Let’s take George Floyd as a case study in what I explained in the previous post. We’ve seen people – large crowds of people – become enraged by George Floyd’s death. I know such people in person, and they are very sincere. They very honestly perceive what happened to Floyd as the height of injustice and an absolute horror.
But why? you’ll ask. He was overdosing before he met with those police officers. He was a violent criminal on heavy drugs. He was committing a crime. He resisted arrest. Yes, it’s sad that he died, as it’s sad when anybody dies, but this is a person who did everything to put himself in a very high-risk situation. Why is it so much more upsetting than the shooting of a 6-year-old boy in Chicago this past Sunday who was sitting peacefully at home with his family? Or the murder of two 15-year-olds also in Chicago over the Labor Day weekend?
George Floyd’s death is so much more upsetting precisely because you are making this argument. You are looking at Floyd and the shot 6-year-old and seeing different things. You are bringing your knowledge and experience into the situation instead of perceiving these two victims as completely identical and as blank slates you aren’t allowed to write on. If you see any difference between what happened to Floyd and an imaginary situation where police grab a baby out of a stroller and murder her on the spot, you have revealed your unforgivable tendency to infringe on the capacity of others fully to control their interactions with the world.
Since it’s impossible to make people perceive others as blank slates, the proponents of the structural oppression theory try to mess with what’s written on the slate. They write insane things on it to confuse you. If you dare to try writing on the slate, the slate will retaliate by writing on you. Thus, George Floyd becomes a role model, punctuality becomes racist, and a blond Argentinean turns into a person of color.


Leave a comment