Jordan Neely and 'George Floyd syndrome'
In recent years, the growth of movements such as Black Lives Matter has sparked a political symptom we’ll call “ George Floyd syndrome.”
This involves the dilution of a complex political and cultural moment in time, such as the death of George Floyd while in police custody , as irrefutable evidence of a leftist political position, such as the interconnection of white supremacy, racism, and police brutality, with the figure at the center of this moment presented as an unquestionable martyr, or even a beacon of moral humanity.
In response, the counter-position involves a relentless focus on the true character of this figure while also disregarding the complexity of the event itself. In the case of George Floyd, this involved delving into his criminal and drug-addled past, with this past sometimes used as an excuse (or even justification) for his death.
As a result, the battle becomes one between two extreme camps that have oversimplified the focal event to the point that relevant details, such as cause of death, context, and intent, become irrelevant, while other responsible parties, such as those who breed and fuel societal division in pursuit of their own political objectives, evade any and all scrutiny.
The same is true of Jordan Neely.
Based on initial accounts, 30-year-old Neely died after passengers restrained him during a mental breakdown on a New York subway car, with one 24-year-old Marine veteran reportedly placing Neely in a chokehold for about 15 minutes.
The New York City Medical Examiner’s Office has ruled that Neely’s death was a homicide after arriving medical personnel failed to revive Neely, having lost consciousness while being forcibly restrained.
And in the hours and days that followed, George Floyd syndrome has returned.
On the Left, the narrative being pushed is that Jordan Neely was simply a Michael Jackson impersonator killed by an uncaring collection of passengers motivated by racism. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) declared that Neely was “murdered,” while Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) said Neely was “lynched” and shared a video of Neely dancing, adding that “black men deserve to grow old.”
Both ignored the important context that, according to witnesses and New York City police, Neely was “yelling and pacing back and forth” prior to being restrained. Other reports suggest that Neely was threatening passengers, saying, “I’m ready to go back to jail” and “I’ll hurt anyone.”
And on the other side of the George Floyd syndrome coin, the actions of those who restrained Neely are being diluted, or even excused, by some who are focusing on Neely’s behavior alone, or his alleged criminal history, or the propagandistic martyrdom assigned by the political Left.
And as a result, the three truths of this horrid episode in New York City slide into insignificance:
- Jordan Neely didn’t deserve to die, but if reports are accurate, his actions arguably justified a defensive response from those who felt threatened. In other words, this isn’t a “lynching.”
- Jordan Neely’s character and past, whether in the form of a Michael Jackson impersonator or violent and abusive criminal, became irrelevant once he had been restrained, and especially once he lost consciousness.
- Vigilante “justice” only happens when a law enforcement void is created.
While Democrats rush to push a narrative of violent racism, and while we can debate whether or not the methods used to restrain Neely were appropriate (a chokehold is commonly categorized as deadly force), we must ask why passengers felt they had to restrain Jordan Neely in the first place.
The answer is simple: Radical politicians have drained cities such as New York of any law enforcement presence, with no care shown for the average citizens being deliberately placed in harm's way.
If you refuse to protect citizens from violence, and violence has become the norm for New Yorkers abandoned by their elected officials, then they will be driven to defend themselves.
Until law enforcement returns to New York’s streets and subways, citizens will be forced to continue to choose between victimization or vigilantism.
If Democrats don’t like the consequences of their own actions, then they have themselves to blame.
Post a Comment