Luigi Mangione, have we done this yet?

Who gets to choose which causes are “just”?

Elon, the Donald and Jeff..

Depends what you mean by good but it can be incredibly effective, you have to go the whole hog mind – armed insurrection.

While not without the occasional positive outcome, history is littered with case studies of revolutions ending badly for pretty much everyone except whoever is ruthless and lucky enough to grab power next.

It’s not saying that everyone should be armed, swords or gun

But you wrote “we all wore a sword”.

As others have said, violence shouldn’t be the answer but what other avenue do these people have? The system is so corrupted that they have no voice, power or method to appeal. The system is broken and those suffering have no way to fix it.

You start by voting for someone who will reform the system. A huge number of the people who are suffering the most under the US health industry and have “no way to fix it” have happily voted for a candidate who is guaranteed to perpetuate the system for the benefit of his corporate chums.

Where to draw the line is a serious and difficult question, but it’s not reason enough to keep ignoring the problem.

It’s not difficult to draw a line. Individuals should not be dispensing their own justice.

Individuals should not be dispensing their own justice

Is true but that also relies on there being a governmental system that functions.  There are apparently ‘ways’ of dealing with the problems of these companies that don’t involve shooting people but I’m not sure anyone knows what they are.  When a company can use software to deny people claims so that they have to fight when they are at their weakest so that the top people can claim huge bonuses that is clearly completely wrong and also untouchable

Murder is horrific. So cannot say anything other than i hope they nail the killer to the wall. This is a social issue that can only be dealt with at governmental level, and it should never be some deluded individuals responsibility to do such a thing.

Sure the responsibility lies with the corruption that is endemic in the US government system, and the ‘little guy’ has no choice.

The only way is for someone to rise to the top and make the changes. Whether that can or could happen i seriously doubt, but taking the law into your hands and putting all the blame on a single individual is not the answer, nor do i think this CEO is really to blame. More the lobbyists and corrupt senators who support them.

Murder is horrific. So cannot say anything other than i hope they nail the killer to the wall.

Fantastic choice of words there fella. Really helps your argument. Which tbh, only gets more incoherent the more you read. So it can only be dealt with by government, but the government is corrupt and you doubt it can be changed….so?

Whether the CEO of a health insurance company is a model citizen or a total **** is utterly irrelevant. The places in the world that are good to live in are places where policy decisions are made by voting in elections, not by shooting people in the street. Mangione is in the same category as Kyle Rittenhouse – deluded young men who decided to deal with society’s problems by shooting people. This is exactly the sort of thing that plays into the hands of people like Trump, who want authoritarian crackdowns on their opponents. Trump has been urging his supporters to use violence to get their way. Once a society starts on that slide into violence, it’s very hard to stop and we should not assume that the side we support will come out on top – the people who win violent confrontations tend to be the ones who are most willing to use violence.

policy decisions are made by voting in elections

Given the ability of the likes of Musk buying his way to power this might well be totally impossible.

policy decisions are made by voting in elections

Something that only can happen with genuine democracy not the pseudo democracy of the US and UK

Something that only can happen with genuine democracy not the pseudo democracy of the US and UK

Shooting people in the street isn’t going to improve democracy, it will destroy it. If you care about democracy, you will condemn what Mangione did, just like you will condemn what Kyle Rittenhouse did.

Yes?  I never said it did.   But voting only changes things in a real democracy

So for those who say that the CEO deserved what happened to him – how far down the company does that responsibility go, in your opinion?
All of the Board?  The EC?  All senior managers – let’s say MD level and up?
The person answering the phone and looking for policy exlcusions that they can apply to avoid paying  claim?
Somebody who works in HR, IT or other general department within the comapny?
All of these people are profiting front the business practices of the company and are almost certaily aware of what that company does to make profits.

The ACA / Obamacare was targetted by Trump in the election that resulted in his 1st presidency (although the propoganda generally only referred to it as Obamacare from hat I remember) as a ‘bad thing’ and that it should be abolished.
THE VERY PEOPLE THE ACA WAS SET UP TO ASSIST VOTED FOR HIM!
So the claims that people would vote for a party that prioritised affordable healthcare are kinda nonsense.  They got the chance, the majority chose not to.  Well done.

You start by voting for someone who will reform the system. A huge number of the people who are suffering the most under the US health industry and have “no way to fix it” have happily voted for a candidate who is guaranteed to perpetuate the system for the benefit of his corporate chums.

If these democracies were truly democratic, then that using the system to improve your position would be great. However, they’re really not. Both the US and the UK are locking in two party systems where people dance around the edges but unwilling to make dramatic change because that would upset the corporations, which upsets the funding, which upsets the politicians.

It’s not difficult to draw a line. Individuals should not be dispensing their own justice.

Doesn’t that just invite a philosophical discussion about what “justice” really is?

I started this thread as an interesting discussion and it’s proving to be just that. I’m under no illusion that a bunch of (mostly) middle aged men are not going to come up with an answer.

I do think it raises some very probing questions if we’re willing to go deep enough though.

The thing about this that I find interesting is how it finally seems to have Americans more openly questioning the rather obvious inequalities of their society. Some of their observations are both insightful and funny.

I think it’s perfectly possible to see the act of murdering as still being abhorrent, while recognising that act had some wider value by highlighting something very broken in America today…

At the same time, have we forgotten who gets sworn in in a couple of weeks?

Let’s not forget either that the UK’s health system is seen as ripe for the sort of insurance backed bastardry that has ultimately cost lives and made an art of robbing people at their most vulnerable point in the US, We don’t have to copy everything the Yanks do, some of their ideas are shit…

Let’s not forget either that the UK’s health system is seen as ripe for the sort of insurance backed bastardry that has ultimately cost lives and made an art of robbing people at their most vulnerable point in the US

Whether you have a fully public-funded system or an insurance based system like the U.S., health care still has to be rationed in some way, the demand for it can never be satisfied. There aren’t enough hospital beds to keep every sick person in hospital until they are fully healthy and there will always be crushingly expensive treatments that will prolong someone’s life for a bit longer. If it’s publicly funded, doctors make a decision about who gets priority, i.e. who gets to live a bit longer and who dies a bit more quickly. Should we start shooting doctors in the street if they make a decision that we disagree with? What about hospital administrators? What about bureaucrats and politicians who make the decisions about how government funds are distributed?

Once you start condoning shooting people who you disagree with, the list of justifiable targets turns out to be everyone.

Shooting people in the street isn’t going to improve democracy, it will destroy it. If you care about democracy, you will condemn what Mangione did, just like you will condemn what Kyle Rittenhouse did.

Fair point, Rittenhouse is out and about and doing the odd podcast now, little darling of the Right promoting Republicans, Proud boys and Firearms…

Doesn’t look like shooting people in the street has done him that much harm… Do we think Luigi will get similar treatment?

Some great points being made on here, for both sides of the debate.

I agree that violence is never the solution, as the winner is always the most violent/ruthless, which is rarely the little guy.

And if the CEO is a “fair” target, everyone else who chooses to draw a wage from a company involved in this suffering presumably is equally open?

It does highlight that lobbying and the “bought” politicians have persuaded enough of the American public to vote against their own self interests. Maybe this killing will open more eyes and encourage more people to educate themselves on this and other issues to force a change via democratic means, but I’m not sure it will be enough to counter 200 years of “government bad” rhetoric.

Whether you have a fully public-funded system or an insurance based system like the U.S., health care still has to be rationed in some way

Sure, so UHC are just ‘apportioning resources‘ and accidentally made billions off the back of that?

Once you start condoning shooting people who you disagree with, the list of justifiable targets turns out to be everyone.

Who’s condoning? I think a fair few can appreciate the motives even if the act isn’t one they would carry out. Not everyone feels total unmitigated sympathy towards Brian Thompson, he presided over an organisation that ultimately values human life less than profitability, for all it’s flaws I would rather keep the NHS…

Interestingly in NY the penalty for possession of a full size Glock mag is greater than for having a “ghost gun” i.e. a gun without a serial number. The “ghost gun” bit is irrelevant really, as was the use of the silencer. The attacker could have got a legal pistol anyway and he was never likely to escape completely.

One thing to note is this is probably the first issue in I don’t know how long that hasn’t split the country perfectly along party lines.

The right have tried to paint Mangione as a left wing radical and failed spectacularly.  He has equal support from both liberals and Trump supporters.  Why do you think Trump has been conspicuously silent on the subject?

It’s nice to see someone manage to bring the US together again.

One thing to note is this is probably the first issue in I don’t know how long that hasn’t split the country perfectly along party lines.

A very good point, in an age of grievance politics where power is taken by managing to align a broad enough spectrum of supporters who may not totally agree on all things. How many of those who wear a MAGA cap because they keep getting slapped down by corporate America will start to notice that they’ve allied themselves with billionaires, behind a cosplaying billionaire, and they’re still getting **** over by businesses?

By the same token lots of progressives who also considered themselves Dem’s might start finding it harder to balance the old cognitive dissonance when the top of their party has a fair amount of old money and corporate sponsors they might not like…

There will of course come the point when Mangione takes the stand and his words are broadcast (and analysed) worldwide, there’s every chance that he will shatter all sorts of illusions once he opens his mouth. He’s gotten himself a rather unique ‘platform‘ but who knows what he’ll actually do with it?

Doesn’t that just invite a philosophical discussion about what “justice” really is?

No. Private citizens should not be gunning people down in the street.

No. Private citizens should not be gunning people down in the street.

Ahem, as noted above:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_Rittenhouse

He’s gotten himself a rather unique ‘platform‘ but who knows what he’ll actually do with it?

Like almost every person facing similar charges, it’s most likely he’ll do whatever his expensive lawyer advises him to do.

End of page 1 comment raised a question in my mind.

… the reports I seen seemed to suggest he struggled to work, or have relationships due his health problems, and would be facing significant medical bills.

Do you get free healthcare while you’re in a US jail?

I do wonder if they’ve got the right man, originally they were quite specific about the firearm used, a  BT Station Six 9 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7ve36zg0e5o but Mangione was found with a ghost gun…………………………

https://x.com/TheDailyShow/status/1866921478949609752

Will just leave this here.

If you don’t (and understandably) want to visit x.com, it’s a clip of the Fox news coverage of the Luigi Mangione story against the backdrop of Kyle Rittenhouse not-guilty celebration footage that Fox put on for him (Kyle, the chap who murdered two people carrying skateboards).

Personally, I have no sympathy for this CEO or the next one it happens to. The American healthcare system is disgusting, and I don’t think anyone in this country fully appreciates quite how bad it is (something that Sunak and Farage want for the UK btw).

For context United Healthcare made $22Bn in PROFIT in 2023. The exec board, the CEOs and the shareholders directly profit from human suffering and denial of justifiable (Doctors begging) medical claims.

I think there’s two interesting things that have come off the back of this. Firstly; After this shooting every media organization commenting on it has had to deal with the fact that there’s quite a bit public enthusiasm for what he did. Right-wing media figures especially condemning  this assassination have been criticized by their own readers and listeners and insurance companies have pulled down lists of their executives from the internet. It’s captured the public’s attention in a way most mass shootings don’t.

And secondly; at almost the exact same time the United Healthcare CEO was assassinated, a gunman walked into a religious school in California and shot two young children before killing himself. It drew almost no media attention. It was entirely drowned out by the execution of an insurance industry CEO. The armed, bored and radicalised young men who are most drawn to this sort of thing will not miss that. The shooters who will inevitably follow him will all have their own reasons, but ultimately, they’ll copy this,  because Mangione proved it’s what gets attention.

It’s not difficult to draw a line. Individuals should not be dispensing their own justice.

If you don’t want individuals or civilians dispensing justice, then the state must provide it. In the US healthcare system there is no justice and no way for civilians to change the system (spare me the ‘vote for someone who’ll change it’, we know how that ends). Same goes for many other aspects of life in the US and other places in the west. I’m only surprised that this sort of action isn’t an everyday occurence. And those moralising or bedwetting about the ethics of ‘extreme’ actions such as this should consider how extreme it is in relation to a system is that allows thousands of people to die, suffer and be bankrupted so that shareholders can be paid billions in profits.

Doesn’t that just invite a philosophical discussion about what “justice” really is?

No. Private citizens should not be gunning people down in the stree.

It was more a question of whether making money directly from the suffering of others and making decisions that condemn people to death in the name of profit can ever be “just”.

So for those who say that the CEO deserved what happened to him – how far down the company does that responsibility go, in your opinion?

All of the Board? The EC? All senior managers – let’s say MD level and up?

That sounds fair to me. The top decision makers who profit from misery, pain, suffering and death. You can’t be at that level and up and not know precisely what you’re doing and the effects from it. They don’t deserve it but I wouldn’t lose a minute of sleep for them or pretend I care one jot that they’re dead if anything happened to them. **** parasites.

If you don’t want individuals or civilians dispensing justice, then the state must provide it. In the US healthcare system there is no justice and no way for civilians to change the system (spare me the ‘vote for someone who’ll change it’, we know how that ends). Same goes for many other aspects of life in the US and other places in the west. I’m only surprised that this sort of action isn’t an everyday occurence. And those moralising or bedwetting about the ethics of ‘extreme’ actions such as this should consider how extreme it is in relation to a system is that allows thousands of people to die, suffer and be bankrupted so that shareholders can be paid billions in profits.

We have a state justice system in the UK (and the USA). It has many flaws and sometimes gets things badly wrong, but there’s a process, with checks and balances. It’s not clear to me from your reply whether you are actually condoning Magione’s action, but vigilantism is just a race to the bottom. You may not be concerned about the death of a wealthy executive from an ethically bankrupt industry, but how would you feel about someone hitting you over the head because you were driving carelessly, or shooting you because you had too many noisy late night parties? That’s what vigilantism means. If you ignore the guard rails of an (imperfect) legal system and allow anyone to mete out the punishment they see fit, we’re all in the crosshairs, not just the dodgy execs.

The people running the US health care industry are not going to change the way they operate because of what Mangione did, so his action is ultimately futile. If the electorate had endorsed Bernie Sanders in previous elections, who has proposed a universal, free at the point of service national health insurance system, it would have sent real shock waves through the health industry. As I said before, in the last election a lot of people actually voted for a candidate who (despite his claims of a “concept of a plan” for health) will make absolutely sure it’s business as usual.

I saw (deep in the badlands of the internet) americans comparing the attention Luigi has received both from the public and the government compared to the multiple school shootings that have occured in december.

To which someone had replied that if the outcome of this is that dissaffected angry suicidal would-be-school-shooters switched targets to morally bankrupt CEOs  rather than innocent children to get their 15 minutes of gruesome fame then it would be a net societal benefit.

so that shareholders can be paid billions in profits.

And average nurse and doctor pay is $113,000 (£89k), and $229,000 (£182k) respectively, and people with cover get the very best treatment available. While there are undoubtedly some massive issues with healthcare in the US, there’s also powerful incentives within the system for both the workers and patients not to change.

Luigi Mangione, patron saint of universal health care:

While there are undoubtedly some massive issues with healthcare in the US, there’s also powerful incentives within the system for both the workers and patients not to change.

Counterintuitively, one of the groups who are incentivized to not want change are unions. Unionized workers get employee sponsored health insurance, it’s a major benefit of being a union member. If you replace that with universal free coverage, there’s one less reason to unionize.

it’s a major benefit of being a union member. If you replace that with universal free coverage, there’s one less reason to unionize.

It’s all back wards though.. you have to pay a union x$$ per month just to qualify for health care? People will sign up just for that, regardless of how effective, or corrupt the union is…I dunno what unions are like in the USA today, but until quite recently they were all owned by the Italian mafia, lol!

Mob boss screws over some dangerous people and ends up shot.

Legal business boss screws over many everyday people and ends up shot.

The way the USA is, it’s just a numbers and probability thing in both cases.