Seriously though, don’t do violence.
The legislature and violence monopoly are there to ensure all people have legal recourse instead of needing to turn to violence. If you corrupt that system and use it to oppress the masses, they become violent.
I neither agree with, nor condone violence, but it does not surprise me at all. Just surprised that it took so long.
Violence from the masses requires the masses to feel like they are starving, sick, and dying with no way out except death. We have been slowly accelerating towards that violence for a while now.
Watch for an increase for those CEO’s, (at least insurance and pharmaceutical CEOs), to have much increased budget for private security measures. Both in surveillance and personnel. I think we will start to see more ‘black limo caravans’ like the the POTUS moves around in. And being surrounded by people in black suits with guns openly visible. They will do whatever it takes to stay alive and be evil.
The next question is: how long before politicians start becoming targets?
For legal reason I wish to say that I don’t advocate violence. I also say that, I really think this was the only way this was going to happen.
Billionaires only do the right thing if it’s profitable or if they’re afraid.
I’m going with I don’t advocate for violence, but I also won’t condemn this use of it. If I knew a better way to attempt to cause change, I would advocate for that. But it is hard to argue with the result. (Anthem reversal)
That’s basically where I am right now
I think there are a lot of us there. More than lemmy would make it appear.
I want to advocate for violence, I’m not going to participate but violence is the only way for change sometimes
I don’t want to advocate violence too, but there’s going to be a next CEO, and somebody must keep renting bikes.
The best alternative is that we all vote in a government for the people that looks after the people and makes laws to bind these corporations from taking advantage of people locked into their systems.
Obviously, we’re a long LONG way from that happening…
Except when it isn’t.
Well, I definitely can’t agree with that…in writing.
I don’t know why you choose the title you used. I would’ve upvoted this post but i couldn’t because of the title. Violence absolutely is the right course of action in certain circumstances. Violence should never be used first, but once all non-violent means have been tried and failed to correct a grave injustice, then violence becomes the appropriate action for any moral person.
If you do nothing while you watch a murderer kill an innocent person, then a part of the guilt falls on your hands. As the saying goes “the only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.”
I certainly agree with that, but that agreement is not a call to violence, and definitely not an incitement of violence…from a legal perspective.
Legal smeagol. When the legal system (jury box) fails us, time to move on to the next box.
I don’t disagree, but I don’t want to get on the wrong side of any of the ToS. Or wind up on a government watch list.
You’re not even willing to risk THAT to help fight against evil?
I mean… I’m not willing to risk that for a meme post.
What do you think that the difference is between a meme post and public conversation?
I’m saying that framing a meme post as the fight against evil is a bit much.
There’s a public, digital record of one and a very slim chance (for most people) that anyone who would care is listening to the other.
The government stopped using watch lists. It’s easier just to watch everyone.
One of the things I remember Snowden saying about the NSA’s data collection is, something to the effect of, “It doesn’t even make sense. If you’re looking for a needle in a haystack, the answer isn’t more hay.” I was still outraged by the government’s collection of my meta data, but it did make me feel a little better about their ability weaponize that data competently.
It’s not so much the excess hay their collecting, it’s the giant electromagnetic they’re building.
This was self defence. Insurance companies conduct violence on a grand scale. The adjuster just defended himself.
To most governments and some private citizens, violence is a tool
“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent”
~ Asimov
And here we are, nailed to the fucking wall. I’m fine with expanding this “incompetence”.
I feel like Asimov’s statement has to be couched in some larger discussion. Taken in a vacuum, I can see some merit, but I can’t say that I completely agree with it. Incompetent in what aspect? I feel that his quote ignores intention. For some, violence isn’t something that they’re resorting to due to a failure to communicate through conflict, it is the preferred tool for the job. He comes off a little condescending and armchair intellectual-y here. I prefer the Sun Tzu quote someone mentioned earlier in the thread, “Violence is a precipitation of two sides unwilling to compromise.”
yeah I love Asimov but the quote is stupid. What is a slave supposed to do to it’s master? Write a strongly worded letter? Beg for others to save them?
Violence absolutely makes sense when there’s no diplomatic solution and unfortunately quarter into the 21st century - where we should have personal robots and moon bases - that is still a pretty big issue.
If life was a story book probably pleed their case to a rich influence noble or seduce a bishop and have them work to slowly change society and in 70 years it works out by using the system to change things from within… end of story
Real life: Then some dbag who likes the old ways will ruin everything and here we are going back to square one.
So like, one rough day, and I mean really rough? Sounds familiar, wait it’s coming back… dictator but only on day one - that kind of thing?
The M4A movement was absolutely incompetent if you compared it to health insurance Super PACs. It was basically a bunch unpaid volunteers, many with their own medical debt, against fully salaried lobby groups paid for with our premiums, our denied claims.
Ah, good. So the corrupt, evil, and greedy tactics of health insurers are finally mitigated to… checks notes oh, to what they were last week.
You know they’re sitting on a wish list of awful policies while they’re waiting for this to blow over so they can implement them when we aren’t looking. Fuck that.
Don’t do violence
This wasn’t violent. It was calm and deliberate and it really seems like what Brian wanted with how he led his life. Seems like a lot of other CEOs of insurance companies and other hyper predatory industries are likely a bit jealous of Brian getting the result they all seem to be aiming for with their own calm, deliberate actions in life.
Also, the stock went up, so weird that we aren’t really celebrating the boost to shareholder value - again, this was the endeavor that Brian committed his life to. He’d be overjoyed to have made an additional $7million on paper for man also worth $14 billion in family wealth.
Did you think it was easy for Brian to sign the death warrants of tens/hundreds of thousands of people? Through a lot of indirect action and often while enjoying a very lovely omikase sushi lunch with a different chef flown in from Kyoto each day to prepare? No. It wasn’t easy. But you know what, he rolled his sleeves up and he did it, because that’s just the kind of man he was until he was shot in the back of the head.
Hope you all have a good day at work today with your own decisions, remaining CEOs, board members of predatory industries and random billionaires. We know you’ll stay focused on doing the most valuable thing with your time today
You couldn’t be more wrong. I think he was actually shot in the chest, the rest seems like a solid assessment tho
Violence gave us (the US) freedom from being a colony, freedom from slavery, workers rights, women’s rights…wait a minute.
Why do we get told to not do violence again? Seems like we just need a little bit of organized violence and we can solve problems.
Because violence is a tragedy and in an ideal world there would be no need for it. However, fewer and fewer people these days can pretend we live in an ideal world.
Equivocation much? By your logic either idiots set the standards or it’s morally defensible to attack people who kill us slowly.
I do think it’s morally defensible for an oppressed group to direct violence toward their oppressors. It’s also a tragedy that it comes to that but tragedy and justice are not mutually exclusive. I also think only an idiot would accept the standards in which we are expected to live, therefore to demand satisfaction with such standards would be idiotic.
It doesn’t really sound like we disagree about anything. Pardon my earlier tone. I should have been mellower, or at least funnier.
I do think, ideally, we should be able to resolve disputes without violence. We don’t live in that world though. Mainly because people that have a lot power and resources worked to keep it that way. They actively work against progress.
And those people will use violence to continue their oppressive rule.
Violence is the one true power from which all other powers are derived.
Denying healthcare = violence
I made a large collection of screenshots from Facebook of people who had their claims denied by United Healthcare today if you want to really see violence.
Damn, I’ve heard that healthcare sucks in the USA but I didn’t expect it to be that bad. This is just heartbreaking.
If anything, this assassination made people like me from countries with functioning healthcare systems more aware of how it could’ve been in the bad timeline.
I tried to find a similar collection from other health care robber companies, but they didn’t seem to be as brutal as this.
It’s self-defence.
Violence is neutral.
Human nature is bad.
When someone is violent to someone else and doesn’t need to be violent, they are bad.
When someone unintentionally wrongs someone, you try to settle the situation without violence in a way that is fair to both parties.
When they don’t settle or they keep wronging people, you need to escalate.
When the person wronging the people is in a place of money and power, and you cannot escalate, there should be consequences.
I’m not a big fan of vigilantism, If the world ran that way, we’d have a lot of innocent deaths. But if the government and laws don’t protect the people, stuff like this happens, or at least it logically should. If anything, I’m kind of shocked this isn’t more commonplace.
violence is neutral
How so?
I think what theyre getting at, is that in the assailant’s mind it’s justified, or they wouldn’t have done it.
Killing a rapist mid-act is not wrong. Killing an innocent person because they have the misfortune of being insured by your company is wrong.
It was here before we got here, and good and bad are both words of human origin.
The one hand-wringer downvoting you didn’t see the video of the pregnant zebra watching its unborn fetus ripped from her uterus and eaten, in front of her terrified, defeated, anguished eyes. The hyenas were just surviving, violence wasn’t taking place.
There’s always one in a crowd.
I mean history is ambiguous about it, but it usually tends to be more bad than good. Usually.
Depends on how far back you go. We’re smart because we’re predators.
