stomping on his face. Perhaps Leavitt was somehow trying to make himself look and feel morally superior by beating up on someone who is wounded, hurting, and completely unable to defend himself. But all he did was reveal himself to be a nasty, sadistic bully with no compassion and no empathy. He should be ashamed of his words and behavior.