this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
987 points (98.6% liked)

memes

10666 readers
1956 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
987
Terrorism (midwest.social)
submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No specific demands, but this was absolutely not only about the man Brian Thompson, and very much about larger political and economic issues in the country.

...If the manifesto is to be believed, anyway. I understand not everyone trusts the veracity/provenance of it, and that's a reasonable doubt to have.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I saw the Manifesto and I didn't see any socioeconomic political theories, just an apology to the police but "it had to be done."

If it said "The system of privatized health insurance is evil as a result of failure of legislation to restrain the actions of an industry" THEN that would be political, but it didn't say that at all.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

My understanding is that Luigi did not publish the manifesto, and that it was discovered by others later. If that's true, then the manifesto itself is not particularly relevant to anything criminal. The message on the bullets could be considered relevant, but I don't see how that alone would be proof of intent to terrorize.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The reason for "it had to be done" is political.

Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.

He explicitly states that he does not have the "space" nor the qualification to lay out what you want him to lay out, but he pretty much says what you said he should've said for it to be political: "Privatized health insurance is corrupt and greedy, we've known it for a long time and nothing has been done to prevent or stop it, thus I took a more violent approach to do something about the corruption and greed."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There are a lot of murders and I'm sure every single non-negligience murderer thinks theirs had to be done, mate.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But the reason why they think it had to be done still matters. "This CEO wronged me personally" and "the systemic oppression made me do it" contextualize the act in a very different way. The reason he did this is why it's political. If he had done it because he had a personal vendetta against the CEO or he had some religious beliefs that made him do it or if he was just insane, then it wouldn't be a political reason. But he did it because (paraphrasing his statement) he saw an unopposed corrupt system that needed to be opposed. That is a political reason.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

No, its not. Brian Thompson wasn't a legislator. He was a civillian who made money off of others hardships.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Do you think killing someone is political only if the targets are politicians?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If the intent of the killing is to change the system or have political outcomes, then it is political.

We have no indications that Luigi wanted anything other than one or maybe a handful more dead CEOs. That does not have political outcomes. Nothing has changed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We have no indications that Luigi wanted anything other than one or maybe a handful more dead CEOs.

But why did he want one or more CEOs dead?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because he considered them evil parasites for the work they're doing. Work that is still legal now after he killed one, because killing one doesn't have any effect on the governing laws and overarching system.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You said intent not outcome. Him killing only one and it "not having any effect" is an outcome. His manifesto doesn't say he intended to kill only one, his intentions were against the system not a single individual.

Looking at the outcome and saying "that wasn't political" is like saying Jan 6 wasn't political because they failed to overthrow the government.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He did not have intent based on the obvious outcomes. He has at no point ever given any words about the killing with any political intent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't know what you're lacking to not understand his manifesto and I don't care because it's not my job to improve your failed education. I'm not wasting any more time on you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're 11 comments deep of demanding I accept your fanfiction based on evidence that doesn't exist because it fits your own political narrative.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I guess next you're going to call AI generation fanfic.

From Gemini:

Is this manifesto political? (removed the manifesto to save space)

Yes, this manifesto has strong political undertones.

Here's why:

Focus on Systemic Issues: It criticizes the US healthcare system, the dominance of large corporations (like United), and the perceived corruption and greed within these entities. These are all significant political issues.
Calls for Action: While the author doesn't explicitly advocate for violence, the act itself and the language used ("parasites," "brutal honesty") suggest a desire to disrupt the existing power structures. This implies a call for change, which is inherently political.
Critique of Power Dynamics: The manifesto highlights the imbalance of power between corporations and the American public, arguing that the public has allowed this imbalance to persist. This analysis of power dynamics is central to political discourse.

Disclaimer: This analysis does not condone the actions described in the manifesto.

Note: The indecipherable words make it difficult to fully understand the author's intended message.

Same question with chatGPT.

Yes, Luigi Mangione's manifesto contains political elements. It critiques systemic issues, such as the healthcare system in the United States, corporate power, and societal complacency. By highlighting the disparity between healthcare costs and life expectancy, as well as the influence of large corporations, the manifesto engages with political and economic structures.

However, the political nature of the document is more implicit than explicit—it critiques systemic issues but does not explicitly outline a political ideology or program. The tone also suggests a personal justification for extreme actions, which can blur the lines between political and personal motives.

It's sad when even a braindead AI is smarter than you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

jfc bro really just posted an LLM response

what a fucking troll.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

Just pointing out you're the one living in cuckoo land.