Staff Reports
The tragic and utterly senseless murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson at the hands of Luigi Mangione has sparked a debate in America that nobody should be proud of engaging in. Instead of addressing the real issues with the health insurance industry head-on, some have been quick to glorify the abhorrent act of assassination, leaving many to wonder just how far society has fallen in its operatic approach to political grievances. It seems that for some, a gunshot is more effective than hard work and political engagement.
With ludicrously misguided sympathy, certain factions have begun to rationalize Mangione’s actions, suggesting that the murder reflects a collective frustration over denied insurance claims and the heavy hand of the insurance industry. While reform in the healthcare system may be needed, it is crucial to understand that political violence is not the answer. Pundits are staggering over themselves to justify the actions of a man who resorted to murder as a form of protest, suggesting that perhaps we, as a society, should feel sorry for him rather than condemn him.
The Top 4 Ways the Assassin Could've Drawn Attention to a Problem Without Murdering Anyone https://t.co/48QukRcoiw
— Garbage-Nazi Athena Thorne (@Athena_Thorne) December 11, 2024
Meanwhile, there are those who cling to the notion that this isn’t a slippery slope but rather a heroic step toward socialized healthcare. The irony is rich; Mangione could have taken the road less traveled, one paved with political activism and legislative change. Instead, he opted for the nuclear option that ultimately puts him in prison, demonstrating a woeful lack of ambition and creativity. With his background and intelligence, Mangione had options galore and squandered them all for a moment of ill-fated glory.
What if Mangione had chosen the more conventional, less murderous path? He could have easily sought election to a legislative position, using his privilege and intellect to enact the reforms he so desperately desired. Instead, he turned to violence, clearly demonstrating a preference for headlines over hard work. He could have become a policy expert or even climbed the executive ladder in the healthcare industry, advocating for change from within rather than resorting to crime.
Alternatively, he could have embraced activism. A fresh face with a penchant for outdoor activities could have inspired a movement rather than taking a life, unleashing a host of catchy slogans and organizing rallies against corporate greed. Can anyone imagine what could have been achieved if he had simply channeled that energy into something productive? Instead, his actions only serve to prove the uselessness of resorting to violence when confronting systemic issues.
The conclusion is a firm reminder: assassination isn’t just a crime; it’s a colossal failure of creativity, ambition, and intellect. If the goal is to enact genuine systemic change, the last thing anyone should consider is following the ill-advised, violent path that Mangione has chosen. The healthcare system may need reforms — improvements that the incoming administration may be poised to address without any help from an assassin’s misguided actions. Celebrating or romanticizing violence only entrenches a culture of disorder rather than respect for life and democracy.
