If they can elect a felon to the white house, so could we.
Edit: Better image, thanks to @PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
Actually… Shit. That’s kind of a good point. His approach was the non-violent solution.
If we’re fighting with the same weapons, then Biden’s last act should be a pardon for Luigi…
Biden is not on our side on this issue, that’s part of the problem. He is and was the candidate that the people who didn’t want healthcare reform pushed in to block Bernie from putting the issue on the ballot by running on it.
I keep hearing this idea floated, do people really think that Biden is not on the same side as the health insurance companies??
And when he doesn’t, that means we’re not fighting with the same weapons.
I think accepting a pardon implicitly admits you did the thing, which could have complications for states prosecuting.
He hasn’t been convicted yet. You cannot pardon someone who doesn’t technically have a record.
Incorrect. Example, hunter was pardoned for everything he might’ve done in the past 11 years, not just what he was actually convicted of.
I stand corrected. That was quite a misinformed post I made.
Nixon was preemptively pardoned.
Didn’t Trump already issue pre-emptive parsons last time around? Or at least try to?
Yes. Steve Bannon.
Didn’t try. Did.
Mangione (similar to Bannon) has a mixture of state and federal charges levied against him, and Presidents cannot pardon state charges.
Sure. I also don’t imagine for a second that Biden would do it. I was just trying to recall if it was actually accurate that you can’t pre-emptively pardon (or, at least, that there’s no precedent for it; what Trump has done hardly seems to be a guideline for what presidents should be able to do).
Gaetz asked for one, but got denied
Yep. Sometimes it’s good to remind the bourgeoise that they should be scared if the mistreatment of the working class grows unacceptable to the latter, with no way to change things from within the system.
Lets make the word “Guillotine” trend on amazon and google…
Although they are cowards, they are also risk takers by nature, especially when the economy is going their way, so naturally they will always push things too far until it’s too late.
if we nominate him, lawyers can drag out his case until …
Holy shit yeah it’s a get outta jail free card right?!
not for everyone. one of these felons helped the rich. that’s how you get the card.
the other is just an allegation btw. if cops say he did it he probably didn’t. but that alone is the worse crime.
Here is a better version.
Thank you, edited.
I upvoted, but these kinds of posts make me uncomfortable. Luigi was a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis. Luigi is not lefty batman.
I am very happy about the discussions his actions are creating and the overreaction from the upper class, but I am not sure it is a good idea to glorify Luigi.
Explain how Batman was not a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis ?
lmaooo
tangentially I feel like Batman could never jive with leftist ideology anyhow. His whole thing is beating and scaring the crime out of people, which is in contrast to the leftist idea that crime happens because the needs of individuals (physical, psychological, and social) are not met by their material conditions.
the leftist idea that crime happens because the needs of individuals (physical, psychological, and social) are not met by their material conditions.
Like, why do people always jump to thinking there can only be one correct option out of multiple choices?
I am sure there are many people committing crimes because they can’t fulfill their basic needs any other way.
But do you think Trump is lacking in material conditions? People are diverse and they commit crimes for diverse reasons.
Nah, you’re right, it definitely isn’t as simple as all due to the material conditions, although I do tend to think the majority of crime is due to them. At the same time, I’m not sure I’m using material conditions in the correct technical sense, and was thinking about including a , “someone feel free to correct my usage” note in my comment. I also wasnt really itching for a super in-depth conversation about it, even though your question
do you think Trump is lacking in material conditions?
is a really interesting one that I’d need to think and talk about a lot. I think if we had appropriate non coercive controls against accumulation of property, while also living in a society that met the physical, psychological, and social needs of its people, Trump perhaps would not be a criminal.
This comes from my tendency to think people are more inherently good than evil, and that much of the evil comes from the patriarchal culture of accumulation
Because crime to account for material needs is the easiest route to lowering crime you just need to have a government that represents the people and not private interests, also consider that living in a corrupt unforgiving oligarchy isn’t doing a god damn thing for mental health either.
You do realize none of what you wrote answers my question nor contradicts anything I wrote, right?
Lol responded to the wrong comment.
Good point ☝️
Also batman didn’t change the systemic issues with Gotham.
Also batman didn’t change the systemic issues with Gotham.
This is exactly what I have been saying since the assassination. You cannot fix systemic problems with vigilantism.
Did anyone’s coverage go down? No. Did UHC just deny the claim of a woman in a coma? Yes.
You cannot fix systemic problems with vigilantism.
Well you can’t fix it from within the system. You can’t fix it with vigilantism, but it can be fixed as every other country in earth has fixed this problem.
The fuck do you people want then?
Fix it within the system using the threat of vigilantism as the or else.
That’s how we got worker rights… threat of communism.
There was time to fix it from within the system. That was before the fascist dictator was elected. There is no fix at this point. The good news is it will almost certainly come all crashing down due to incompetence and you only have a few years before global warming because a much bigger problem than healthcare anyway.
What do I want? A socialist utopia. I’m just not under any illusions about it happening in America.
No, there demonstrably wasn’t. This happened under Biden.
Sorry, do you think time began in 2020?
Batman repeatedly made attempts at systemic change using his wealth. It’s kind of his arc - he starts young out of anger and rage with his only limit being he would not kill. As he ages, his various funds and programs he starts run into roadblocks from criminals seeking to exploit vulnerabilities in then to enrich themselves. But his biggest problem (in Gotham at least) is that there are many villains who simply want to fight progress because it makes them feel good. His money can do a lot of the work, but his particular skills allow him to apprehend some of the biggest challenges to his goals.
But he’s still human. He’s still deeply flawed. That’s sort of the whole point. He’s not fixing everything alone, he can’t. None of us can.
Lets be real, Batman’s method of vigilantism was to beat up the people being hurt the most by the system, the poor, the lonely, the mentally unhinged, he didn’t really participate in going after the people responsible for sad state of affairs in Gotham.
Also you cant fix this country with a fully captured government either, so is your point that we should just give up?
Or will you accept that in this case, the plural of vigilante is revolutionaries.
Ah yes, the great revolution that’s been coming any day now my entire life that will set everything right.
Weird how this revolution didn’t happen before the fascist dictator got into power when it might have had a much greater chance of success.
I don’t really care what you do. Feel free to think America will be a socialist paradise with permanent Republican rule and if it isn’t, the people who either voted for Trump or didn’t give enough of a shit to vote at all will totally rise up and change things. Sounds probable.
If you’re waiting for perfect, you’ll be waiting for ever.
I mean if people are gonna have guns and people with mental crises who go and murder other people, then let’s choose the lesser evil:
a) Sandy Hook style shooting up a school, killing many kids and teachers
b) New Orleans style driving a car into a public event, killing many partygoers
c) Luigi style murdering a single person who is arguably themselves guilty of causing the legal death and suffering of thousands
Now what would be the lesser evil in this scenario?
Obviously, I prefer no dead people, which would require regulating guns and providing mental healthcare and a social safety net to people, but alas, that option seems to be impossible.
unfortunately it is also a bad showing of the left because this guy ends up taking more action.
“the point of theory is to change the world” -Marx. If the left does nothing then the left has failed us. Luigi isn’t perfect, but he is a real person who was willing to sacrifice everything, to walk away from a life of comfort and privilege, just to take a stand against evil and to show the entire world that even a god king can bleed (300 reference)
Luigi was a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis. Luigi is not lefty batman.
That sounds a lot like Batman.
That’s why I use Saint Luigi. It’s a ignore all the things that don’t line up with the ideal, and only focus on those that do kind of thing. Just like the churches do with thier saints. Lol
Lefty Batman is inherently contradictory too. Because a real leftist Batman would use his money to fix the systemic problems of Gotham, and are you still really Batman if you’re not out beating the shit out of poor mentally ill people?
Or you could make the argument that Batman solves his problems with violence, in which case Luigi is fucking literally Lefty Batman for targeting a person far closer to the problem than Batman ever normally would.
Because a real leftist Batman would use his money to fix the systemic problems of Gotham
The last Batman movie makes explicit this contradiction in Batman. Batman acts in a vigilante manner to save individuals. Yet, the fund Bruce Wayne is custodian of is the source of the cancer at the core of Gotham.
Crypto bro working through a mental crisis… not lefty batman…
Batman was a rich bro with severe mental trauma. Any modern reboot would have no problem making Wayne a crypto bro.
I don’t think he’s a hero, but his actions are the inevitable outcome of our system.
When justice can no longer be achieved through peaceful demonstration or the legal system, people will increasingly turn to violence as their only option.
While I won’t celebrate violence, I do prefer targeted violence upon those causing the damage to mass murders of innocents.
If you’re going to murder someone - don’t. But if that doesn’t stop you, I’d rather the victim be someone who damages the world instead of schoolchildren and churchgoers.
The NOLA NYE terrorist attack on random party-goers is also an inevitable outcome of our system.
A lot of people on Lemmy believe that a wealthy elite controls the whole system. I think it’s far more likely that no one controls the system. Sure, some people are able to get rich off the system and carve out a little niche for themselves but the whole state apparatus is just a big tug of war that’s long since pulled everyone into the mud pit.
Political gridlock was long ago designed into the system as a way of preserving the compromise between ideologically disparate groups. Now we’re reaping what we sowed.
A lot of people on Lemmy believe that a wealthy elite controls the whole system. I think it’s far more likely that no one controls the system. Sure, some people are able to get rich off the system and carve out a little niche for themselves but the whole state apparatus is just a big tug of war that’s long since pulled everyone into the mud pit.
The closest I’ve seen to that is people explaining that the upper owning class has influence and control over many aspects of society, like politicians and mass media, but this does imply a conspiracy, that any one group has a cohesive agenda or control. It’s more about acknowledging a mutual class interest among the owning class which trends towards certain outcomes despite that tug of war among them.
It’s not glorifying Luigi. He’s a vigilante. The health insurance companies are criminals in the eye of the majority, and the majority can’t get it changed through legal peaceful means. The vigilante sees an injustice and takes it upon themselves to enact justice extrajudicially.
As we have seen, the majority appears to to support his actions. His background is unimportant. Humans are very grey. That’s one of the things that democracy can account for.
Think of it this way: if he was willing to risk all that he had to enact justice once does that not make him better than many of us? How many of us have smaller amounts of excess, are directly impacted by the health insurance companies, yet have done nothing but take steps that have not helped anyone else? That’s the definition of sacrifice rather than compromise.
Does the meme not imply that Luigi should be the next Presidential candidate? Is that not glorifying Luigi?
No.
The meme is pointing out that the non-violent solution didn’t work. The “common cultural knowledge” that makes it humourus is that a wealthy guy with 37+ felony convictions and no interest in the common people. Luigi killed one dude that had it coming.
It’s not glorifying a thing. It’s the common millennial Gallows Humor.
Ah, my bad. This is what I get for posting while sick. Sorry.
There will never be the perfect Robin Hood. Engels was wealthy, Bernie is a millionaire.
Really the point is that Luigi is (allegedly) right, and represents a justifiable sentiment of disdain for the system and class solidarity.
I agree. Do we really want to make Luigi a political leader then?
I think this is less about actually making Luigi a political leader and more about reminding everyone that the actual political leaders the working class puts forward deserve consideration as a compromise by the powerful people in the system, because the working class could at any point decide to stop compromising.
The System works by compromising, should the system through fuckery stop delivering acceptable compromise, the (by far) larger class has other ways to defend its interests.
I voted for someone who wanted to continue a genocide in order to keep her popular vote count higher than Trump’s (I live somewhere where my vote does nothing). ¡Viva Luigi!
Yeah, he’s only (allegedly) killed one guy. That’s not even close to rookie numbers for political leaders.
Well if the OP does literally mean to imply that they want Luigi to run or something I do disagree there, but I’m pretty sure they’re just making a point.
It’s hard to say. There are people out there who literally believe Luigi should be the President. I don’t know how to tell the difference.
Speaking of the devil https://midwest.social/comment/14439838
I appreciate you trying to shift the narrative and demonize our modern day folk hero, but it’s probably not going to work.
Demonize? What have I said that was incorrect?
Just because he’s your “modern day folk hero” doesn’t make him or his actions immune to scrutiny. This way of thinking opens doors that people like you tend to stand firmly against.
No one should ever stand above our laws, our standards of morality, or our ethical codes of conduct without question. And propping someone up to such a height makes you every bit as bad as those you accuse of doing so.
Lol WTF.
They said it makes them uncomfortable, and explained why.
Don’t bring this kind of conversation shutdown, bad faith misinterpreting, toxicity BS from reddit.
When has Batman been lefty?
His generally agreed upon biography is a wealthy billionaire trust fund baby who suffered great emotional loss and broke, who now spends the rest of his life and fortune fighting injustice
I didn’t intend to imply that Batman was lefty.
Honestly, I feel about the same. Meme is funny, and I thoroughly enjoy the discussion, which is why I posted it, but I want actual leftist leaders in charge, not actual Luigi.
The point though is: Bernie was the working class trying to better the system from the inside. If the system keeps fucking us over, the system CAN be overthrown through different means.
The political class better realise that it’s in their favour to have us change the system non violently.
That’s the point though- people tried playing by the rules, the system shat in their faces. Now you have people snapping and going vigilante with guns and that’s called consequence.
You break the socialist contract, bad things start getting lauded
Yeah, I get that this is an inevitable outcome. But now that we’re talking about it, instead of putting every CEO’s head on a spike, let’s try to do something more constructive. You know like creates systemic change to close the wealth Gap.
I’m still proposing that we take the richest person in the US every year, and confiscate 50% of their wealth and use it to fund healthcare, housing, education and food (all basic needs that the top 1% has stolen from us). Then we build a statue in their honor somewhere, labeling them as “This Year’s greatest winner and Patriot”.
It’s a symbol. People are attracted to the idea that someone could coolly shoot an evil guy and (for a couple days) get away with it.
If he had hurt innocents or fumbled the execution (pun intended) he wouldn’t be so popular.
Also consider how our institutions are failing us. People feel, often rightly so, that the systems aren’t working for them. The supreme Court is openly corrupt and makes wildly unpopular decisions. Health care is a shit show. The police somewhat routinely kill innocent people and their dogs. Plus a bunch of stuff that’s not true but people believe. It feels like there’s no path forward, and then some smooth guy just shoots one of the perpetrators dead? Amazing.
I agree. The symbolism is good here. I just don’t like making a symbol of just violence a leader.
He was not wealthy if he couldn’t afford the health care…
All I know is that his family is very wealthy. I hadn’t heard that he couldn’t afford healthcare. Do you have a source on that?
I thought the dead healthcare CEO was the source.
You can kill an insurance CEO while being covered by said insurance.
In the manifesto I read he had coverage. It didn’t matter because the claims were denied.
Do you have that link? When I search for the manifesto I get this one: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto and it doesn’t say anything about coverage or getting denied.
Now I’m not completely sure the source is reliable, so I refrain from posting it.
He’s a symbol of an idea.
He’s part of the reason I hate phrases like “Kill all billionaires”.
Yes, most rich people are pretty evil, and I’d like them taken to task. But simply being born into fortunate circumstances doesn’t make someone evil; it’s the things they DO to keep that wealth that make them a greater or lesser evil. Ideally, everyone would have at least that basic quality of life that he did. Investing in crypto is one thing, but if he committed some atrocity using crypto I’ve yet to hear about it.
Mental health crises are very common now. They don’t necessarily make the act “not brave”.
I have the position that murder is the least ideal form of change, but as the post states all less violent options have been removed from the table at this time. It’s sad that CEO (person) was killed, but it may have been an inevitable outcome.
It’s sad that people with for-profit health insurance are forced to buy it and then killed when they can’t use it. Then I feel bad for CEOs who kill their clients some time later I imagine.
What’s important is what you do.
Not what you claim to be, or what others say you are.
That’s why identity politics are a failure. Classifying people between good or bad by a bunch of meaningless labels. The only classification that matters is what one is doing or not doing.
I’m not classifying Luigi as good or bad as a whole. I am just saying that making Luigi out to be some lefter version of Bernie is not a good comparison. I don’t think we want kill CEOs to be the message of left leadership. The idea scares me, like the pendulum is swinging to far the other way.
I don’t think we want kill CEOs to be the message of left leadership.
Spoken like an agent provocateur. A key aspect of decent humans (what you call left) is that there is no (moral) authority. That’s a concept of asshole humans (a.k.a. “right”).
You could argue that Luigi killing the CEO from a utilitarian perspective is a net positive. Things are still playing out, so it is hard to say.
What i feel strongly about is making Luigi a leader would be a net negative from a utilitarian standpoint.
I wasn’t arguing in favor of making him a leader, just objecting to the trolling about a “left leadership”. The very concept of empathetic people (a.k.a. “left”) is to not crave leadership and to encourage diversity in opinions, which also means that we typically never agree on many things. That’s the main weakness of people with a conscience versus those who follow an authoritarian cult.
You are correct. I messed up. I miss interpreted the post as suggesting Luigi become a leader. This is on me. Sorry.
After having used reddit until the API changes, lemmy seems way too civilized ;) No biggie, have a good day!
Spoken like an agent provocateur
Spoken like an agent provocateur.
I think this kind of exemplifies our problem. We’re more focused on keeping up partisan divides than we are on celebrating what brings us together. I’m guilty of it too, but it’s not supposed to be Left vs. Right, it’s a class struggle and we’ve let them create a situation where all we want to do is fight amongst ourselves.
I’d vote for him. Or against his conviction, if I was on his jury.
Btw is Lemmy.world finally cool with that opinion yet?
Yeah, there was clarification a few days after the assassination that discussing jury nullification for crimes already-committed was not a violation of the TOS, contrary to the claims of some of the mods (not admins).
I haven’t had anything deleted and I’ve said more than a few things about Luigi and death to CEOs
Excellent 😈
Got blocked from contributing over the. Oh well. New account
Lemmy.world was never not cool with that opinion. There was an issue about talking about jury nullification which, it turned out, did not apply to this case, and it is not legal to call for assassination in The Netherlands, where the server is based, so those posts get removed because, and I really don’t know why people don’t get this, we want Lemmy.world to continue to exist.
Hey I appreciate your explaining the nuance. Thank you.
Yes, thank you! There’s an important difference between “I can understand why he did that, the system indeed is fucked” and “More people should do this”.
Empathy isn’t necessarily a call to copy that behaviour and reminding people that a system that mistreats people will create suffering on all sides isn’t the same as endorsing the suffering of one side.
It’s not even an ethical issue in this case. It’s literally that we have to obey the law if we want to exist.
I love this.
But he can’t run because by the time of the next election he’ll be a convicted fe-
-Oh wait, never mind.
This is frickin’ genius. Let’s get some yard signs pronto - Etsy people, Assemble!
Disgusting. This is as bad as championing Trump. Rape, murder—what’s the difference?
Who you murder matters.
I have zero problem with all the Nazis the Allies murdered in WW2.
This is a class
waroccupation. The Class war was lost in the 80s, the people were tricked into surrendering without terms. Luigi, an alleged traitor to his class bless him, tried to foment a resistence/revolution to the class occupation most of us suffer under.The idea that change must be nonviolent is something that the oligarchs put in our heads to maintain their control, which includes violence using captured government force against us. Most nations were founded using violence, including this one. Further, the oligarchs have captured both major parties, leaving us to bicker on social issues, and without a vote on the shape and priorities of the sociopathic economy both parties are well paid to defend from us, the people that suffer it. Our nonviolent options have been taken away, as we’re encouraged to be divided and hate our fellow laborers on every conceivable wedge so we never look up. Divide and profit.
Brian was murdering Americans in swaths. His murder weapon was snake oil, a con: “buy our service as your preparation for inevitable illness! Just give us your money every month, and you’ll be prepared when you need life saving care…” “… Oh you’re sick now? You’ll die without care you expect us to pay for? Whatever gave you the idea we’d pay for your care? Thanks for all the premiums, fuck off and die, poorie sucker.”
cough India’s independence, Jim Crow Laws. cough cough
Neither of which were achieved through purely peaceful means.
Ghandi had violent freedom fighters supporting the same cause, which are never mentioned in today’s history books. And the civil rights movement had Malcom X, the Black Panthers, and riots.
Violent flanks are associated with higher success rates of social movements:
https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/1/3/pgac110/6633666?login=false
“India’s Freedom Struggle (1857-1947) was shaped by influential leaders who are called Freedom Fighters of India like Mahatma Gandhi, who pioneered nonviolent resistance”
Those riots wouldn’t have had any influence whatsoever, along with so much of all the other things done outside of the influence of MLK’s nonviolent influence, if it wasn’t for him sitting down with the president himself, and pressuring him via calm mindedness logic and reason, not to mention organizing the biggest moment in the entire movement by far.
If only the leader of Poland had sat down at a table and calmly negotiated with Hitler to not invade.
That’s obviously not what I’m saying exactly. If you’re interested check out Leo Tolstoy’s non-fiction: Confession, What I Believe, The Gospel In Brief, and The Kingdom of God Is Within You
You’re so close to getting it.
I hope someday I can say the same for you my friend.
India’s independence
There was plenty of violence there, even in the Quit India Movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi.
Violence didn’t result because Gandhi ever advocated for it, it was something that happened as a result of it. Because again non-violence isn’t just standing by and doing nothing, it’s about resisting evil via non-cooperation. Resisting it by not obeying it; not retaliating, but never to submit to evil at the same time.
Why does this argument assume violence is always evil?
There are plenty of situations where non-violence is not effective, where an attacker does not want or need co-operation, making non-cooperation merely non-resistance to evil. Sometimes the only realistic way to disobey violence is with targeted counter-violence or the threat of counter-violence, we don’t always have the luxury of non-violent tactics available to us.
Even groups like antifascist orgs emphasize that non-violent tactics are generally preferred, and I agree completely, but ultimately, there are many real-world situations where non-violent methods just aren’t applicable. This is important to realize if we want to stop evil.
“Where an attacker does not want or need co-operation.” That’s the context in which I’m speaking. That’s the whole point, to not submit to both your inherent need to retaliate and there demand for you of something; to not just sit there and do nothing, but resist—non-violently. To not submit to them taking your land, your children, but to do so non-violently. To resist the aggressor, by never giving them your obedience, which includes allowing them to harm you or your loved ones, but without literally fighting back, but by never backing down at the same time.
👊🏻 fuck yeah
Luigi didn’t change anything. He just killed a guy, who will be shortly and largely painlessly replaced by another stooge to do the bidding of the owners of society.
Real resistance must be organized to achieve anything. This Rambo shit is a Hollywood fantasy. And yes, organized nonviolent resistance can work and has worked many times, including in regimes far more repressive than the US.
I recommend reading Civil Resistance: What Everyone Needs to Know for those interested in how resistance movements an actually win real change.
Luigi didn’t change anything.
- Overnight sense of fraternity and class solidarity amongst the working class
- Billionaires and execs are already second guessing their safety
- Would be school shooters types were taught there is a better outlet for their anger that will get them national love, attention, and legal donations
- Reinvigorated interest in gun ownership amongst everyone
- Started a national conversation about how the rich are robbing us blind and killing us in mass, a conversation that is still going a full month later despite the media’s constant distractions
Yeah, absolutely nothing changed. 🙄
I think you are way overestimating the reach of these changes due to echo chambers. Most people don’t support Luigi outside of terminally online political radicals (no hate, that’s me as well). Loud but small in numbers.
It’s possible his action will take on a symbolic importance that leads to bigger changes in the future. But that remains to be seen, and I think ordinary people are already forgetting about this story. Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
My 80-year-old Trump voter MIL recently told my wife we need more Luigis in the world. Anecdotal but I think it’s probably more commonplace than you’re imagining.
There was a poll posted indicating 70% of those surveyed view united health care’s CEO as “kind of asking for it”, not that uncommon.
Most people don’t support Luigi outside of terminally online political radicals (no hate, that’s me as well). Loud but small in numbers.
They don’t need to support him for the above changes. But now that you mention it, a rather significant number of people support him even if they’re in the minority:
Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
I agree. But it’s absolutely silly to think nothing changed.
But that remains to be seen, and I think ordinary people are already forgetting about this story.
I’m not even in the USA and that’s not the case here.
Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
Yes, but this is very different from saying it didn’t change anything. It evidently has. We’re not pretending this is the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the flashpoint of a new era. No, this is one of the small little steps where organizing becomes more viable, when the “”“public debate”“” shifts from ‘is it ok to punch nazis?’ to ‘is it ok to assassinate the worst capitalists?’. For many, it’s provided a real window into the corporate mass media’s alienation from the people on the ground.
I mean, if actually meeting your end at the hands of a customer your company fucked over becomes a perceived risk to the job, C-suites might think twice about anti-human profit-seeking decisions for their companies
Maybe, but that’s only going to happen through a broader movement and not through a single killing. And organizing a movement to kill enough people will be difficult or impossible (and I believe unethical but I understand I’m in the minority there). OP had it backwards—nonviolent resistance is actually much easier because of state repression, not in spite of it.
Also, I think without deconstructing the structures that produce such outcomes, it would be at best a temporary improvement.
Luigi wasn’t working in an organised group though… he was a disgruntled citizen fucked over by our healthcare system like many, many others in this country. You don’t need to organise shit when you’re denied life-saving treatment and have nothing to lose by offing another greedy billionaire. Wouldn’t surprise me if we start seeing more Luigi’s until our government and the billionaires who control it start listening.
https://www.npr.org/2024/12/05/nx-s1-5217617/blue-cross-blue-shield-anesthesia-anthem
To those patients… it matters.
It’s unclear if this is related to the assassination. There were a lot of efforts pushing back against this horrible policy so attribution is difficult without knowledge of their internal deliberations.
Given the timing, and the general apathy and march towards even more malice towards their customers, that would be an unbelievable coincidence.
The day before, they simply had no fear to rescind a profitable new policy. It also happened at the same time BCBS took down all their executive profiles from their website. Was that also just coincidence? Or do you concede that was because of the shooting?
No I think that clearly was. But you are ignoring pressures by various elected officials and civil society on the anesthesia policy. Luigi may have been a factor but he clearly wasn’t the only factor.
I don’t think most of these decision-makers really understood why Luigi did what he did, or why so many people supported him. They think they’re the good guys. And it’s not at all clear that this policy change will protect them from the kind of person who does this anyway. So the causal link is not as clear as you imply.
That said, I’d be interested to hear health care execs talk about how this made them feel or behave, if any are willing to be honest. Maybe I am wrong, it’s difficult to know.
But you are ignoring pressures by various elected officials
Seriously? Both parties are very well bribed to protect their sociopathic corporate greed from civil society.
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/industry-detail/F09/2024 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/summary?id=D000000348
If there were elected officials working against them, there were a hundred elected officials being called by the companies telling the parties to get their spoiler members, because the DNC and RNC only promote on your ability to get the bribe money aka “fundraise,” back in line.
My question still stands: rape regarding trump, and murder in this circumstance—what’s the difference?
It wasn’t the oligarchs that suggested nonviolence, sweet lord; hate only ever breeds more hate, evil only ever makes more evil. Love (selflessness, i.e., logic and reason) is the only true remedy, as proved in gaining India’s independence, and in eliminating the Jim Crow Laws here in America as a couple examples; not to mention leading to mankinds first experimenting with Democracy in ancient Geeece: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codrus
Most of Greece fell to Tyrant rule for the next 400ish years, while Athens stood tall to practice this system of Archons, leading to 9 more positions regarding things like their judiciary system and religion.
Do you think we could have loved the Nazis into standing down and stopping their genocide?
Do you think you can love a sociopath capitalist murdering for profit into no longer doing so?
Do you think plotting to run up and Hug Brian would have saved a single life? Because BlueCross, at least for now, reversed a policy to deny enough anesthesia for surgeries because of what Luigi allegedly did. He brought about positive change to some, for now, however temporary.
I don’t believe in justice in another life there’s no evidence of. Loving hate just gets you mowed down, this isn’t a fairy tale or a movie. If we want to turn an unjust world into a just one, good vibes won’t cut it when the people in charge don’t even view us as people due to no meaningful net worth.
Yeah, I can assure you, returning good for evil done is far from a fairy tale or movie, and a slap in the face to all the people that have given their lives for its cause and its potential.
We’ve always retaliated throughout history, and it only ever got us more and more retaliation; it only ever puts a reason to retaliate in someone’s lap. The tickle of love or hate in the world both begins and ends with the individual.
You say that as if this is a retaliation, then peace, then retaliation.
United Healthcare murdered people for profit yesterday. They are today. They will tomorrow. This is an active attack. An active slaughter is upon the people, though the owners just call it business, whether we would fight back or not.
Don’t confuse quiet for peace. We haven’t had peace here in decades.
No amount of murder justifies the murder of even one.
I’m not sure what you mean by the peace retaliation bit, can you explain?
Are you familiar with the trolley problem?
We wouldn’t be appealing to the Nazi’s in this regard, we would’ve been appealing to the people of Germany, and the soldiers—the men that made up the Nazi regime.
It was literally just explained to you.
I tried to 🤷
You got more patience than I do, so props to you.
You didn’t though. If so, would you care to explain further? And make sure to answer the question directly this time.
I can repost my at length response as to who is murdered and why matters, your response to it would indicate you don’t see the someone murdering an active murderer, or a member of a mass murder movement, as any different than any random murder of hatred or convenience.
Eva Braun apparently just didn’t love Adolf enough to mend his heart.
So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it’s unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?
No it wasn’t. If so, please kindly reply to me with it quoted so I can understand more clearly. Thank you.
Who you murder matters.
I have zero problem with all the Nazis the Allies murdered in WW2.
So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it’s unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?
The conversation is about murder, not rape. The purpose of rape is to personally gain sexual satisfaction, or to hurt someone for the sake of it. That is not the case here, and it’s a false equivalency.
Bootlicker.
When will leftists face the fact that Bernie simply wasn’t popular enough to win not one but two primaries?
Love Luigi, (may he live forever), but this delusion around Bernie is hilarious.
When will leftists face the fact that Bernie simply wasn’t popular enough to win not one but two primaries?
That doesn’t mean that Bernie didn’t represent a rising appetite for change in the system, which is what this meme is pointing at.
The DNC fucked over Sanders. All of the super delegates were on Hillary’s side before the DNC even had its first primary making it seem like Bernie was not a real choice, while the media downplayed him constantly (the billionaire owned media? shocked pikachu face). This was such clear bullshit that the DNC even changed their rules in 2018 to make it so the super delegates cant vote on the first primary ballet, but I believe its because it doesnt make a lick of difference either way. The people who run the country would never allow us to move in a direction of fixing the problems of unregulated capitalism.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/25/democrats-rules-superdelegates-sanders
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/25/politics/democrats-superdelegates-voting-changes/index.html
I don’t know why you’re surprised or confused about this. Bernie was an independent and not even a member of the DNC until just before the election.
He was an unknown. Hillary has been a part of the party for decades. That’s like complaining that the DNC didn’t throw full support behind a Green party candidate that switched just before the election. That’s not bullshit. That’s just how politics works. Bernie didn’t lay the foundation of trust needed to get the DNC to back him.
Your argument was that he wasn’t popular enough, my argument is that he never stood a chance In the DNCs primary regardless of popularity with the voters. Now if you wanna say Bernie couldn’t win against the entrenched DNC superdelegates, then yeah obviously. But if you wanna say he couldn’t win the popular vote in the election, well I’d love to show you Hilary, someone even diehard DNC voters didn’t give a shit about to the extent that she lost to an orange toddler, and that’s who the DNC went with.
As an aside the reason Bernie losing pisses people off so much is he is the only candidate for president that has existed in decades that actually ran on a platform of representing the people, with a proven track record of being on the side of the people, and not just pretending to while gobbling billionaire dick.
Two things can be true. He was both not popular enough and didn’t lay the foundation to succeed within the DNC.
Even three things can be true. The two above and Hillary was also unpopular outside of the Democrat party. But she was still popular enough to win the primary.
Leaving aside the issue of whether or not he legitimately lost those primaries (which is certainly debatable at least in 2016), I think he would have not been a very effective president because both parties in congress and the judiciary would have done everything in their power to oppose any social welfare policies he might have tried to get implemented.
Obviously, he would have been better than Trump, but I do not think he would have achieved much. In fact, I think he would have achieved less than Carter.
I agree with your point to everyone working against him. Btw I love Bernie and voted for him both times. But I’m just tired of leftists shooting themselves (and all of the rest of us) in the foot by spreading anti-Democrat propaganda during and between every election and being all shocked Pikachu when literal billionaires take over the government as a result.
It’s usually privileged white leftists who think their political puritanism is justified.
You do know the meme doesn’t say “Bernie would have won” or anything like it, yes?
We all know you lefties think Bernie was “plotted against” by the DNC or some other victim mentality bullshit you guys love so much. Lmao.
*plonk* <º)))))><
The Democratic Party primary doesn’t choose the President, though. The electoral college does. At least one analysis of the polls concluded that Sanders could have won the EC.
Why russian flag?
I did not create this meme, but if you’re referring to the colours, blue red and white are the colours of the US flag. Afaik all design elements and colours are directly taken from irl Bernie-posters.
Huh.
Btw. this apparently russian flag seems to be an accidental result of the design language of those posters. On posters with a white background the top stripe is blue instead of white. The design simply tries to use the 3 american colours and retain the appearance of 2 stripes.
This seems to be the original design and was simply adjusted to a blue background with this unintentional side effect of creating the impression of a russian flag.
And an American flag is a nightmare in terms of graphic design. It’s asymmetric, both the stars and the stripes are distracting and, honestly, it’s just ugly.
Too many flags are red, white and blue
Red white and blue are actually the colors of the Russian Federation’s flag. It shouldn’t be my job to educate you /smdh
Sorry the /s stands for just kidding.
Do you recognize this flag? Can you tell me what the colors on it are?
That looks like a French flag that was put in a blender.
Wow, y’all just became, un ironically, Unabomber stans?
Holy shit, losing the election surely fucked everyone up in the head
As far as I know, Luigi’s popularity is not limited to one political side.
It could also be referring to overall election loss, or DNC primary loss.
that is some impressive mental gymnastics to equate those two things, keep huffing the copium.
The Unabomber was anti-technology and explicitly anti-leftist, besides mainly targeting random civilians, so idk how he’s at all comparable to Luigi, whose (alleged) manifesto is simply right, and who (allegedly) killed one CEO of the most stingy healthcare insurance company, who was also being accused of insider trading and fraud.
