Luigi Mangione represents an idea that is uncomfortable to certain people in power. It’s okay to attribute millions of deaths to Hitler when he gives the order to kill and condones the decisions his subordinates make to carry out that order. But they don’t want to let the poors normalize the idea that a healthcare CEO should be considered similarly responsible for many intentional deaths when he gives the order to deny as many claims as possible especially when they are clearly valid and urgently needed. Brian Thompson is responsible for many deaths. It’s not fair to say he isn’t just because he didn’t kill directly with a gun.
I’m inclined to agree, they don’t want people starting to consider social murder as a crime worth seeking justice for, because the entire government is complicit in a vast network of social murder. An enormous yearly sacrifice all in the name of preserving ‘markets’ for housing, food, transportation, and healthcare.
Hilarious that we forewent a more neutral public option over fears about “death panels.”
Here’s an interesting thought. The CEO is not the only one responsible at this company. His board and also his staff are responsible. We can’t say that they are just following his orders because it’s not Hitler’s military where disobeying an order could get you jailed or killed. This is at-will private employment we’re talking about and they’re all making their own decisions to participate.
So: how far down the ranks would Luigi need to kill in order to address the whole problem? CEOs are an appealing symbol of everything but we really should think past just them. For example, yes their salaries are ridiculous but all together they are also just a drop in the bucket. Bringing CEO pay into line would not fix America by a longshot.
It will continue to be a problem for moderators because of the way they moderate and the terms they outline to moderate by. They leave gray areas for things that are against the law but that they feel are perfectly ok, but not for other things that are against the law that they feel aren’t. They don’t provide clarity about the law in their locality, and they don’t always stick to their moderation in a way that would make it the same for all users and that’s the problem. Additionally they don’t want to be blamed for anything or take backlash for anything so they overlimit some things and under limit others and pretend their hands are tied about both.
And how about here? I say he deserved it, but not necessarily agree with really carrying out the deed. So… Is my comment going to be deleted, or not?
