[EDIT] Inb4 more people try to suggest that I’m mourning the loss of this scumbag capitalist fuck: No, I’m not sad he’s dead. No, I don’t think corporate murder is acceptable and no, I would not ever rat to police if I knew the shooter and yes, I believe the punishment fits the crimes he’s committed against untold thousands of people. THAT SAID…

I’m not down with vigilante murder or anything because it seems like the slipperiest of slopes toward chaos, but what other option is there in a situation where someone seeks to make an impact in this way? You can’t just beat up evil CEOs and let them go back to work. It would be naïve to expect them to change their ways when faced with consequences for their actions and then promptly let go. It just seems like the chances that it emboldens their penchant for exploitative behaviour and disdain for people in need are too high.

We’re just born into and strapped to this capitalist ride and expected to sit quiet and make these leeches their billions. How else can this cancerous greed possibly be dealt with? Is vigilante murder the only effective option? Honest questions. I’m terribly conflicted and I’m genuinely curious what more reasonable and intelligent minds than mine think about this because I can’t think of an alternative to murder in this case.

Ideally, we wouldn’t have to resort to vigilante killings to level the playing field but I 100% understand that we don’t live in a society where the rich will ever give a fuck about the rest of us or would ever sacrifice their power over us in the name of goodwill.

  • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    OP, can you please edit your question to make it clearer. Remember, open-ended and thought provoking.

  • Bear@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Doubt this is an honest question. The obvious answer is to stop being a radical, help yourself, get to work, and build something nice.

    • BreadOven@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think this reasoning is why everyone is in this current situation.

      It’s just a constant stream of pushing goal posts. Before you know it, you have a dictator running the country and they’re sending immigrants (or previously Jewish people) to be killed en masse.

      I know that’s a very harsh comparison, but it all starts with people accepting small changes.

      Question everything your government is doing, even if you agree with it. (Obviously not to the point of conspiracy theories haha)

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s the thing… Most people do not have opportunities for this because of a parasitic owner regime is sucking everybody dry but top 10-20% of larpers who enable them

      • Bear@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        In fact most people do have the opportunity to go to work and help themselves.

  • toiletobserver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The closest thing to a real answer that i can come up with is to remove money from politics. That itself seems near impossible a goal, but in order to start making better decisions you have to improve the decision making process that got us to this point.

    • Draghetta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Taking money from politics is like taking food from cooking. Not compatible.

      The whole point of politics is power, influence, assignment of scarce resources. I don’t mean this in a bad way, it’s literally what politics is about: you want your government to make laws that influence your community, to collect taxes and use them in a certain way, to regulate certain things the way you’d like. Without those things politics are meaningless.

      Money is just power that you can measure and trade, it will always be part of the equation. Removing money from politics is nonsensical.

      • Xaphanos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The whole point of politics is compromise. Finding solutions that the most people can accept.

        • Draghetta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Compromise is the… point, of politics? Are you sure? At best it’s a mean to an end, and only in democracy. We’re not taking moral judgement here, just what is what.

      • Akasazh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        There’s few countries where the effectiveness of electoral campaigns are measured in the amount of money raised.

        It is possible to regulate the amount of money in politics, there’s plenty of examples.

        • Draghetta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Party funding and salaries are not “the money” that is in politics, those are peanuts. Do you think Elon musk is interested in a government job because he wants the paycheck?

          • Akasazh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I wasn’t taking about that at all.

            I’m most countries there time of money in politics is way healthier than in the us.

            So it’s possible to regulate that better.

            • Draghetta@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yes but you are talking about party funding. Politicians are not into it for the funding, that’s peanuts.

              The relationship between politics and money is already regulated, that’s what embezzlement laws are about. They can be improved, but you’ll find it’s harder than you would think.

              Surely decoupling money from politics is not possible, which is what I was answering about.

              • Akasazh@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                No I was talking about electoral funding, through super PACs and the like. How individuals and companies can buy their way into politicians favor.

                I was talking about that the dollar amount raised during elections is a measure of success. That’s not the case in almost all developed countries. And it’s wrong.

  • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    If any other avenue existed: it would long have been tried and replicated. They have the judiciary, they have the legislative bodies, they have the senates, they have the presidencies/head of states whatever.

  • The incident still appears to be a professional hit (as of this comment).

    That means its much less likely to be about the wrath of countless UHC victims, and more likely a business associate or rival.

    That said, we lowly proletariat are already dying, and will do so a lot more as Trump and the Heritage Foundation advance their agenda. The sooner we all get on board with resistance, the better.

    That said, there are effective nonviolent means of revolution, but I suspect sooner or later some pretty woman will get killed horribly on camera, and the whole country will start exploding.

    • okwhateverdude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      The incident still appears to be a professional hit (as of this comment).

      A professional hit would have had some plausible confusion if it was suicide, such as defenestration that the ruski’s like to do. Or he simply would have disappeared. The US has no shortage of gun enthusiasts and youtube is a great teacher. It doesn’t make sense for a business associate or rival to inflame the masses and increase the likelihood of copycats since it directly affects their class. All of these fucks are in it together and they protect their own.

  • Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t think vigilante violence is a good idea but if some of the murders in the US are targeted at billionaires instead that’s fine by me. If the system wasn’t fucked this wouldn’t have been news.

  • elbucho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think it all boils down to that nebulous concept of “the social contract”. The most naive interpretation of the justice system is that it will provide justice when justice is demanded. It is, after all, called “the justice system”. But what constitutes justice? And who receives it? We have already seen two separate supreme court decisions that state unequivocally that the police are neither obligated to serve nor protect people. We have also seen that young black men are 7 times more likely to be falsely convicted of serious crimes than young white men, so we know that the justice system does not work for all of us. We know that rich people get convicted far less often, and for far shorter sentences than poor people, and we know that the legal system saps the opportunity to acquire generational wealth from those who do get convicted.

    It is illegal to shoplift $100 of groceries from a corporation, but it is perfectly legal for that same corporation to drive out competition and then raise prices, in essence stealing from the entire community. It is illegal to intentionally harm someone, but it is perfectly legal for a medical insurance company to deny coverage to paying customers for necessary medical intervention.

    When justice is completely out of reach by legal means, the flimsy fiction of the social contract is voided. New York City has somewhere in the neighborhood of 900 murders per year, which means that there have probably been 5 or 6 other people who have been murdered in the city since Brian Johnson was shot. Are the police putting the same effort into tracking the killers of those people as they are into the Brian Johnson’s murderer? The reality is that the vast majority of us are intentionally excluded from the halls of power. The American Declaration of Independence makes the bold claim that it is a self-evident truth that all men are created equal. Does the present situation in this country feel to you like equality? Because to me, it feels like there is an owner class, and a peasant class, and brother… we ain’t the owners.

    • zaphodb2002@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      The American Declaration of Independence makes the bold claim that it is a self-evident truth that all men are created equal.

      The guy who wrote those words was also raping his slaves. It’s always been this way.

    • arin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Also government constantly approving selling violence of mass destruction

    • Draghetta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is a very interesting question that would require so much more talk than is proper for a lemmy comment.

      I’ll try and make a stupidly short summary:

      In political philosophy, it is commonly accepted to define a state as a political community where the government detains the monopoly over legitimate use of physical force.

      Basically what allows you to feel safe in such a community - as opposed to a more tribal one - is that you know that you can’t be harmed by your fellow citizen. When you buy your groceries you don’t want to worry that the shopkeeper will beat you up because he doesn’t want to give you change. When you are outside enjoying your sandwich you don’t want to worry about a random guy cracking your head open in order to steal it. You are not worried because you know that their violence would be considered illegitimate, and would be met by legitimate violence.

      This only works if everyone agrees to delegate their use of violence to the state, who in turn executes that violence through the appropriate means (police etc) using the appropriate rules. If violence is taken into one’s hands the whole foundation of the political community breaks down, which means that the state has existential interests in prosecuting whoever does it.

      States where violence is not really prosecuted are those commonly considered failed states.

      Now I know this is rather abstract and the real world is more complex than that, but as I said this would require a lot more space than is available here. But there is your answer: [privately administered] violence is not the answer.

      • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        OK I get that, but the social contract has broken down.

        “Health care industry” is a horrible, horrible concept. You and I both know that these corporations get in between doctors and patients. Why? Profit. Everyone knows this.

        I’m not going to go out and murder a CEO but I’m sure not going to give a shit that this one got murdered. Godspeed, murderer.

        • Draghetta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m with you. I was just addressing the general question, which doesn’t get addressed as much as it should :)

          I would rather see the conversation going towards reforming the broken system rather than going in the direction of “fuck the state it’s all broken anyway” which wouldn’t help anybody.

          Let’s call this murder an act of political violence. If it’s the first, brutal step towards reform, then it’s one thing and we can “celebrate”. If it’s the first step towards Dodge City (which is the vibes I get from some comments) then there is very little to be happy about.

      • Anticorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        When you buy your groceries you don’t want to worry that the shopkeeper will beat you up because he doesn’t want to give you change.

        True, but it used to be understood that he’d get beaten up if he didn’t give you change. Slowly that bar has been moved to where now they over-charge you, keep the change, and then have the cops arrest you if you try to get help from the institutions put in place to ensure a safe society. Figuratively of course.

      • sir_pronoun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        But there is the question of whom most people consider part of this political community - people aren’t going to crack each other’s heads open over a sandwich. But over denied healthcare… even in a world where most people support the lynching of these CEOs, you should be safe with a sandwich.

  • blarth@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Over the last several years, I have had opportunities or at least contemplated opportunities to make lots of money while exploiting others or being a completely useless finance bro.

    The thing that keeps me from moving in those directions is moral character. If you can’t bring yourself to bullshit your fellow human and take from them to enrich yourself without providing any real value, you won’t get as rich as a CEO. Think of all those get rich quick YouTubers who do nothing but sell digital bullshit or ebooks about how to sell ebooks or some other digital bullshit to get rich quick.

    There are, of course, exceptions, but what did Brian Thompson really do for society? Moreover, what harm did he cause to society?

    These people know they are doing the wrong thing and are cashing in on their ability to take from society while enriching themselves. In the context of health care, they’re literally hurting and killing people.

    Remember when the arguments against nationalized health care were mostly about how we would have death panels? How fucking ironic.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The main point of any government is a mediator between people.

    When the government is corrupt and not only lets the powerful break the laws, but rewrites them in their favor, people realize it.

    They stop following rules because they know others aren’t. If someone stops them in the act, they feel innocent because they didn’t complete the act. If no one stops them, they legitimate believe it was allowed, because they see people flagrantly break the rules with no consequences on the daily.

    That’s what today’s elite don’t get, they’re stopping the peaceful process we all agreed was better than violence, because they have a monopoly on legal violence. But eventually it just means no one follows the rules, and 99% of us don’t have much to lose these days.

    A society that starts acting that way quickly becomes uncontrollable.

    Like we saw four years ago, it only takes a relatively small amount of people in one spot to really be uncontrollable. A mob of 5,000 people is just as unstoppable as a hoard of 5,000 zombies. At that point pain compliance is the only thing that can get thru to them, and there’s always a chance the mob fights back instead.

    That’s why if cops think the mob has a chance of having guns, they immediately back down.

    If BLM had marched with ARs, shit might have changed.

  • Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    There are so many more of us than there are of them that a general strike would bring about swift change without us stooping to their level of harming others to gain and wield power.

    Unfortunately, we’d have to stop all the infighting and work together. We couldn’t be bothered to do that for the latest US presidential election, so I’m not sure we’d do it in this case.

    I have even less hope that violence and threats of violence will do any good at this point. They have so much money, they can buy invincibility. And that’ll be even easier under the next administration. Vigilantism is a feel-good revenge fantasy rather than it leading to anyone’s life improving. If it was effective it would be much more common. We’ve got the guns in America, but their use has not yet caused a utopia.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Unfortunately, we’d have to stop all the infighting and work together.

      Given all the divisions in our society, it’s remarkable how unified people seem over cheering this CEOs murder. I think we may have unlocked a common cause.

      They have so much money, they can buy invincibility.

      There is no such thing. Even the secret service drops the ball sometimes. Also, more security means more potential for betrayal. If the demand for security personal goes up, the quality will go down.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I mean the labor movement that lead to humane labor laws was very much violent. Compared to what insisting on nonviolence would’ve accomplished, the modern US is indeed a utopia. As for why, well, count the number of children you know who work in coal mines.

  • TheBananaKing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Killing in the defense of others is a legal defense to homicide.

    If the guy were attacking people with a machete, nobody would dream of prosecuting the person who put him down.

    The fact that he’s doing it slightly more slowly, but on a massively larger scale should not change anything.

      • Anticorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The current older generation has lived longer than any other in history, and they’ve clung to control for as long as possible

        And they’ve used that time to change laws and tax codes to ensure their power and money will pass to their children, forming lasting dynasties who will continue their extortive behavior.

        • datavoid@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          $1000 says Baron Trump will be president someday, no laws required (just idiots)

      • daddy32@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        immigration

        Is it really a big issue or are you just internalizing the language of the oppressing class, putting common people against each other?

        The current older generation has lived longer than any other in history, and they’ve clung to control for as long as possible.

        And now you’re adding ageism to the mix. It is not old people who are the problem! Keep your eyes fixed on the real enemies and don’t target your exploited fellows.