news Luigi Mangione assassination of UnitedHealth Insurance CEO Brian Thompson Thread

[CallumDavies]

17 minutes ago, nadiamendell said:

If the "rule of law" were working as intended, we wouldn't be in this situation, now would we? 

The rule of law is a principle that is applied to societies through a complex system of actors. Like all systems created and run by humans its messy, complicated and can sometimes lead to very bad outcomes, and often leads to consistently bad outcomes for certain groups. I think that is wrong. But, like all systems, can be improved.

 

Killing people to get your own way undermines your own position if you recognises that everyone should have equal protection under the law. If you don't think that then we hold different political and philosophical positions, and that's okay.

 

I want freedom and safety for the people I know and love, including my community and the places I grew up and lived in. That means I also believe we need to afford those rights to people I think are bad, including those who don't believe in my rights, security and welfare.

 

Murdering people in cold blood isn't okay.

Edited December 10 by CallumDavies

[G.U.Y. Gaga]

On 12/4/2024 at 9:49 AM, dabunique said:

was someone's claim denied?

 

 

 

 

[G.U.Y. Gaga]

On 12/4/2024 at 9:49 AM, dabunique said:

was someone's claim denied?

 

 

 

 

[Kern]

I wish we could show him this thread 

I would just tell him to ignore @Xtina23, she drinks 

Edited December 10 by Kern

[305]

8 minutes ago, Vermillion said:

Thanks. I was trying to put this in the OP earlier and gave up to go on errands.

 

 

He just keeps getting hotter

[Cyanide]

5 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

The rule of law is a principal that is applied to societies through a complex system of actors. Like all systems created and run by humans its messy, complicated and can sometimes lead to very bad outcomes, and often leads to consistently bad outcomes for certain groups. I think that is wrong. But, like all systems, can be improved.

 

Killing people to get your own way undermines your own position if you recognises that everyone should have equal protection under the law. If you don't think that then we hold different political and philosophical positions, and that's okay.

 

I want freedom and safety for the people I know and love, including my community and the places I grew up and lived in. That means I also believe we need to afford those rights to people I think are bad, including those who don't believe in my rights, security and welfare.

 

Murdering people in cold blood isn't okay.

So basically people like you think we should just sit back and allow the 0.1% to kill us for a moral high ground?
 

Your take lacks any real social/cultural/historical awareness and you sound like you would tell slaves in the 1800s that opposing their slavemasters makes them bad people  are you even American? 

[BOOMBAYAH]

We're really going to reach a point where the entire planet is on fire, 90% of healthcare claims are denied, and people are still bending over backward to defend the existence of oil companies and greedy healthcare CEOs—preaching that, one day, they will be held accountable as long as we vote and participate in peaceful marches and spread awareness with infographics.

 

[SLIME]

FÜCK Josh Shapiro and every other politician defending the CEO as an "honorable" man, using language of the past that sounds respectable to our parents and grandparents while betraying stunning disregard to the unique and worsening economic inequality of today.

[BionicWooHoo]

15 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said:

To be clear, after the Daniel Penny acquittal yesterday, it seems clear they also want the homeless cleared off their streets by whatever means necessary, but they don't want their taxes raised to deal with societal problems either. So they'll reward vigilantism and basically say things such as "Killing off the homeless and getting them out of my sight is good, actually."

 

Americans are individualistic to a fault. They'll of course want and accept help when they need it, but then they suddenly become allergic to the concept of "common welfare" when it comes to taxpayer dollars being spent to help anyone else.

Would I love to see politicians do something about homelessness? Of course but how long exactly will that take in Congress? 50 years? 100 years?
Like there's so many perpetually online people from rural bumble **** nowhere talking about "lets just provide mental services you guys! lets work together" like nah, stfu. Unless y'all have been stuck in a subway car with a half naked homeless person ranting and screaming at everyone or gotten mugged or chased by a homeless person in a city, literally stfu. 

[TaggedGalaxy]

The corporate and elite boot lickers in here

[BOOMBAYAH]

The 2028 Primary is going to be a looooong campaign for this guy 

[Cyanide]

3 minutes ago, BOOMBAYAH said:

The 2028 Primary is going to be a looooong campaign for this guy 

This must be the democracy and justice for all @CallumDavies is talking about 

[ClashAndBurn]

6 minutes ago, BionicWooHoo said:

Would I love to see politicians do something about homelessness? Of course but how long exactly will that take in Congress? 50 years? 100 years?
Like there's so many perpetually online people from rural bumble **** nowhere talking about "lets just provide mental services you guys! lets work together" like nah, stfu. Unless y'all have been stuck in a subway car with a half naked homeless person ranting and screaming at everyone or gotten mugged or chased by a homeless person in a city, literally stfu. 

So are you confirming that you would like for homeless people exterminated like vermin? Yes or no?

[awesomepossum]

On 12/6/2024 at 12:15 PM, Helix said:

Hollywood execs are probably already fighting about the movie rights to this story.

 

I'm sure we gonna have a cheap netflix movie next year 

i'm thinking a hallmark movie about the spirit of christmas. you know, a heartwarming tale for the holiday season 

[Domination]

Finally Ken posting the real manifesto. The other one was nauseatingly gratuitous and clearly written by the same crowd who was so convinced this guy was going to be some random leftist living in Cleveland.

[modeblock]

Against my will, I saw Ratpiro defending that CEO on the news. I see he still hasn't dropped the Obama impersonation (extremely embarrassing).  

 

OT: @CallumDavies we get it babe, killing "in cold blood" is BAD. We KNOW! We. Don't. Care. Does it make us bad people to celebrate the death of a murderer? I don't think so. The State failed us when they threw us to the dogs to appease their wealthy donors. We voted. We marched. We begged. They STILL DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO HELP FIX THIS HEALTH CARE CRISIS!!!! 

 

I guess, according to your superior morals, we are bad people because we're celebrating an action that could potentially draw us closer to Medicare for ALL. I'll take it. 

Edited December 10 by modeblock

[Katamari]

What are the odds Luigi's  mansion gets a slight bump in sales

[CallumDavies]

3 minutes ago, Cyanide said:

So basically people like you think we should just sit back and allow the 0.1% to kill us for a moral high ground?
 

Your take lacks any real social/cultural/historical awareness and you sound like you would tell slaves in the 1800s that opposing their slavemasters makes them bad people  are you even American? 

You misunderstand my position, which I'll restate one last time. 

 

It may be your position that it is okay, and in fact, preferable for individuals to make their own moral judgements about who lives and dies. Based on their own subjective assessment. Free from the law, or any common systems of democratic societies. That is fine. I do not hold that position. And I will always fiercely argue against it.

 

I do not think America is a fair and just society. It needs significant if not total reform. I'm not even sure it's possible to save. I am not in favour of 'the system'. 

 

However, I think it is extremely dangerous to normalise a culture of individual, direct, violent or mortal action. If we make that normal, we are all in more danger. We make it acceptable for extremists on the right to take direct action against leaders on the left. If we decide to target people, we also become targets. It's an existential threat to society. That is my philosophical belief.

 

The alternative of collective action is frustrating and slow. I'm not saying that we should just carry on exactly as we have been doing. I am saying that murder is bad. And killing people to get what you want is something that we lose control of, as soon as we chose it.

 

 

[bad guy]

32 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

And even if it did, that is obviously not a moral position to hold. Killing people to achieve political, economic or social objectives is in effect terrorism.

I personally can go into a long debate over morality (I just find it interesting to talk about) because while it's mostly objective just within human nature, it can be bent depending on circumstance. Let's just look at one aspect of American history...would you view Native Americans killing English settlers to achieve an objective as terrorism? Only a few first settlers out of the hundreds went out and actively slaughtered Native people, and much of the Native deaths were attributed to diseases settlers as a whole brought with them, yet non-violent settlers still died in the crossfire. On the flip side do you consider English settlers who sailed to Cape Cod and unknowingly spread disease to the native population, thus endangering their lives and land at the time, all for their economic/social objective of "freedom" from monarchial England as terrorists? Hopefully you see where I'm going with this.

 

In short, I think it's very easy for people to shut down any act of violence as bad and unjustifiable because our morality says that only immoral people do such things, but I think it's much deeper than that. We're not talking about someone who shot a nurse or a receptionist. We're talking about a major harmful power imbalance. Would we call all the medieval serf uprisings against the king to be acts of terrorism? I mean they were technically using violence against the state for their own political objective. We can go through so many variations of this throughout history. I recommend watching The Battle of Algiers (1961) and see if your thoughts on what you describe as terrorism still remain the same.

[awesomepossum]

25 minutes ago, Vermillion said:

Thanks. I was trying to put this in the OP earlier and gave up to go on errands.

 

 

not the top replies saying it's too long 

[Virgos Groove]

To make an omelette, you have to break some eggs.

 

Mark Twain had a fantastic quote on the French Revolution that applies here:

 

Quote

"There were two "Reigns of Terror," if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the "horrors" of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break?  What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves."

 

[CoolNebraskaGuy]

18 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

The rule of law is a principle that is applied to societies through a complex system of actors. Like all systems created and run by humans its messy, complicated and can sometimes lead to very bad outcomes, and often leads to consistently bad outcomes for certain groups. I think that is wrong. But, like all systems, can be improved.

 

Killing people to get your own way undermines your own position if you recognises that everyone should have equal protection under the law. If you don't think that then we hold different political and philosophical positions, and that's okay.

 

I want freedom and safety for the people I know and love, including my community and the places I grew up and lived in. That means I also believe we need to afford those rights to people I think are bad, including those who don't believe in my rights, security and welfare.

 

Murdering people in cold blood isn't okay.

Thanks for the freshman philosophy-level take on morality and ethics in the postmodern world! 

 

You are no student of history with the takes you've been dishing in this thread. Our world is defined by violence and scarcity. Those of us fortunate enough to live comfortable lives in the developed world have been spared of that reality. Maybe not for much longer, sadly. 

[BionicWooHoo]

7 minutes ago, ClashAndBurn said:

So are you confirming that you would like for homeless people exterminated like vermin? Yes or no?

Over simplification and ignores how just a few weeks ago there ppl got stabbed to death by a homeless person in NYC. But sure oh no let's clutch our pearls in the meantime. When's the last time you got mugged or chased by a homeless person on the streets by the way?

[Rush]

 

[RideOrDie]

not the "let's not normalise violence/murder to change systems! otherwise we become targets!" do some of y'all hear what you are saying... were you listening your history class at school... have you ever picked up a history book... some of y'all forgetting we are animals, so continue being prey i guess...