|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Northern Ireland23313 Posts
On December 08 2024 11:25 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 10:35 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2024 10:17 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 07:43 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ye first they came for the CEOs and then they came for the shareholders and then I was like oh fuck I'm Norwegian
Anyway I'm rarely a big fan of invoking slippery slope but wanton assassinations feel like a very steep and icy mountain to descend from. I'm not asking people to mourn the guy as I'm sure he was a piece of shit, twice the industry average of denied claims or whatever certainly isn't a good look when the industry average is already pretty questionable, but we really can't be like 'yeah this seems like a good way to solve our problems'. I'm honestly a fairly imaginative guy but I don't feel like I have to be to picture a future Introvert (not meant as an attack on you buddy) whataboutisming about this following some abortion doctor being murdered with some 'you guys complaining about this is rich after celebrating the murder of CEO's you're opposed to'-line (even if abortion doctors have a long history of being targeted long predating this).
I can even be like, somewhat sympathetic to the killer if it turns out he had to watch his wife and mother of his two children wither away to a treatable form of cancer that they refused to cover. As far as revenge murder motifs go, that's a pretty decent one.
But I sure as hell don't want this to become some type of precedent. I get that the rule of law might have a justifiably pretty shitty reputation in the US right now, but vigilanteism or lawless killings as a method for improving society has a shittier reputation everywhere all the time.* And yeah, when I asked that question, I basically do have a list. I mean personally I'm genuinely worried about climate change as somewhat of an existential threat, if not to me then certainly to my son and people in other regions of the world. Off we go with every CEO for a fossil fuel company everyone with private jets everyone opposed to the cause all cattle farmers oh sorry mr Guga you have to go even though I enjoy your videos cause surely you inspire beef consumption. Shit, still not there, well how about we calculate the biological footprint of everyone and set the cutoff at 4.5? That might actually do it and hey honestly a fair chance the world 200 years from now will thank us for it. The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of people are making the world a worse place to be. In a way, particularly because of how we affect the environment, it takes considerable effort to live in a western country and not do that.
'Murder is wrong' is actually an axiom that I think we're well off trying to maintain and also one where I think we're well off keeping as a sort of, binary option, rather than go like 'buut I mean this guy' and try to do some type of calculus to defend it.
Again I'm not saying you have to mourn the guy.
*Maybe there are exceptions 100% Rule of law is infinitely harder to rebuild because it's the foundation to the entire society. the fact that we have some here on TL seeing this as a win kinda proves just how extreme the politics is becoming, I would assume we are older and more mature than a bunch of edgy gen z What is the purpose of laws? They’re meant to map out some kind of moral system, as well as a practical component in keeping things running smoothly, arbitrating disputes, and obviously preventing folks beating or shooting people. If that fabric starts breaking down it’s not exactly desirable, but equally it’s indicative that people’s perception of legitimate under the law systems is that actually they’re not especially morally legitimate. This idea that the rule of law is the bedrock of society is arse backwards, laws stem from whatever values said society holds first. I don’t think people here are immature edgy gen Z folks, they just don’t agree with your outlook here. except executing people on the street is bypassing the entire legal system and hardly the moral system anyone should support except extremists. Not to mention he isn't even under any type of investigation (when the law actually exists)) It doesn't matter whether they agree or not, this is a simple fact. If you can't see it, chances are you better be reporting yourself to the legal system just to avoid yourself buying assassins or doing the murder yourself.
No, my point is the law is meant to broadly reflect the general morality of a particular society. If you can circumvent said morality, but still be within legal parameters, then the laws are the problem.
If you applied your logic retrospectively well, that slave who shot that slave holder transgressed. It’s the rule of law after all. Or any number of previous laws we now consider archaic.
I’m not arguing against the rule of law at all, but if you end up with a huge misalignment between what is (IMO) immoral, but legal, and people can’t do shit about it, then the recourse left is breaking the rule of law
|
Northern Ireland23313 Posts
On December 08 2024 12:30 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 11:56 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 11:45 Zambrah wrote:On December 08 2024 11:25 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 10:35 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2024 10:17 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 07:43 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ye first they came for the CEOs and then they came for the shareholders and then I was like oh fuck I'm Norwegian
Anyway I'm rarely a big fan of invoking slippery slope but wanton assassinations feel like a very steep and icy mountain to descend from. I'm not asking people to mourn the guy as I'm sure he was a piece of shit, twice the industry average of denied claims or whatever certainly isn't a good look when the industry average is already pretty questionable, but we really can't be like 'yeah this seems like a good way to solve our problems'. I'm honestly a fairly imaginative guy but I don't feel like I have to be to picture a future Introvert (not meant as an attack on you buddy) whataboutisming about this following some abortion doctor being murdered with some 'you guys complaining about this is rich after celebrating the murder of CEO's you're opposed to'-line (even if abortion doctors have a long history of being targeted long predating this).
I can even be like, somewhat sympathetic to the killer if it turns out he had to watch his wife and mother of his two children wither away to a treatable form of cancer that they refused to cover. As far as revenge murder motifs go, that's a pretty decent one.
But I sure as hell don't want this to become some type of precedent. I get that the rule of law might have a justifiably pretty shitty reputation in the US right now, but vigilanteism or lawless killings as a method for improving society has a shittier reputation everywhere all the time.* And yeah, when I asked that question, I basically do have a list. I mean personally I'm genuinely worried about climate change as somewhat of an existential threat, if not to me then certainly to my son and people in other regions of the world. Off we go with every CEO for a fossil fuel company everyone with private jets everyone opposed to the cause all cattle farmers oh sorry mr Guga you have to go even though I enjoy your videos cause surely you inspire beef consumption. Shit, still not there, well how about we calculate the biological footprint of everyone and set the cutoff at 4.5? That might actually do it and hey honestly a fair chance the world 200 years from now will thank us for it. The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of people are making the world a worse place to be. In a way, particularly because of how we affect the environment, it takes considerable effort to live in a western country and not do that.
'Murder is wrong' is actually an axiom that I think we're well off trying to maintain and also one where I think we're well off keeping as a sort of, binary option, rather than go like 'buut I mean this guy' and try to do some type of calculus to defend it.
Again I'm not saying you have to mourn the guy.
*Maybe there are exceptions 100% Rule of law is infinitely harder to rebuild because it's the foundation to the entire society. the fact that we have some here on TL seeing this as a win kinda proves just how extreme the politics is becoming, I would assume we are older and more mature than a bunch of edgy gen z What is the purpose of laws? They’re meant to map out some kind of moral system, as well as a practical component in keeping things running smoothly, arbitrating disputes, and obviously preventing folks beating or shooting people. If that fabric starts breaking down it’s not exactly desirable, but equally it’s indicative that people’s perception of legitimate under the law systems is that actually they’re not especially morally legitimate. This idea that the rule of law is the bedrock of society is arse backwards, laws stem from whatever values said society holds first. I don’t think people here are immature edgy gen Z folks, they just don’t agree with your outlook here. except executing people on the street is bypassing the entire legal system and hardly the moral system anyone should support except extremists. Not to mention he isn't even under any type of investigation (when the law actually exists))It doesn't matter whether they agree or not, this is a simple fact. If you can't see it, chances are you better be reporting yourself to the legal system just to avoid yourself buying assassins or doing the murder yourself. Wrong, https://www.yahoo.com/news/slain-unitedhealthcare-ceo-accused-insider-164213460.htmlUnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was facing a lawsuit accusing him and other executives of insider trading related to an ongoing Justice Department investigation before he was fatally shot outside a New York City hotel on Wednesday.
Thompson, 50, was one of three UnitedHealth Group executives named in a class action lawsuit filed in May that accused them of dumping millions of dollars worth of stock while the company was the subject of a federal antitrust investigation, which investors say wasn’t immediately disclosed to shareholders. Good to know, so he was executed before the legal system actually completed its due. He was a rich man he was never going to get what was coming to him by way of the legal system lmao
He was also getting charged for insider trading and you know, not the much lesser crime of presiding over a regime where people died. God forbid the shareholders lose out
|
On December 08 2024 10:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:
At the end i feel we are always having the same discussion, which is whether or not it’s worth believing in liberal democracy, in the rule of law, in the very imperfect society we live in, or whether all bets are off, and we just go straight into civil war and violent revolution, where you win arguments by gunning down the baddies.
I hear that lots of us here believe that there is nothing to save in the current system. The question i have is whether any of you would be ready to face the consequences of the abandonment of every principles or societies are based upon. Because well. It’s very easy to talk Revolution on a gaming forum.
I personally still prefer to know that we are not ok with executing people in the street even when we think they are absolutely terrible. Because as Drone mentioned, many of us are probably on the kill list of someone. You took the plane too many times and ate quite a few too many steaks last year, you are destroying the planet, you gotta go. Or your girlfriend had an abortion. Or whatever some lunatic might find that makes you a criminal in their eyes.
America is super broken but honestly the first reason for it, before capitalism, corruption or corporate greed is its cult of violence. Want to make the country a better place, start by stopping to believe that murdering the bad guy is the way forward to build a better world.
By letting murderous CEOs run corporations, we have already broken every principle of a functional society. We're not the ones breaking things, we're pointing out how broken things are and calling for change.
|
On December 08 2024 12:53 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 10:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:
At the end i feel we are always having the same discussion, which is whether or not it’s worth believing in liberal democracy, in the rule of law, in the very imperfect society we live in, or whether all bets are off, and we just go straight into civil war and violent revolution, where you win arguments by gunning down the baddies.
I hear that lots of us here believe that there is nothing to save in the current system. The question i have is whether any of you would be ready to face the consequences of the abandonment of every principles or societies are based upon. Because well. It’s very easy to talk Revolution on a gaming forum.
I personally still prefer to know that we are not ok with executing people in the street even when we think they are absolutely terrible. Because as Drone mentioned, many of us are probably on the kill list of someone. You took the plane too many times and ate quite a few too many steaks last year, you are destroying the planet, you gotta go. Or your girlfriend had an abortion. Or whatever some lunatic might find that makes you a criminal in their eyes.
America is super broken but honestly the first reason for it, before capitalism, corruption or corporate greed is its cult of violence. Want to make the country a better place, start by stopping to believe that murdering the bad guy is the way forward to build a better world. By letting murderous CEOs run corporations, we have already broken every principle of a functional society. We're not the ones breaking things, we're pointing out how broken things are and calling for change.
You are, as usual, mistaking the symptom for the cause. You will not solve this by killing CEOs or regulating who gets to be one. A solution would be to change the bastardized health insurance system in the US. Even though that is a harder task than killing people in self-righteous anger and probably less gratifying to you.
|
In this case the symptom is actively protecting the cause and the symptoms are very very powerful
|
On December 08 2024 11:17 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 10:57 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I don’t know. My mum fled Argentina in the late 1970s because left wing guerillas were assassinating CEOs left, right and centre, and in response the military government was taking whoever they suspected of being remotely left wing, torturing them, stealing their babies and throwing them from airplanes in the Rio de la Plata. They killed 30000 people like that. Most of them in their 20s.
Again, it’s easy and fun to make big declarations about civil war and revolution on a starcraft forum. But this is what it looks like when, really, there is no rule of law and when murdering each other has become the norm.
Maybe you guys think it’s worth it. I don’t know. So the legitimate, legal junta enacted far more violence? How many perpetrators saw the inside of a prison cell? I don’t think many folks here want to see that kind of political violence, not even remotely. But if the connection between general sentiment and political action can be fundamentally broken on some issues, what do you do? There are issues that are rare in even being relatively bipartisan and consistently polling in the 60-70 range for decades. In the crudest sense I’d rather not shoot a CEO, I’d rather them not be a cunt. Either if they’re legally compelled that way, or hey voluntarily.
It’s just a case of a society that slipped into extreme violence. Of course the junta is guilty, they are some of thee worst criminals of the XXth century, but to be totally fair, the guerrillas have a huge responsibility in the country descent into hell. I believe their cause was just, but the means were atrocious.
I am sure you see the parallel. Violence breeds violence, murder breeds murder. Once you have normalized that we can kill each other if we have a really good reason, all bets are off, and you prepare for yourself really, really dark days.
I know no one here wants that. But that’s the logical consequence of what people advocate here.
To answer the second part, when political action is broken, you fight to restore the power of political action. It’s slow, it’s frustrating, it’s despairingly difficult. It needs to be done at every level, from complete grassroot to the top of the political apparatus. It means a lot of convincing. And the result is not guaranteed.
But that’s better than bullets.
|
Once you have normalized that we can kill each other if we have a really good reason,
I dont see how this isn't what the US healthcare system isnt already doing. Why is systematized death so much more tolerable? Its entirely normalized in the US that US healthcare companies can cause you to suffer and die for the really goodest reason in capitalism, money.
To answer the second part, when political action is broken, you fight to restore the power of political action. It’s slow, it’s frustrating, it’s despairingly difficult. It needs to be done at every level, from complete grassroot to the top of the political apparatus. It means a lot of convincing. And the result is not guaranteed.
How do you restore the power of poltiical action within a system coopted by the rich and powerful? Do you think that the rich and powerful will give up their money without the threat of violence?
This is the same problem the police as an institution have, even if you get some good cops they get squeezed out or turned into bad cops by the institutionalized power of all of the bad cops. You can elect politicians that say they want to do things you want, but the system is setup to make sure that those things you want that conflict with what the rich and powerful want do not happen.
Sorry, but societally, violence has to be an option.
If Elon Musk bought Wizards of the Coast and basically gave himself ultimate power in Dungeons and Dragons then nothing you do can force him to rescind his ultimate power so you can enjoy the game without either,
A. abandoning Dungeons and Dragons
B. beating his ass up until he changes it back.
It would be nice not to have to be in this place, but we are in that place. Take it up with billionaires and all of the other awful scumbags who have systematically hurt and killed so many people for green paper, because at this point theyre the only ones with any meaningful ability to affect systematic change.
EDIT: None of this even begins to approach the problem of the unbelievable human suffering and death that we just have to accept while whatever concept you have for a long and hard road plays out.
There is no path here that is not drenched with blood, I just personally prefer the one with the blood of the people responsible for this situation instead of droves of ostensible innocents.
|
On December 08 2024 03:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 03:25 RvB wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 08 2024 02:41 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 02:39 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2024 01:43 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 01:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2024 01:02 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 00:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 23:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 23:47 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Your arguments are not very good, magic powers.
We have the rule of law to avoid people taking Justice into their own hands, and to avoid that everyone who think someone else is terrible just go and kill them. Today it’s an evil CEO, tomorrow it’s a presidential candidate, or a journalist or whoever.
That guy was awful, but if we start cheering on people getting gunned down, we are no longer living in a civilized society, we are living in a war. Liberal democracy is based on the idea that we coexist, argue, fight, and debate within a frame and that we don’t just eliminate each other. There are other ways of addressing corporate greed and healthcare that butchering the bad guy, even if that’s a very American thing to do. The rule of law has not prevented UnitedHealth from mass murdering people. The rule of law has failed and a correction was made. This also puts UH into the spotlight and millions of people who previously weren't aware of the mass murder are now aware of it, so something might be done to prevent it. There's a reasonable chance now, when before there was no chance. The idea that these assassinations are gonna spiral out of control if we cheer for one instance is unsubstantiated. If anything, CEOs are nowhere near scared enough. Ok but then you are saying we are in a civil war, and we give up on pretending we are in a liberal democracy. Everyone takes his gun and go shoot the perceived enemy. I am not really ready or willing to live a civil war quite yet personally. Your opinion should not be controversial. The rule of law is one of the primary things that separates Western liberal democracies from authoritarian countries. It's essential to build and maintain inclusive institutions as opposed to the extractive institutions of authoritarian countries. That it's even a point of discussion says a lot about the state of the thread. It isn't though.Trump/Israel are demonstrative of this fact. On December 08 2024 01:07 KwarK wrote:On December 08 2024 01:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2024 23:44 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2024 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2024 06:51 BlackJack wrote:
What if we find out the assassin is actually GH who was spurred on by all of Kwark's badgering that he's a wanna-be revolutionary and he needs to man up and take action Wouldn't be enough for Kwark to stop anyway. His petulance isn't rational. It absolutely would be. If you took direct action I would stop accusing you of not taking direct action. + Show Spoiler + My issue is that you exist in a nonexistent sweet spot where you’ve given up on elections but you’ve also not committed to actually taking power outside of elections. It’s a spot that does less than anyone but insists that doing nothing is a virtue. Mmhmm... Are you familiar with any other direct action besides shooting and blowing people up? Who wins? 1. MLK with a following of millions. 2. A man with a shooty stick. How is MLK's quest to dismantle economic imperialism and exploitative capitalism going? Well? But at least people still remember that that was at the heart of his message, right? Is that a no? No Israel and Trump aren't demonstrative of this fact. The opposite in fact. Their conduct would be much worse without the constrains put on them by our societies. It's not even close to authoritarian countries like China and Russia. + Show Spoiler +Your criticism rings pretty hollow considering your apologism for Putin and Maduro. China and Russia would also potentially be worse without the constraints put on them by our societies. That's not a distinguishing feature of liberal democracies. So yeah, they are demonstrative of the fact that "the rule of law" is NOT one of the primary things that separates Western liberal democracies from authoritarian countries It's not remotely the same. In those countries the judiciary is entirely subservient to the state. Political opponents are thrown out of windows or simply disappear. I can continue for a while but you get the point. There are no or very few institutions that serve as a counter balance to the executive in those countries. Western liberal democracies, even if flawed, do have them. Trump's attempt at insurrection failed after all and Netanyahu is standing trial. Yet Trump is president again, and Netanyahu has faced zero consequences. Netanyahu's trial in Israel just started. High ranking politicians being convicted and even serving prison time in Israel is not unprecedented. Trump is a disgrace who rides roughhod over any norms. Nonetheless even he faces significant constraints. On December 08 2024 02:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 02:39 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2024 01:43 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 01:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 08 2024 01:02 RvB wrote:On December 08 2024 00:14 Biff The Understudy wrote:On December 07 2024 23:54 Magic Powers wrote:On December 07 2024 23:47 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Your arguments are not very good, magic powers.
We have the rule of law to avoid people taking Justice into their own hands, and to avoid that everyone who think someone else is terrible just go and kill them. Today it’s an evil CEO, tomorrow it’s a presidential candidate, or a journalist or whoever.
That guy was awful, but if we start cheering on people getting gunned down, we are no longer living in a civilized society, we are living in a war. Liberal democracy is based on the idea that we coexist, argue, fight, and debate within a frame and that we don’t just eliminate each other. There are other ways of addressing corporate greed and healthcare that butchering the bad guy, even if that’s a very American thing to do. The rule of law has not prevented UnitedHealth from mass murdering people. The rule of law has failed and a correction was made. This also puts UH into the spotlight and millions of people who previously weren't aware of the mass murder are now aware of it, so something might be done to prevent it. There's a reasonable chance now, when before there was no chance. The idea that these assassinations are gonna spiral out of control if we cheer for one instance is unsubstantiated. If anything, CEOs are nowhere near scared enough. Ok but then you are saying we are in a civil war, and we give up on pretending we are in a liberal democracy. Everyone takes his gun and go shoot the perceived enemy. I am not really ready or willing to live a civil war quite yet personally. Your opinion should not be controversial. The rule of law is one of the primary things that separates Western liberal democracies from authoritarian countries. It's essential to build and maintain inclusive institutions as opposed to the extractive institutions of authoritarian countries. That it's even a point of discussion says a lot about the state of the thread. It isn't though.Trump/Israel are demonstrative of this fact. On December 08 2024 01:07 KwarK wrote:On December 08 2024 01:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2024 23:44 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2024 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 07 2024 06:51 BlackJack wrote:What if we find out the assassin is actually GH who was spurred on by all of Kwark's badgering that he's a wanna-be revolutionary and he needs to man up and take action Wouldn't be enough for Kwark to stop anyway. His petulance isn't rational. It absolutely would be. If you took direct action I would stop accusing you of not taking direct action. + Show Spoiler + My issue is that you exist in a nonexistent sweet spot where you’ve given up on elections but you’ve also not committed to actually taking power outside of elections. It’s a spot that does less than anyone but insists that doing nothing is a virtue. Mmhmm... Are you familiar with any other direct action besides shooting and blowing people up? Who wins? 1. MLK with a following of millions. 2. A man with a shooty stick. How is MLK's quest to dismantle economic imperialism and exploitative capitalism going? Well? But at least people still remember that that was at the heart of his message, right? Is that a no? No Israel and Trump aren't demonstrative of this fact. The opposite in fact. Their conduct would be much worse without the constrains put on them by our societies. It's not even close to authoritarian countries like China and Russia. + Show Spoiler +Your criticism rings pretty hollow considering your apologism for Putin and Maduro. China and Russia would also potentially be worse without the constraints put on them by our societies. That's not a distinguishing feature of liberal democracies. So yeah, they are demonstrative of the fact that "the rule of law" is NOT one of the primary things that separates Western liberal democracies from authoritarian countries It's not remotely the same. In those countries the judiciary is entirely subservient to the state. Political opponents are thrown out of windows or simply disappear. I can continue for a while but you get the point. There are no or very few institutions that serve as a counter balance to the executive in those countries. Western liberal democracies, even if flawed, do have them. Trump's attempt at insurrection failed after all and Netanyahu is standing trial. The US's next president engaged in an insurrection against the US and you're unironically using that as an example that the US is beholden to "the rule of law". Okay buddy, I think we're done here. Cherry picking an example and taking it out of context to dodge the argument is convenient. It's just so obviously absurd to point at an insurrectionist being president as evidence that the US is beholden to "the rule of law" as to make your position laughably dismissible as nonsense. Show nested quote +Rule of law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are:
Publicly promulgated
Equally enforced
Independently adjudicated
And consistent with international human rights principles. Cat's out of the bag, the US objectively isn't beholden to the "rule of law".
I specifically said the insurrection itself. The rest is your addition. If you think it's a bad example then disregard it. It does not materially change the argument. These things get measured. See for example the dataset from the world bank and wjp. Almost all the top countries are liberal democracies. Only Hong Kong and Singapore are exceptions.
Edit:
On December 08 2024 12:35 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 11:25 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 10:35 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2024 10:17 ETisME wrote:On December 08 2024 07:43 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Ye first they came for the CEOs and then they came for the shareholders and then I was like oh fuck I'm Norwegian
Anyway I'm rarely a big fan of invoking slippery slope but wanton assassinations feel like a very steep and icy mountain to descend from. I'm not asking people to mourn the guy as I'm sure he was a piece of shit, twice the industry average of denied claims or whatever certainly isn't a good look when the industry average is already pretty questionable, but we really can't be like 'yeah this seems like a good way to solve our problems'. I'm honestly a fairly imaginative guy but I don't feel like I have to be to picture a future Introvert (not meant as an attack on you buddy) whataboutisming about this following some abortion doctor being murdered with some 'you guys complaining about this is rich after celebrating the murder of CEO's you're opposed to'-line (even if abortion doctors have a long history of being targeted long predating this).
I can even be like, somewhat sympathetic to the killer if it turns out he had to watch his wife and mother of his two children wither away to a treatable form of cancer that they refused to cover. As far as revenge murder motifs go, that's a pretty decent one.
But I sure as hell don't want this to become some type of precedent. I get that the rule of law might have a justifiably pretty shitty reputation in the US right now, but vigilanteism or lawless killings as a method for improving society has a shittier reputation everywhere all the time.* And yeah, when I asked that question, I basically do have a list. I mean personally I'm genuinely worried about climate change as somewhat of an existential threat, if not to me then certainly to my son and people in other regions of the world. Off we go with every CEO for a fossil fuel company everyone with private jets everyone opposed to the cause all cattle farmers oh sorry mr Guga you have to go even though I enjoy your videos cause surely you inspire beef consumption. Shit, still not there, well how about we calculate the biological footprint of everyone and set the cutoff at 4.5? That might actually do it and hey honestly a fair chance the world 200 years from now will thank us for it. The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of people are making the world a worse place to be. In a way, particularly because of how we affect the environment, it takes considerable effort to live in a western country and not do that.
'Murder is wrong' is actually an axiom that I think we're well off trying to maintain and also one where I think we're well off keeping as a sort of, binary option, rather than go like 'buut I mean this guy' and try to do some type of calculus to defend it.
Again I'm not saying you have to mourn the guy.
*Maybe there are exceptions 100% Rule of law is infinitely harder to rebuild because it's the foundation to the entire society. the fact that we have some here on TL seeing this as a win kinda proves just how extreme the politics is becoming, I would assume we are older and more mature than a bunch of edgy gen z What is the purpose of laws? They’re meant to map out some kind of moral system, as well as a practical component in keeping things running smoothly, arbitrating disputes, and obviously preventing folks beating or shooting people. If that fabric starts breaking down it’s not exactly desirable, but equally it’s indicative that people’s perception of legitimate under the law systems is that actually they’re not especially morally legitimate. This idea that the rule of law is the bedrock of society is arse backwards, laws stem from whatever values said society holds first. I don’t think people here are immature edgy gen Z folks, they just don’t agree with your outlook here. except executing people on the street is bypassing the entire legal system and hardly the moral system anyone should support except extremists. Not to mention he isn't even under any type of investigation (when the law actually exists)) It doesn't matter whether they agree or not, this is a simple fact. If you can't see it, chances are you better be reporting yourself to the legal system just to avoid yourself buying assassins or doing the murder yourself. No, my point is the law is meant to broadly reflect the general morality of a particular society. If you can circumvent said morality, but still be within legal parameters, then the laws are the problem. If you applied your logic retrospectively well, that slave who shot that slave holder transgressed. It’s the rule of law after all. Or any number of previous laws we now consider archaic. I’m not arguing against the rule of law at all, but if you end up with a huge misalignment between what is (IMO) immoral, but legal, and people can’t do shit about it, then the recourse left is breaking the rule of law
Nvm
|
United States41652 Posts
On December 08 2024 12:01 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 23:57 KwarK wrote:On December 07 2024 20:44 Liquid`Drone wrote:
For the people supporting this, feel like compiling a list of jobs/positions in companies that are bad enough to justify being shot for doing?
*note that i recognize that being indifferent (this was just one guy being murdered and 170k people die every day and many of those deaths are certainly more tragic than this one) is an entirely different beast from being supportive.
I’ll play. HR people/company lawyers/religious elders that target the victims of sexual abuse for coming forwards rather than the perpetrators can get on the list. Corrupt cops. Police union chiefs who protect corrupt cops which, as I understand it, is all of them. Essentially the problem is the perverse incentives of capitalism. What we want is the profit motive to encourage a company to minimize their sexual harassment by applying penalties to companies doing sexual harassment. The big brain play is to not hire sexual predators and to have a strong culture against them. The galaxy brain play is to not get caught. What we want is a profit motive to drive insurance companies to provide medicine at the lowest cost. The big brain play is bulk buying, cost effectiveness studies etc. The galaxy brain play is to switch the medicine out with low cost sugar pills. You forgot accountants, who help people avoid paying taxes, which results in lack of money for various progressive initiatives, also teachers who accept jobs at private schools, rather than teaching people pro bono, and a greedy baker who expects to be paid for the bread he makes.
No I didn't. They're not on my list.
|
It is interesting to see the difference in reactions.
People talk about how we can't have vigilantism and shooting everyone we decide is wrong or bad and yet America has shown that it is fine with that for decades.
Dozens of people get shot every day and that is just accepted as part of American life. But shoot 1 ceo and suddenly its a massive deal.
This guy isnt special. He is a statistic, he is one of 15.000+ people who got shot this year.
To those who care so much about this instance, do you care as much about the other 15k? Why not?
|
United States41652 Posts
Assassinations aren’t the same as other killings even though the death count may be equivalent.
|
On December 08 2024 19:21 KwarK wrote:
Assassinations aren’t the same as other killings even though the death count may be equivalent.
But i am sure a bunch of these other murders would also qualify as assassinations.
And at what point does someone killing a person who they feel has wronged them become an assassination instead of just a murder? Is it just when the person getting killed is rich and powerful?
If i think my boss fucked me over by firing me, and kill them, is that an assassination?
If i think my boss's boss ruined my life by setting up policy that gets me fired, and kill them, is that an assassination?
If i think my doctor mistreated me and ruined my life, and kill them, is that an assassination?
Why does it become an assassination when i kill the boss of the company that made my doctor not give me life-saving treatment?
And if yes, why is it worse to kill someone powerful rather than just killing some other person, if the reason is fundamentally similar?
|
On December 08 2024 19:11 Gorsameth wrote:
It is interesting to see the difference in reactions.
People talk about how we can't have vigilantism and shooting everyone we decide is wrong or bad and yet America has shown that it is fine with that for decades.
Dozens of people get shot every day and that is just accepted as part of American life. But shoot 1 ceo and suddenly its a massive deal.
This guy isnt special. He is a statistic, he is one of 15.000+ people who got shot this year.
To those who care so much about this instance, do you care as much about the other 15k? Why not?
Not your best argument. Nobody is saying you have to mourn this guy. People are taking issue with celebrating or supporting his slaying. Nobody is celebrating the other gun deaths or advocating for more of them, most of which are self-inflicted.
|
On December 08 2024 11:07 Zambrah wrote:
Go back and find the article I linked about the poor dude who had to fight UHC for proper treatment for his ulcerative colitis, he was absolutely debilitated, what he went through would have been absolutely torturous, and thats happening at a massive scale, its not just clean painless whoopsy-daisy deaths, its companies actively choosing to deny people care, cause them to actively suffer mentally and physically, and in many cases leads to their death.
I skipped over your article the first time but went back and skimmed it now. It tells the story of a man with a case of ulcerative colitis so severe that doctors prescribed him two different biologics, Remicade and Entyvio at doses higher than the FDA approved. Because he was receiving not just 1 but 2 of these super expensive drugs at even higher doses than the maximum you would expect, United tried to deny him coverage for the treatments so they could save money. Sounds awful.
It's also worth noting that even if he lived in Canada under their universal healthcare system he also would likely not have access to this treatment plan.
Alberta senior says province's move to change biologic drug coverage has left her in agony CBC
Last year, the Alberta government announced plans to change drug coverage for about 26,000 residents in an effort to save about $380 million over the next four years.
...
Petersen's illness used to make her so sick that she couldn't even get out of bed. For 22 years, Remicade relieved that pain.
But in advance of the 2021 deadline, Petersen's drugs were switched from Remicade to Inflectra.
"This new stuff, it doesn't work. I can't sit still, because my old body's aching everywhere," Petersen said. "What can I do? Because I feel really abandoned."
Ironically you picked as your example a drug that United Healthcare offers to more people than Canada's universal healthcare system. Hopefully nobody wants to assassinate the government bureaucrats that decided to change the drug coverage to save money. At least they weren't doing it for personal profit, although I'm not sure if that gives the lady in the above article any comfort.
|
So Brian Thompson and gang offloaded shares without proper "warning" and got sued for USD 117,000,000 in damages to other investors.
The executives sold their shares, when UHC was under investigation for breaking Anti-Trust-Law... but instead of putting out a statement, the execs just sold their stock, and then told people that UHC/UHG buying up dozens of smaller Insurance companies might have been illegal in the eyes of investigators.
Imagine if Thompson was about to spill the beans on the UHC insiders, and just in time he got assassinated by somebody knowing his shedule, his wereabouts and the financial ability to pay a small percentage of the dooming payments of $120M for his death.
Paint this as a disgruntled US healthcare victim or vigilante... make the shooter get away..
|
Once you have normalized that we can kill each other if we have a really good reason, all bets are off, and you prepare for yourself really, really dark days.
I keep seeing this sentiment reiterated in various ways. Zambrah touched on it, but it's worth emphasizing, normalized killing is how it's always been in the US.
There are countless normalized killings in the US, what people are reacting so negatively or positively to potentially being newly normalized + Show Spoiler + is that including more wealthy and powerful white people.
That said, of course we should as a society tend toward denormalizing all the killing, rather than trading killing oppressed people for their oppressors. But I'm pretty sure you guys have all said some version of "we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good", so let's apply that here.
|
On December 08 2024 15:41 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +Once you have normalized that we can kill each other if we have a really good reason, I dont see how this isn't what the US healthcare system isnt already doing. Why is systematized death so much more tolerable? Its entirely normalized in the US that US healthcare companies can cause you to suffer and die for the really goodest reason in capitalism, money. Show nested quote +To answer the second part, when political action is broken, you fight to restore the power of political action. It’s slow, it’s frustrating, it’s despairingly difficult. It needs to be done at every level, from complete grassroot to the top of the political apparatus. It means a lot of convincing. And the result is not guaranteed. How do you restore the power of poltiical action within a system coopted by the rich and powerful? Do you think that the rich and powerful will give up their money without the threat of violence? This is the same problem the police as an institution have, even if you get some good cops they get squeezed out or turned into bad cops by the institutionalized power of all of the bad cops. You can elect politicians that say they want to do things you want, but the system is setup to make sure that those things you want that conflict with what the rich and powerful want do not happen. Sorry, but societally, violence has to be an option. If Elon Musk bought Wizards of the Coast and basically gave himself ultimate power in Dungeons and Dragons then nothing you do can force him to rescind his ultimate power so you can enjoy the game without either, A. abandoning Dungeons and Dragons B. beating his ass up until he changes it back. It would be nice not to have to be in this place, but we are in that place. Take it up with billionaires and all of the other awful scumbags who have systematically hurt and killed so many people for green paper, because at this point theyre the only ones with any meaningful ability to affect systematic change. EDIT: None of this even begins to approach the problem of the unbelievable human suffering and death that we just have to accept while whatever concept you have for a long and hard road plays out. There is no path here that is not drenched with blood, I just personally prefer the one with the blood of the people responsible for this situation instead of droves of ostensible innocents.
If you don’t see the difference between what is happening in the US with healthcare acting like douches and what i am talking about, mate, there is nothing to talk about. I am talking about people being thrown alive from planes.
At some point i am powerless to make a point if you don’t at the very least make a little effort.
At the end it’s always there limits of this thread. The complete incapacity of just getting out of your little, narrow, priviledged American perspective and realize that, yeah, the US absolutely suck, but it’s worse when death squads come and disappear your whole family because someone once participated in a demonstration. That’s what happened in Argentina and it started with good left wing folks innocently murdering the really bad rich CEOs in the street.
And no, a death ain’t equal a death. Someone dying because he got denied his medicine is horrible, but a couple of 23 years olds getting arrested, taken to a military building, tortured for weeks, then have the dude thrown from a plane from 2000 metres while the military waits for the wife to give birth in order to steal her baby and give it to infertile officers before throwing her into the sea also is really, really, really, really worse. Can’t you see it? Or is it “what the US system is already doing?”
So that’s what a civil war looks like. Do you want that.
Honestly, i am absolutely on the same side than you, but you make me angry, and so, i am out if there.
|
Again there is a non-zero chance that the UHC CEO wasn't killed by a disgruntled vigilante, but a hitman who seeks to protect even greedier executives from paying a pension fund damages they caused by insider trading of UHC/UHG shares.
This alone should be reason enough to seek the truth before killing somebody.
But as the bald ginger said, there are people on the legal side of stealing, that no longer have to fear checks and balances. In their circles a "hit" is communicated clearly in advance.. and ususally means to dumb shares or get into others, or even flee the country in advance of investigations.
|
On December 08 2024 21:07 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2024 15:41 Zambrah wrote:Once you have normalized that we can kill each other if we have a really good reason, I dont see how this isn't what the US healthcare system isnt already doing. Why is systematized death so much more tolerable? Its entirely normalized in the US that US healthcare companies can cause you to suffer and die for the really goodest reason in capitalism, money. To answer the second part, when political action is broken, you fight to restore the power of political action. It’s slow, it’s frustrating, it’s despairingly difficult. It needs to be done at every level, from complete grassroot to the top of the political apparatus. It means a lot of convincing. And the result is not guaranteed. How do you restore the power of poltiical action within a system coopted by the rich and powerful? Do you think that the rich and powerful will give up their money without the threat of violence? This is the same problem the police as an institution have, even if you get some good cops they get squeezed out or turned into bad cops by the institutionalized power of all of the bad cops. You can elect politicians that say they want to do things you want, but the system is setup to make sure that those things you want that conflict with what the rich and powerful want do not happen. Sorry, but societally, violence has to be an option. If Elon Musk bought Wizards of the Coast and basically gave himself ultimate power in Dungeons and Dragons then nothing you do can force him to rescind his ultimate power so you can enjoy the game without either, A. abandoning Dungeons and Dragons B. beating his ass up until he changes it back. It would be nice not to have to be in this place, but we are in that place. Take it up with billionaires and all of the other awful scumbags who have systematically hurt and killed so many people for green paper, because at this point theyre the only ones with any meaningful ability to affect systematic change. EDIT: None of this even begins to approach the problem of the unbelievable human suffering and death that we just have to accept while whatever concept you have for a long and hard road plays out. There is no path here that is not drenched with blood, I just personally prefer the one with the blood of the people responsible for this situation instead of droves of ostensible innocents. If you don’t see the difference between what is happening in the US with healthcare acting like douches and what i am talking about, mate, there is nothing to talk about. I am talking about people being thrown alive from planes. At some point i am powerless to make a point if you don’t at the very least make a little effort. At the end it’s always there limits of this thread. The complete incapacity of just getting out of your little, narrow, priviledged American perspective and realize that, yeah, the US absolutely suck, but it’s worse when death squads come and disappear your whole family because someone once participated in a demonstration. That’s what happened in Argentina and it started with good left wing folks innocently murdering the really bad rich CEOs in the street. And no, a death ain’t equal a death. Someone dying because he got denied his medicine is horrible, but a couple of 23 years olds getting arrested, taken to a military building, tortured for weeks, then have the dude thrown from a plane from 2000 metres while the military waits for the wife to give birth in order to steal her baby and give it to infertile officers before throwing her into the sea also is really, really, really, really worse. Can’t you see it? Or is it “what the US system is already doing?” So that’s what a civil war looks like. Do you want that. Honestly, i am absolutely on the same side than you, but you make me angry, and so, i am out if there.
The mind boggles. Some of the keyboard warriors here apparently think they are already fighting in their glorious revolution.
|
I can't find a connection between solving healthcare.. and autocratic regimes with secret police.
With all the hate for the insurance companies, don't forget the healthcare providers are greedy fucks as well. $6k for an ambulance ride, $100k for Treatment and $50k for meds are just fantasy numbers.
Pharma corps use Universities and Taxpayermoney to do research.. and most of their actual research is about how to keep patents/IP on a drug alive and keep your monopoly. 2/3s of their non-production budget is usually spent on marketing, lawfare and lobbyism. 1/3 is spent on R&D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
