this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
120 points (92.9% liked)

Anarchism

1732 readers
310 users here now

Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.


Other anarchist comms


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Man charged with health insurance CEO murder to accept $300,000 in donations

Lawyer says 26-year-old accused ‘very much appreciates the outpouring of support’ on fundraising platform

Mangione “very much appreciates the outpouring of support”, said a statement on GiveSendGo that was attributed to his attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo.

There's only one occurrence of Luigi. The slogan was "free Luigi", not "free Mangione".

obligatory: I do not condone violence.

I just think that his was a political act like other historical regicides. Ravaillac is a historical name, like Luigi has now become. Why avoid it?

all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Obligatory: I DO condone violence

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I do condone violence in self defense, such as against imminent threats including the mass murder of people in the pursuit of profits.

I don't condone violence in general though.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Asking someone if they support violence is like asking if they support the coriolis effect. It's a fact of life, not just for humans but every living thing, that we have to deal with sometimes. It's a nonsensical question in most contexts.

Better to ask if someone supports self-defense against violence.

In this case, if they support self-defense against institutional violence.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 days ago

They are worried about being sued by Nintendo

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Usually you mention a full name once (as done in the second paragraph) and then only use the last name. Fairly sure that's how it goes for all normal articles. You see the same thing on Wikipedia. I do think the slogan should've been mentioned, though.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

True. This post is not telling the whole truth.

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

this post is not "telling", it is questioning!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The answer to any headline that's a question is "No".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well, your post confirms the law

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

Except that it does. The answer to the question in your title is No.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

if i make another post with the title

"Is the lemming earphone843 mature enough to participate in our conversations?"

the reply, according your rule, would be "no".

right?

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

You just didn't read the article carefully.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

i did. I always do.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

agreed.

previous articles from different journalists, still from theGuardian, were doing exactly that

looking at Vargas' article titles, maybe it's coming from him. He routinely uses this pattern : https://www.theguardian.com/profile/ramon-antonio-vargas

@[email protected], you're probably right. But the above articles were fairer, imo

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago

Nah, it's a standard journalism style.