I find this statement very troubling, and I'm clearly not the only one.

The idea of redemptive, transformative violence is a myth and a trap. https://twitter.com/MayorFrey/status/1384619597576474625

George Floyd did not willingly sacrifice his life for the sins of Minneapolis. He fought for every breath, begged not to be killed. He was no more or less than a human being, living his one and only beautiful, complicated life.

He was trying to get through the day, not be a martyr or a symbol or a hashtag.

He deserved to make it through the day. His family and friends and loved ones deserved to have him around, to spark joy and frustration and all of the other complicated things real human beings do.

They deserved to keep the real George, not share his shadow and memory and likeness with the world in such a horrific, tragic way.

I am sensitive to the myth of redemptive violence because of my dad. He was a minister, and the myth of redemptive violence was a trap he consciously and consistently fought.

There’s so much in Christian tradition that almost fetishizes the suffering of Jesus, and frames the story of Jesus as a fated sacrifice. It removes all agency from his story, makes of him somehow less than a person: a pawn who was born to die, for a greater good.

But that myth is dangerous. It robs the story of its true power and meaning. And belief in redemptive violence can lead you to very dark places, where the “sacrifice” of people you’re hurting and killing is justified by a greater good.

This myth is hard to fight. When bad things happen to good people, we as humans struggle to understand, to find or assign meaning. We are left with an inescapable, all-consuming yet unanswerable question: how could this terrible thing happen?

One of the answers people have come up with is this myth. It only appears that bad things happen; really, it’s all necessary. It’s part of a “plan,” a broader narrative. The life and death of the martyr (Jesus, George Floyd) were part of a broader trajectory towards justice.

It’s understandable. In some ways it’s not a huge leap from “this was terrible, but some good may come of it,” to “this terrible thing happened *so that* good things can follow.”

But really it's night and day.

George Floyd’s little girl can truthfully say her daddy changed the world. But he didn’t choose that. It was not inevitable. It was not okay. It was not right. It was not redemptive, or transformational. It was not part of a broader plan or trajectory. It was just a tragedy.

Violence does not redeem. It does not create. It does not build. The aftermath of violence can include growth and positive change – but the violence is not responsible for that growth.

This statement from the mayor crosses this line, and it's not okay.

Lastly, this also hits home for me because I lost my dad to suicide, years ago. His death changed me, for better and worse. I am who I am in part because he died as he did. Some good came of it.

But my dad’s death did not help anything, solve anything, create anything good.

My dad's death was a tragedy. I would undo it, if I could, even though I know that that would undo some of the good things that happened as a result of it.

I can only imagine that George's loved ones feel the same. That they would trade a "better" Mpls for more time with him.