3 ms·

CEOs: “Do something about it.” Luigi Mangione: … CEOs: “Not like that… I’m not suggesting that it’s a good response. I’m suggesting that this interpretation

CEOs: “Do something about it.” Luigi Mangione: … CEOs: “Not like that… I’m not suggesting that it’s a good response. I’m suggesting that this interpretation of what CEOs are saying is wrong.

ch4s3 5mo ago
This is a deeply sick way of thinking. Mangione was and is a fool, a 3rd rate thinker. His manifesto is muddled, factually mistaken, and by his own words he understood the topic poorly. You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries. There's no quick fix for political change.
- slg 5mo ago
  >political violence rarely achieves its aims This country was founded on political violence. When the political violence works, we tend to stop considering it political violence.
  - ch4s3 5mo ago
    I did say rarely, and if you are looking more carefully a pluralistic democracy wasn't really what a lot of the founders were after, especially guys like Jefferson. Sure we're happy we got it, but it wasn't necessarily the aim and we got SUPER LUCKY that Washington decided to step down and retire. The former military leaders of revolutions almost never do that.
    - slg 5mo ago
      > I did say rarely And I think you have that backwards. The nonviolence movements of the mid to late 20th century are the exception more than the rule when it comes to achieving change.
      - ch4s3 5mo ago
        There’s plenty of evidence that early states often collapsed because people just left. The dissolution of the USSR was also largely non-violent.
- yoyohello13 5mo ago
  > political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries. Cursory knowledge of history also shows that, when it comes to violence, logic does not matter. People are scared for their livelihoods. If the rich and powerful keep shouting to the word that they are going to destroy your way of life, there will be violence. It doesn't matter how futile or counterproductive it is.
  - joe_mamba 5mo ago
    [flagged]
    - yoyohello13 5mo ago
      I'm quite aware the elites will never be meaningfully impacted. That doesn't change the reality that it's going to happen. I personally am quite afraid of the future, I know deep down me and my family are in for a bad time in the years to come, and nowhere in the world will be safe, other than the bunkers in Greenland of course.
      - joe_mamba 5mo ago
        >That doesn't change the reality that it's going to happen. That's why the elites have secret self sustaining doomsday bunkers on private islands. And the mid-upper class are trying to cash in as much as they can now while the going is still good so they can also move their families abroad or to gated communities in safer places of the country to be as far away from the potential riot hotspots as possible when the shit hits the fan. Ultimately it's gonna be every man for himself. Expecting the government to do something for the "little guy", is futile. If they were to do anything for you, they would have done something since the 1970-80's, when they started shipping jobs abroad and eroding your purchasing power to enrich the shareholders.
- pesus 5mo ago
  > You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence. As another commenter said, the literal founding of the country was based on political violence.
  - ch4s3 5mo ago
    > Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence. Violence by the police against peaceful protestors is what turned public opinion. Violence by political activists did not lead to the Civil Rights Act. You have it backwards.
    - pesus 5mo ago
      This is the cursory knowledge I'm referring to - it leaves out extremely pertinent details. The Civil Rights Act did not pass until multiple days of rioting following the assassination of MLK. The peaceful protestors were also only one side of the coin. Their impact relied on being an alternative to the other side, which was not peaceful.
      - ch4s3 5mo ago
        L.B.J. was instrumental in whipping votes for the Civil Rights Act. In his joint address to congress he said "No memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. He then went on to personally lobby individual senators until it passed. It think you're the one who has a cursory understanding here.
- leptons 5mo ago
  Mangione was a one-off, and a lot of people understand why he may have done what he did. Just wait until the American version of the French Revolution happens. If AI keeps stealing all the jobs, it will come sooner rather than later.
  - quickthrowman 5mo ago
    Revolutions usually are bad. The Who puts it succinctly in Won’t Get Fooled Again “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” Best case scenario is a new set of elites that end up doing the same shit as the last group, see Russia from 1918 to the present for an example.
    - leptons 5mo ago
      The Who is your evidence? Lol. The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. It needed to happen. And centuries later, the French still don't accept bullshit, they will protest and riot when their protections are diminished in any way. America does protesy and riot too, though not to the same extent, but that will only get worse as things get bad. Russia is not a good example either, their society has always been a clusterfuck, and probably always will be as long as there are people willing to throw other people put of windows so someone can stay ahead or in power.
      - ch4s3 5mo ago
        > The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. What? Napoleon marched them off to war "spending 30,000 lives per month". They didn't get a proper Republic until 1870 and turned into miserable colonial overlords. Moreover the 3rd Republic;s foreign policy helped cause WWI.
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
      - quickthrowman 5mo ago
        > The Who is your evidence? Lol. The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. Many people have made comments that are similar in nature, the line from that song is the pithiest example I could think of to express the idea that replacing terrible leaders usually leads to more terrible leaders. Spending decades fighting wars across Europe under Napoleon was good? I wonder how the troops that invaded Russia feel about the French Revolution lol
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- happytoexplain 5mo ago
  It is sick! It's truly sick. Think about the fact that it is sick, and it is what people are saying. We are sick right now.
  - yoyohello13 5mo ago
    Humans have been killing each other since before recorded history. There is no use pretending it's some exceptional 'sickness'. Rather than dismissing the sentiment as the product of a sick mind, it's more productive to accept it's part of us and try to understand the underlying causes.
pesus 5mo ago
People will downvote you because the idea of violence shocks and scares them, but if you steal people's future and strip them of any real (peaceful) options to change things, it becomes inevitable some of them will try to fight back with what few options they do have left.
- dfxm12 5mo ago
  The status quo of health insurance in the US ("delay, deny, defend") is structural violence. This isn't about fear of violence, they just have different politics...
  - happytoexplain 5mo ago
    Loss of livelihood is in the same category of structural violence as loss of healthcare.
yoyohello13 5mo ago
Downvoted... but not wrong. People who think we can automate 50% of jobs without subsequent violence are fooling themselves.

ch4s3 5mo ago

This is a deeply sick way of thinking. Mangione was and is a fool, a 3rd rate thinker. His manifesto is muddled, factually mistaken, and by his own words he understood the topic poorly. You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries. There's no quick fix for political change.

slg 5mo ago
>political violence rarely achieves its aims This country was founded on political violence. When the political violence works, we tend to stop considering it political violence.
- ch4s3 5mo ago
  I did say rarely, and if you are looking more carefully a pluralistic democracy wasn't really what a lot of the founders were after, especially guys like Jefferson. Sure we're happy we got it, but it wasn't necessarily the aim and we got SUPER LUCKY that Washington decided to step down and retire. The former military leaders of revolutions almost never do that.
  - slg 5mo ago
    > I did say rarely And I think you have that backwards. The nonviolence movements of the mid to late 20th century are the exception more than the rule when it comes to achieving change.
    - ch4s3 5mo ago
      There’s plenty of evidence that early states often collapsed because people just left. The dissolution of the USSR was also largely non-violent.
yoyohello13 5mo ago
> political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries. Cursory knowledge of history also shows that, when it comes to violence, logic does not matter. People are scared for their livelihoods. If the rich and powerful keep shouting to the word that they are going to destroy your way of life, there will be violence. It doesn't matter how futile or counterproductive it is.
- joe_mamba 5mo ago
  [flagged]
  - yoyohello13 5mo ago
    I'm quite aware the elites will never be meaningfully impacted. That doesn't change the reality that it's going to happen. I personally am quite afraid of the future, I know deep down me and my family are in for a bad time in the years to come, and nowhere in the world will be safe, other than the bunkers in Greenland of course.
    - joe_mamba 5mo ago
      >That doesn't change the reality that it's going to happen. That's why the elites have secret self sustaining doomsday bunkers on private islands. And the mid-upper class are trying to cash in as much as they can now while the going is still good so they can also move their families abroad or to gated communities in safer places of the country to be as far away from the potential riot hotspots as possible when the shit hits the fan. Ultimately it's gonna be every man for himself. Expecting the government to do something for the "little guy", is futile. If they were to do anything for you, they would have done something since the 1970-80's, when they started shipping jobs abroad and eroding your purchasing power to enrich the shareholders.
pesus 5mo ago
> You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence. As another commenter said, the literal founding of the country was based on political violence.
- ch4s3 5mo ago
  > Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence. Violence by the police against peaceful protestors is what turned public opinion. Violence by political activists did not lead to the Civil Rights Act. You have it backwards.
  - pesus 5mo ago
    This is the cursory knowledge I'm referring to - it leaves out extremely pertinent details. The Civil Rights Act did not pass until multiple days of rioting following the assassination of MLK. The peaceful protestors were also only one side of the coin. Their impact relied on being an alternative to the other side, which was not peaceful.
    - ch4s3 5mo ago
      L.B.J. was instrumental in whipping votes for the Civil Rights Act. In his joint address to congress he said "No memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long. He then went on to personally lobby individual senators until it passed. It think you're the one who has a cursory understanding here.
leptons 5mo ago
Mangione was a one-off, and a lot of people understand why he may have done what he did. Just wait until the American version of the French Revolution happens. If AI keeps stealing all the jobs, it will come sooner rather than later.
- quickthrowman 5mo ago
  Revolutions usually are bad. The Who puts it succinctly in Won’t Get Fooled Again “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” Best case scenario is a new set of elites that end up doing the same shit as the last group, see Russia from 1918 to the present for an example.
  - leptons 5mo ago
    The Who is your evidence? Lol. The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. It needed to happen. And centuries later, the French still don't accept bullshit, they will protest and riot when their protections are diminished in any way. America does protesy and riot too, though not to the same extent, but that will only get worse as things get bad. Russia is not a good example either, their society has always been a clusterfuck, and probably always will be as long as there are people willing to throw other people put of windows so someone can stay ahead or in power.
    - ch4s3 5mo ago
      > The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. What? Napoleon marched them off to war "spending 30,000 lives per month". They didn't get a proper Republic until 1870 and turned into miserable colonial overlords. Moreover the 3rd Republic;s foreign policy helped cause WWI.
      - deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
    - quickthrowman 5mo ago
      > The Who is your evidence? Lol. The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. Many people have made comments that are similar in nature, the line from that song is the pithiest example I could think of to express the idea that replacing terrible leaders usually leads to more terrible leaders. Spending decades fighting wars across Europe under Napoleon was good? I wonder how the troops that invaded Russia feel about the French Revolution lol
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
happytoexplain 5mo ago
It is sick! It's truly sick. Think about the fact that it is sick, and it is what people are saying. We are sick right now.
- yoyohello13 5mo ago
  Humans have been killing each other since before recorded history. There is no use pretending it's some exceptional 'sickness'. Rather than dismissing the sentiment as the product of a sick mind, it's more productive to accept it's part of us and try to understand the underlying causes.

pesus 5mo ago

People will downvote you because the idea of violence shocks and scares them, but if you steal people's future and strip them of any real (peaceful) options to change things, it becomes inevitable some of them will try to fight back with what few options they do have left.

dfxm12 5mo ago
The status quo of health insurance in the US ("delay, deny, defend") is structural violence. This isn't about fear of violence, they just have different politics...
- happytoexplain 5mo ago
  Loss of livelihood is in the same category of structural violence as loss of healthcare.

yoyohello13 5mo ago

Downvoted... but not wrong. People who think we can automate 50% of jobs without subsequent violence are fooling themselves.