Civilization and the Innate Moments of Derek Chauvin; What a Genius of Democracy, What a Mess of Democracy?
Posted: 29 Apr 2021, 16:33
I may sound like a broken record in making intuitive comments about civilization. Then again, the more I try to understand it deeply based on a limited reading of history and observation of contemporary happenstances here in the U.S., the more it appears to me that the intuition is validated.
Two innate moments of Derek Chauvin have become one case in point for me.
The first one was when he was staring at a camera that was capturing him as he knelt on the neck of the late George Floyd. I have no expertise in reading body language. However, looking at the picture looked to me that his innate thinking was as if he was asking how dare anyone takes his still or motion picture, as he was doing that. I do not think that he was able to ask himself how dare I am doing this to a citizen of my country and a fellow countryman or any other human being for that matter. I do not also think that he was out to consciously infuriate the rest of humanity by his actions.
The second one was when his eyes were turning to look in different directions just as he was preparing to hear the verdict of his trial. To close observers of what it means to be civil, what may be most surprising about that innate moment of his is that he looked as if he had an expectation to hear a not guilty verdict. What can explain that kind of expectation by any conscious human being in light of the abundance of evidence presented during the course of the trial?
I take his faculty as one more sample in order to make my point about civility and hence civilization. During both of his innate moments, I couldn't tell at all if there were any reckoning in his faculty that he wasn't above the law of the land. He knelt on George Floyd's neck as a man above the law, he went to trial as a man above the law, he attended the trial as a man above the law, and, from what I can tell, he expected a verdict as a man above the law. That is what I call his most surprising innate consciousness.
As his eyes turned to look in different directions just before the verdict was read, it looked as if the law of the land was coming to flash before his eyes that he was below the law. In a nutshell, the civilization I have been referring to is the transition from considering oneself to be above the law to reckoning the self to be below the law. In my book, this kind of reckoning is the earliest form of civilization in the history of mankind.
I am not sure if this reckoning has so far been seared into the consciousness of Derek Chauvin, considering that his innate moments captured by cameras at this age in his life do not seem to reveal any registry of that reckoning.
Given his French last name, one could easily presume that at this age in his life, he would be literate about the French Revolution for liberté, égalité, fraternité. One of his defense pronouncements by his defense team that George Floyd was able to breathe when he said "I can't breathe" moments before he died has become an analogous bit, at least for me, to why they don't eat cake question to the starvation of bread.
It is hard to say whether he is a French man lost in America or one of that American subset that is yet to reckon with the supremacy of law instead of the false and self-destructive feeling of the supremacy of one tribe over another.
In the absence of civilization, that self-destructive feeling has registered a long history in continuity.
Given my limited reading and understanding of history, the destructive medieval anarchy is unmatched anywhere in the world. It appears to me that Hitler's barbaric destruction is also unmatched anywhere in the world. In addition, it appears evident that contemporary gun violence in the U.S. is unmatched anywhere in the world.
Add to that the fierce attack on democracy by elements of the citizenry of the U.S. on its Capitol on January 6, 2021. If that kind of fierce riot was to defend democracy, it wouldn't surprise me. Those that innately value civility, civilization, and hence democracy can be so fierce to defend it. When you realize that that kind of fierce attack by some elements of the U.S. citizenry is against democracy, I don't know if you can reach any other conclusion than telling those elements that democracy is not their baby.
This is what makes the work of those who studied about it, borrowed it, and established it here in the U.S. in order to overcome such kind of lawlessness using its checks and balances mechanism imaginations of geniuses even if those imaginations couldn't save themselves from committing the original sins. They must have had the foresight for the checks and balances to overcome such riots.
In my view, the January 6, 2021, riot was also one of the moments that unraveled those original sins when some of the descendants of the excluded from establishing the borrowed democracy became the fierce defendants of that borrowed democracy while some elements of the descendants of the exclusionists unleashed their fierce attack on democracy.
I understand that many people equate democracy with the product of democracy. The rule of law that gave birth to democracy leads to creativity. This doesn't mean creativity would be null in the absence of democracy. Robers may have more imaginations for temporary creativity than the robbed. That doesn't make robbery civilization. It still remains barbarism in practice. Its mobility makes it a means for plundering while on the march.
Recently, I had a chance to watch on TV one of the greatest marvels of creativity on the planet in the UK, its palace in Windsor. I presume that the inception of the Magna Carta preceded the idea of building this marvelous architecture. While watching it, one can't help asking how much of the resources from other continents may be in the architecture on that Island.
Apparently, the UK is a monarchy that the founders of the U.S. fought against to be independent of and established for it a democracy of checks and balances and gave it leverage for science and scientific thoughts.
Then again, while science and scientific thoughts were meant ages ago to be for the benefit of humanity, some in the contemporary age have the audacity to abuse them for innately barbaric exclusionary practices.
To many around the world, those ancient thoughts may have become innate values and ways of life under the rule of law. On the other hand, to the medieval anarchists, Hitler's Nazi, the Derek Chauvins of this world, elements of the fierce rioters on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. 2021, to attack democracy, the ways of life under the rule of law have been a yet to come reckoning. Sometimes, I wonder how this reckoning would take shape if some elements never came in contact with the part of the world where medieval anarchy was never unleashed or never reached.
The contemporary debate here in the U.S. between those who have reckoned with the rule of law and those elements for whom that reckoning appears to be yet to come has only made its contemporary practice of democracy a mess.
Those who wrote its constitution put the people before the constitution. That is evident to this day from the phrase "we the people." So, what can be said of it when some individuals willfully put themselves above the people who pay taxes and hire them in order to be served by them? If there is a grain of truth in this as evidenced by Derek Chauvin's moments, among others, what can be said of it other than what a mess of democracy?
The word culture, along with its applied derivative cultured, has innate meanings with implications for age-old consciousness. To those with a deep understanding of the words civil, culture, and cultured, how are the terms "civil war," "culture of violence," and "cancel culture" supposed to be interpreted other than to be viewed as haphazardly coined terms and repeated thoughtlessly?
I am not sure if the sources of such shallow terms are public servants. If they are, could such terms be indicative of dereliction of duty by them, for instance, in watching the mess against democracy instead of trying to address it more thoughtfully like the rest?
I submit that I am writing this commentary mainly as a personal reflection of the trial of Derek Chauvin while also reading and hearing bits and pieces of news about current human rights from my own country of Ethiopia, which is appalling. It would be hypocritical of me to write this commentary if I haven't been critical about it. Then again, I would be much interested to watch parallels between the innate reactions of the Derek Chauvin of the U,S, and a Derek Chauvin of Ethiopia if a similar trial were to be held there as well.
Two innate moments of Derek Chauvin have become one case in point for me.
The first one was when he was staring at a camera that was capturing him as he knelt on the neck of the late George Floyd. I have no expertise in reading body language. However, looking at the picture looked to me that his innate thinking was as if he was asking how dare anyone takes his still or motion picture, as he was doing that. I do not think that he was able to ask himself how dare I am doing this to a citizen of my country and a fellow countryman or any other human being for that matter. I do not also think that he was out to consciously infuriate the rest of humanity by his actions.
The second one was when his eyes were turning to look in different directions just as he was preparing to hear the verdict of his trial. To close observers of what it means to be civil, what may be most surprising about that innate moment of his is that he looked as if he had an expectation to hear a not guilty verdict. What can explain that kind of expectation by any conscious human being in light of the abundance of evidence presented during the course of the trial?
I take his faculty as one more sample in order to make my point about civility and hence civilization. During both of his innate moments, I couldn't tell at all if there were any reckoning in his faculty that he wasn't above the law of the land. He knelt on George Floyd's neck as a man above the law, he went to trial as a man above the law, he attended the trial as a man above the law, and, from what I can tell, he expected a verdict as a man above the law. That is what I call his most surprising innate consciousness.
As his eyes turned to look in different directions just before the verdict was read, it looked as if the law of the land was coming to flash before his eyes that he was below the law. In a nutshell, the civilization I have been referring to is the transition from considering oneself to be above the law to reckoning the self to be below the law. In my book, this kind of reckoning is the earliest form of civilization in the history of mankind.
I am not sure if this reckoning has so far been seared into the consciousness of Derek Chauvin, considering that his innate moments captured by cameras at this age in his life do not seem to reveal any registry of that reckoning.
Given his French last name, one could easily presume that at this age in his life, he would be literate about the French Revolution for liberté, égalité, fraternité. One of his defense pronouncements by his defense team that George Floyd was able to breathe when he said "I can't breathe" moments before he died has become an analogous bit, at least for me, to why they don't eat cake question to the starvation of bread.
It is hard to say whether he is a French man lost in America or one of that American subset that is yet to reckon with the supremacy of law instead of the false and self-destructive feeling of the supremacy of one tribe over another.
In the absence of civilization, that self-destructive feeling has registered a long history in continuity.
Given my limited reading and understanding of history, the destructive medieval anarchy is unmatched anywhere in the world. It appears to me that Hitler's barbaric destruction is also unmatched anywhere in the world. In addition, it appears evident that contemporary gun violence in the U.S. is unmatched anywhere in the world.
Add to that the fierce attack on democracy by elements of the citizenry of the U.S. on its Capitol on January 6, 2021. If that kind of fierce riot was to defend democracy, it wouldn't surprise me. Those that innately value civility, civilization, and hence democracy can be so fierce to defend it. When you realize that that kind of fierce attack by some elements of the U.S. citizenry is against democracy, I don't know if you can reach any other conclusion than telling those elements that democracy is not their baby.
This is what makes the work of those who studied about it, borrowed it, and established it here in the U.S. in order to overcome such kind of lawlessness using its checks and balances mechanism imaginations of geniuses even if those imaginations couldn't save themselves from committing the original sins. They must have had the foresight for the checks and balances to overcome such riots.
In my view, the January 6, 2021, riot was also one of the moments that unraveled those original sins when some of the descendants of the excluded from establishing the borrowed democracy became the fierce defendants of that borrowed democracy while some elements of the descendants of the exclusionists unleashed their fierce attack on democracy.
I understand that many people equate democracy with the product of democracy. The rule of law that gave birth to democracy leads to creativity. This doesn't mean creativity would be null in the absence of democracy. Robers may have more imaginations for temporary creativity than the robbed. That doesn't make robbery civilization. It still remains barbarism in practice. Its mobility makes it a means for plundering while on the march.
Recently, I had a chance to watch on TV one of the greatest marvels of creativity on the planet in the UK, its palace in Windsor. I presume that the inception of the Magna Carta preceded the idea of building this marvelous architecture. While watching it, one can't help asking how much of the resources from other continents may be in the architecture on that Island.
Apparently, the UK is a monarchy that the founders of the U.S. fought against to be independent of and established for it a democracy of checks and balances and gave it leverage for science and scientific thoughts.
Then again, while science and scientific thoughts were meant ages ago to be for the benefit of humanity, some in the contemporary age have the audacity to abuse them for innately barbaric exclusionary practices.
To many around the world, those ancient thoughts may have become innate values and ways of life under the rule of law. On the other hand, to the medieval anarchists, Hitler's Nazi, the Derek Chauvins of this world, elements of the fierce rioters on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. 2021, to attack democracy, the ways of life under the rule of law have been a yet to come reckoning. Sometimes, I wonder how this reckoning would take shape if some elements never came in contact with the part of the world where medieval anarchy was never unleashed or never reached.
The contemporary debate here in the U.S. between those who have reckoned with the rule of law and those elements for whom that reckoning appears to be yet to come has only made its contemporary practice of democracy a mess.
Those who wrote its constitution put the people before the constitution. That is evident to this day from the phrase "we the people." So, what can be said of it when some individuals willfully put themselves above the people who pay taxes and hire them in order to be served by them? If there is a grain of truth in this as evidenced by Derek Chauvin's moments, among others, what can be said of it other than what a mess of democracy?
The word culture, along with its applied derivative cultured, has innate meanings with implications for age-old consciousness. To those with a deep understanding of the words civil, culture, and cultured, how are the terms "civil war," "culture of violence," and "cancel culture" supposed to be interpreted other than to be viewed as haphazardly coined terms and repeated thoughtlessly?
I am not sure if the sources of such shallow terms are public servants. If they are, could such terms be indicative of dereliction of duty by them, for instance, in watching the mess against democracy instead of trying to address it more thoughtfully like the rest?
I submit that I am writing this commentary mainly as a personal reflection of the trial of Derek Chauvin while also reading and hearing bits and pieces of news about current human rights from my own country of Ethiopia, which is appalling. It would be hypocritical of me to write this commentary if I haven't been critical about it. Then again, I would be much interested to watch parallels between the innate reactions of the Derek Chauvin of the U,S, and a Derek Chauvin of Ethiopia if a similar trial were to be held there as well.