4w ago

Last week's assassination of Minnesota's Democrat former House Speaker was the logical sequel to that of the United Healthcare CEO

Those who cheered on the latter murder should now be examining their consciences.

The historical record is very clear: in politics, violence begets violence. This story is only beginning and it may not end well for America.

See details about the recent shootings.

25 comments

Hard pass. Dude was a far right extremist judging by his views who was radicalized into ending a political opponent for "his team" while the other was due to the crushing pressure of the uncaring and unhelpful health care industry. Completely different and I award you no points.
- Yeah, but OP thinks they're very clever
- I don't think you understand OP's point. They aren't saying that the motivations are equally valid, they are saying that political violence of any kind will always escalate into further and wider violence.
  
  Luigi's violence was not political. Full stop.
Last week's assassination of Minnesota's Democrat former House Speaker was the logical sequel to that of the United Healthcare CEO
I don't disagree with your conclusions about cheering on violence and what it begets, but I will just point out that if you're going by the sequel logic then the shooting of Brian Thompson was the 5th movie in the series, with the first four being assassinated Democrat state representatives.
It also ignores the literal hundreds of movies and documentaries that have been made where American Insurance companies kills thousands and cause enormous amounts of suffering, just so that they can turn an even higher profit.
I still don't agree with political assassination, but starting the narrative with the assassination of Brian Thompson is pretty arbitrary if the storyline is so broad that this is the sequel.
- Nothing you say contradicts my point. Answering political questions with violence is a road that leads directly to civil war, wherever the road starts. This finding is about as reproducible as findings come in political science. And it's what the assassination-cheerleaders (in this community and others) do not want to engage with.
  
  Yeah I do agree with your overall point.
  
  road that leads directly to civil war
  I highly doubt its going to lead to that. The vast majority people are too lazy to fight for anything and would much rather stare at their phones all day. And every sane person knows war is hell so they don't want that.
Apples and Oranges mate. Such a shortsighted view to boil down all of the nuances behind the systemic reasons that people engage in political violence down to just "violence begets violence".
The right-wing assassin is a direct result of the Republican's brand of vitriolic, jingoist rhetoric that tries to convince its cult that the country is "being invaded by evil foreigners". Not because of the death of one CEO. His murder wasn't anything special other than it got an exaggerated amount of media coverage because he was rich.
Either way, America has been on this course for far, far longer then Luigi has even been alive. His alleged actions did not cause this. This story isn't "just beginning", it began almost a century ago and is now reaching its climax.
And, just for the record, I still proudly cheer for the death of scum like that insurance CEO. He deserved so much worse than the quick death he was given. Who did commit the act is a hero for the people.
This sounds great in a general handwavey sort of way except for the fact that (at least to my knowledge) there's no evidence tying the alleged Minnesota assassin's motive in any way to the death of Brian Thompson.
He does appear to consider women's healthcare a form of "violence", however. Should we examine our consciences and outlaw women's healthcare in case people like this take offense and start a civil war?
We can wring our hands and try to find ways to make everything our own fault or we can accept that anyone under enough pressure can become violent, regardless of whether they believe themselves to have righteous intentions when they do it.
- Should we examine our consciences and outlaw women’s healthcare in case people like this take offense and start a civil war?
  This seems like a super confused take. Are you saying that killing healthcare CEOs shouldn't be illegal?!
  
  Not sure where you're pulling that from. Neither the original post nor my response said anything about legality. OP said these assassinations were the "logical sequel" to the CEO attack, without any evidence the two are directly related at all.
political voilence causes more political voilence
I think that's kinda true, but I don't like the way you phrased it
- It is very shortsighted phrasing that only serves to tell people that we shouldn't engage in violence for the sake of self defense because "it just makes more violence".
  When in reality, it is just a way to tell people to sit down and accept the violence being committed against them by the system as normal and that rising up against it is somehow an immoral act.
- Nobody’s cheering a CEO murder
  half of Lemmy is. I'm not part of that half
  And nobody’s cheering a Democrat politician murder
  yes, actually some people are, can you believe that? crazy world
- Distinction without a difference. People are even cheering the death of a british billionaire who was killed by a bee, which has no symbolic value at all.

25 comments