Jordan Neely was a person.

Our society left him stranded, and, because of his desperation and our warped priorities, his existence filled people not with sympathy but with fear. Then he was killed, and that is a tragedy, because he was a person.

I’m saying obvious things, because they’re clearly not obvious to everyone.

Not just that Neely’s death was a tragedy, but that he was a person.

These are controversial propositions.

I know, because there is a controversy.

https://armoxon.substack.com/p/jordan-neely-was-a-person

Jordan Neely Was a Person

One Nation Under Fear - Part 1

The Reframe
There are people outraged at any suggestion that Neely’s death was a tragedy, an outrage that seems born out of a reaction to the inference that he was a human, because the things these people say only make sense if they have decided that he was not a person.
I notice that many of these outraged people are the exact same people who seem to think every daily police lynching or vigilante act against a marginalized person is justified, and get outraged at every suggestion that the latest atrocity was tragic or unjustified.

This outrage is validated in our halls of power and our media as one of many equal competing perspectives, which means that instead of serving as a shocking revelation of collective cultural inhumanity toward one another, it becomes a debate instead—a *controversial* debate.

So, to repeat: Jordan Neely was a person, a human, and his death was tragic because he had the same measure of humanity as his killer, or you, or me, and observing these facts is one side of a controversy.

Also controversial is any attempt to establish the humanity of anyone who our society has marginalized, which is a word that means “this human’s humanity has been systematically ignored.”

To briefly change the subject somewhat, I’ve been told that I ought to make more of an effort to understand other points of view and perspectives.

That’s interesting, because I am not unhoused or marginalized, so I thought that this is what I was already trying to do.

However, "understanding the perspectives of unhoused or otherwise marginalized people" isn't what is meant.

What’s meant is that I should try to understand the perspectives of others, who refuse to understand any perspectives other than their own.

Anderson Cooper is the most recent person to tell me this, which he did after his network platformed our previous president and filled their studio with fans of our previous president, so that the previous president could defame E. Jean Carroll, a human being who he at the very least sexually abused (her claim, which I find entirely credible, is rape).

Sexual abuse is a crime, and it is the habitual practice of the former president, according to none other than him, for which (along with defamation) a civil jury had just found him liable.

And he also tried to murder Congress and overthrow democracy in the United States.

And he is guilty of many other crimes as well, some of which we watched him do and brag about, others of which we must only presume. And he once took out a full page ad in New York newspapers calling for the execution of some Black kids for a crime they didn’t commit, and so on.

When pressed about doing this years later, he pointed out that there is still disagreement on the matter.

So there's another controversy for you: whether those kids, who killed nobody, killed anybody.

Anyway, mere hours after being found liable to the tune of $5 million for defamation and sexual abuse, the former president and lifetime criminal was given a town hall by CNN, and he immediately proceeded to defame the victim of his sexual abuse.

And his crowd of supporters that CNN picked to clap and cheer everything he said clapped and cheered, which only seems possible if they don’t consider E. Jean Carroll to be a person.

@JuliusGoat Apparently this disgusting turn of events is resulting from a right wing takeover of CNN after their unflattering coverage of the MAGA Coup