Posted on 06/23/2020 2:12:20 PM PDT by billorites
When I first saw the mural of George Floyd with large angel wings, I assumed that it was a satire on his sanctification – effective, perhaps, but not in the best of taste. Shortly afterwards, however, I realised that the mural was in earnest: the picture of the mural in the newspaper included a man genuflecting before it and the caption said that he was making a ‘pilgrimage’. Apparently, St Peter can no longer cope alone at the Pearly Gates: he need bouncers too, Heaven having become something like a nightclub.
George Floyd was not a saint; in fact, he was a bad man, and being killed by a brutal policeman does not change a man’s life from bad to good. He was a man of many convictions – criminal convictions, that is, not political ones – and at least one of his crimes was of deep-dyed malignity. Along with five others, he broke into a pregnant woman’s house and held her at gunpoint while his associates ransacked the house for drugs and money. This is not the kind of crime that results from a sudden surrender to temptation. It was premeditated and planned, albeit not very intelligently or successfully.
George Floyd was not a quick learner. He had several convictions for possession and supply of drugs, yet when he moved to Minneapolis, allegedly to turn over a new leaf, he still took drugs and a video showed him discarding what was probably a packet of drugs when he was first arrested.
None of this exculpates the policeman, Derek Chauvin, and no decent person would suggest that it did. But the ludicrous sanctification of George Floyd naturally conduces to an examination of his character, and is moreover a sign of our modern tendency to make martyrs or saints of victims. But victims do not have to be martyrs or saints in order to be victims, and George Floyd certainly did not die for any cause.
As is so often the case, sentimentality is but a short step away from brutality. The sanctification of George Floyd implies that the character of a victim of murder is in some way a measure of the seriousness of the murder, when what is wrong with murder is that it is murder. Even the murder of a very bad man is murder, such that if Derek Chauvin were killed in prison by other inmates, it would still be murder. We may in our hearts regret the murder of a good man more than we regret that of a bad, but the law can take no notice of such a distinction. Any other attitude would be to justify or excuse murder.
Another example of the relation between sentimentality and brutality has been the use of very young children in demonstrations. There are videos of two girls, nine and seven, one making a speech at a demonstration and the other marching in a demonstration, her pretty little face contorted with hatred, chanting a horrible slogan, ‘No justice, no peace’ (a justification in advance of further looting, or worse), and making aggressive gestures.
Clearly they had been put up to all this by their parents. If they had been born in Nazi Germany, they would have rushed up to the Fuhrer to present him with flowers. And no doubt the parents of the little girls, in the pride of their self-righteousness, will continue to indoctrinate them into becoming mental clones of themselves, in the belief that decerebrate rage and resentment are really a manifestation of generosity of spirit.
The little girls themselves, deeply unattractive as they have been made, are of course not themselves to blame. But what kind of fathomless sentimentalism is it that believes that a cause is justified or strengthened by the use of parroting children of nine and seven? It is not what the children parrot that counts, horrible as it might be, but that the children parrot it, that they have been turned (presumably by their parents) into mere instruments.
Perhaps even more alarming than the performances of the little girls themselves were the comments that they called forth, at least the comments that I was able to see on internet sites that claimed that the little girls had become ‘icons’, that is to say sanctified models presumably to follow. All the comments that I saw were by people who said that they were moved by the little girls, that at worst they showed just how bad racism was in America, and that they, the little girls, were the augury of a better and brighter future.
Needless to say, one never knows what proportion of the population is in agreement with internet commentary, or the strength of its agreement or disagreement. But even so, the fact that a substantial number of people, probably of above average level of education, cannot see the obvious – that the little girls had been manipulated to the point of abuse – by parents or others was to me alarming. I was reminded of North Korea, which I once visited, where small children were dragooned to the point of exhaustion into taking part in huge kitsch ceremonies to the glorification of evil. We are not at the same stage yet, but I suspect that there are many monomaniacs who wouldn’t mind it if we were, provided only that it was their ideas (being indisputably correct, morally-speaking) that were imposed.
In 1952, the historian J.L. Talmon, wrote a book titled The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy, and we may be seeing the first stage of such a democracy in the recent events. The phrase, totalitarian democracy, is not the contradiction in terms that it might at first appear, for there is little doubt that there are substantial numbers of people, mostly educated, who not in the least object to the imposition of a dictatorship of their own virtue in the name of the People.
Against this, I make a modest proposal: that it should be against the law for children under the age of 15 (say) to attend political demonstrations or rallies, and that disobedience to this law should be classified as child abuse.
“I make a modest proposal: that it should be against the law for children under the age of 15 (say) to attend political demonstrations or rallies...”
Let’s go with a No on that one, but good luck in your futile efforts to get the law passed.
I suppose Trayvon Martin doesn’t deserve Saint Hood either??
Wether he was good or bad isn’t the issue.
If a cop can be that brazen, callous and careless with any life, yours doesn’t matter to him either...
Only if it’s virtuous to, having gotten away, turn back and attack a guy just for being a creepy ass cracker.
George Floyd died at the hospital. The technique used to keep him down after he resisted getting into the patrol car does not cut off his breathing. It keeps him from getting up. He was on drugs. Probably in what id called extreme stress disorder. Sorry he died but the cop did not kill him.
Mr. Dalrymple comes very close to doing that.
You nail my discomfort with this piece.
Candace Owens is so right. If I were black, I’d be ashamed that my community, egged on by a bunch of fake-ass white liberals and media, put people like this guy on the pedestal as our model.
Blacks can do much better but choose not to. Instead they call exceptional people like Condi Rice and Justice Thomas all kinds of horrible names.
2 facts: 1) George Floyd didn’t have to die. 2)The death of George Floyd was good for the gene pool. BLM will acknowledge one but not the other. Antifa? They could care less about either.
The sort of person who might be edified by this article will get to the fourth word and then give up.
BLM could care less about either as well— they are Marxists, Antifa are a mix of anarchists and various sorts of radical socialists. The motives of both are purely anti-capitalist and anti-God, and stating otherwise only helps them.
He was pronounced at the hospital. According to the paramedics who put him in the ambulance he was unresponsive and without a pulse. George Floyd died at the scene.
The technique used to keep him down after he resisted getting into the patrol car does not cut off his breathing.
If done improperly or for an extended period of time it does cut off breathing, which is why most police departments don't use it.
Sorry he died but the cop did not kill him.
You don't seem all that broken up about it. And the coroner has said that the officer's actions were a contributing factor to Floyd's death.
And, of course, the spokesperson role for the environment was assumed by a Swedish teenager, Greta Thunberg who evidently spent the majority of her 16 year life diligently studying the causes and effect of climate change to become the end all expert followed by a fawning media and its left wing sycophants. And no one in academic community objected!
The mob doesn’t get to determine whether the cop was “brutal” or whether a chemical-filled Floyd died resisting arrest.
Correct.
trayvon martin was a little punk burglar thug wannabe
so, no
True. The coroner and the DA do. And they charged him with second degree murder.
Alas, no.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.