“Eat the Rich” memes spread, but is it a political movement?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 348
  • Views: 6K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:
I do, too.
Click to expand...
I think it’s terrible. I could understand some sympathy towards the shooter if he was a dad whose child or wife died or was suffering because of denial of coverage. It wasn’t remotely close to that. I don’t see a single mitigating detail to a pointless act of barbaric violence. He deserves no sympathy, pity, support or consideration beyond a fair trial.
 
Paine said:
I find it encouraging that people understand the dynamics behind this killing.
Click to expand...
I don't think people do understand the dynamics behind this killing at all. And I'm not remotely defending insurance companies.

People are cheering on the violence. Thats all they are doing. They aren't advocating for meaningful change. Hell, they don't even know his background or history in most cases.

Having sympathy for this asshat is nothing more than allowing a spoiled brat temper tantrum to turn into murder in my opinion.

If you think this gets us closer to reform of our Healthcare system, we are just going to disagree.
 
Paine said:
Really? I find it somewhat encouraging.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? I find it very alarming how they conflate two distinct issues. On one hand there is the issue of how for-profit insurance conducts its business. On the other hand, there is the issue of someone taking another’s life. Sadly, many of the people polled think that because of the way for-profit insurance works, it was justified for the killer to take another’s life based on that person’s position within the for-profit insurance industry. That’s messed up. And it’s also messed up to think that people would find it acceptable for individuals to decide to take the life of another— and carry out the act— if there is something about that person that they deem morally reprehensible.

But the inability of those being polled to fully think through those questions and adequately consider the ramifications is troubling to me.
 
wmheel1287 said:
I don't think people do understand the dynamics behind this killing at all. And I'm not remotely defending insurance companies.

People are cheering on the violence. Thats all they are doing. They aren't advocating for meaningful change. Hell, they don't even know his background or history in most cases.

Having sympathy for this asshat is nothing more than allowing a spoiled brat temper tantrum to turn into murder in my opinion.

If you think this gets us closer to reform of our Healthcare system, we are just going to disagree.
Click to expand...
If you’re intent on taking the worst possible interpretation of what I’m saying and what these poll results are saying, then I guess you would come away with that position.

From my POV, I see a majority of young people realizing that this wasn’t an act of random violence or something that happened in a vacuum. They seem to understand that there is legitimate anger at the system. This anger can be dangerous as we see.

It says nothing about the possibility of healthcare reform, and my posts on the subject in the past have said as much.
 
Last edited:
Icky Mettle said:
Are you serious? I find it very alarming how they conflate two distinct issues. On one hand there is the issue of how for-profit insurance conducts its business. On the other hand, there is the issue of someone taking another’s life. Sadly, many of the people polled think that because of the way for-profit insurance works, it was justified for the killer to take another’s life based on that person’s position within the for-profit insurance industry. That’s messed up. And it’s also messed up to think that people would find it acceptable for individuals to decide to take the life of another— and carry out the act— if there is something about that person that they deem morally reprehensible.

But the inability of those being polled to fully think through those questions and adequately consider the ramifications is troubling to me.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t seem to be what the polling in question is saying. The questions leave things much more open ended than for you to assert that people are justifying this killing. Explanation is not justification. All this polling seems to be saying is that, on average, younger people are more likely to accept that this killing was not just because of one person’s decision.

That doesn’t absolve Mangione of anything.
 
Paine said:
If you’re intent on taking the worst possible interpretation of what I’m saying and what these poll results are saying, then I guess you would come away with that position.

From my POV, I see a majority of young people realizing that this wasn’t an act of random violence or something that happened in a vacuum. They seem to understand that there is legitimate anger at the system. This anger can be dangerous as we see.

It says nothing about the possibility of healthcare reform, and my posts on the subject in the past have said as much.
Click to expand...
"Young people are also the least likely age group to say “a great deal” of responsibility falls on the person who committed the killing. Only about 4 in 10 say that"

60% don't even place "a great deal" of responsibility on the person with the gun. You read that to say they aren't justifying the killing?
 
wmheel1287 said:
"Young people are also the least likely age group to say “a great deal” of responsibility falls on the person who committed the killing. Only about 4 in 10 say that"

60% don't even place "a great deal" of responsibility on the person with the gun. You read that to say they aren't justifying the killing?
Click to expand...
How would you read that to say they are justifying the killing? If someone places a “moderate” amount of blame on Mangione and a “great deal” of blame on the for-profit health insurance industry, are they justifying the killing to you?
 
Paine said:
How would you read that to say they are justifying the killing? If someone places a “moderate” amount of blame on Mangione and a “great deal” of blame on the for-profit health insurance industry, are they justifying the killing to you?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s pretty much the definition of justifying the killing.
 
Paine said:
That doesn’t seem to be what the polling in question is saying. The questions leave things much more open ended than for you to assert that people are justifying this killing. Explanation is not justification. All this polling seems to be saying is that, on average, younger people are more likely to accept that this killing was not just because of one person’s decision.

That doesn’t absolve Mangione of anything.
Click to expand...

“About 7 in 10 U.S. adults between 18 and 29 say ‘a great deal’ or ‘a moderate amount’ of responsibility falls on profits made by health insurance companies, denials for health care coverage by health insurance companies or the person who committed the killing.”

“Young people are also the least likely age group to say ‘a great deal’ of responsibility falls on the person who committed the killing. Only about 4 in 10 say that…”

(ETA: wmheel beat me to that part).

And the last sentence of your first paragraph makes no sense.
 
Icky Mettle said:
“About 7 in 10 U.S. adults between 18 and 29 say ‘a great deal’ or ‘a moderate amount’ of responsibility falls on profits made by health insurance companies, denials for health care coverage by health insurance companies or the person who committed the killing.”

“Young people are also the least likely age group to say ‘a great deal’ of responsibility falls on the person who committed the killing. Only about 4 in 10 say that…”

And the last sentence of your first paragraph makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Nothing you’ve said up to this point has made sense.
 
Paine said:
Delusional.
Click to expand...
If someone placed a “moderate” amount of blame on Medgar Evers’s murderers and a “great deal” of blame on the NAACP troublemakers who needed to stay the hell out of Mississippi, are they justifying the killing to you?
 
Last edited:
lawtig02 said:
If someone placed a “moderate” amount of blame on Emmitt Till’s lynchers and a “great deal” of blame on the Civil Rights Movement troublemakers who needed to stay the hell out of Mississippi, are they justifying the killing to you?
Click to expand...
Leave it to a former Republican to try to find any sort of equivalence between the lynching of Emmitt Till and the killing of a healthcare CEO.

We are talking about blaming individuals for bad actions vs blaming systems.

I would place much more blame on the system of racial supremacy and segregation than I would any individual committed a lynching. Does that mean that someone who commits murder should not be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? No. Does it mean the act isn’t reprehensible? Of course not.

The actions are a result of lived experience under the system, not vice versa.
 
Paine said:
Leave it to a former Republican to try to find any sort of equivalence between the lynching of Emmitt Till and the killing of a healthcare CEO.

We are talking about blaming individuals for bad actions vs blaming systems.

I would place much more blame on the system of racial supremacy and segregation than I would any individual committed a lynching. Does that mean that someone who commits murder should not be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? No. Does it mean the act isn’t reprehensible? Of course not.

The actions are a result of lived experience under the system, not vice versa.
Click to expand...
You’ve lost the moral thread in your zeal to be as progressive as possible. Sorry. I hope you get it back as you mature a little more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top