Not really “powertripping”. Just pathetic. Consider this a notice to avoid feddit.org… I’ve unsubbed and blocked the instance.
We can’t dehumanize fascists for their choice to dehumanize everyone for things outside their control though, because that would be mean, and hurt their sociopath feefees!
Europe stool idly by throughout the 1930’s “tolerating” fascism, and the Nazi’s killed over 100 million people. Don’t make the same mistake as the radical centrists of history. Fascists will not afford you the same tolerance or courtesy.
Luigi seems to have a lot of support as well. In reality.
I think the key difference is that no one was bringing Brian Thompson to justice.
The nature of humans is that they seek justice for themselves. Congress and the courts are, in theory, an uneasy compromise to offer people justice in exchange for demanding that they don’t go out and make justice for themselves. Because we’ve seen where that leads, and it sure isn’t good.
You can believe in the rule of law and still think Brian Thompson deserved to die. Because by any legal standard, he committed more homicides than pretty much everyone on death row. And yet, somehow, our system is so twisted up that it is fine. Everything Thompson did was perfectly legal. Just like slavery, segregation, and the holocaust.
I don’t think killing CEOs at random is a route to any good thing. Bringing random violence into the political equation serves one side only, and it is not ours. But it is perfectly consistent to condemn murder and still support Luigi, in reality.
You’re not wrong, but the issue is that as fewer and fewer people believe that the law will actually hold anyone accountable, they’ll decide the correct thing to do is to take it into their own hands.
And, if there’s anything that’s been very, very, very, very, clearly shown over the last 2 or 3 years in the US it’s that the rule of law does not apply to anyone who is rich, famous, or is capable of wielding sufficient soft power.
If you’re one of those 3, then absolutely nothing you do is illegal, and once you’ve reached the point where the justice system will not do anything to those that wrong you, the only thing you have left is to go out and take action yourself, which historically has almost always been violence.
I would expect there to be more, rather than less, of these types of murders from here on - especially given that everyone in this country either has a gun, or is a 15 minute background check away from having one.
Very much so. I was meaning to imply as much, when I threw that little “in theory” into how congress and the courts are supposed to work.
The class war will not be televised!
But also there other things people can do to fight it besides violence. Yeah it aint as glamorous as taking down a CEO parasite for entire nation to align behind.
Advocate for your wages, mind your privacy and be a shrewd consumer…
Deny parasite profit hurts them it just would take millions to really punish these parasites.
But yeah people with nothing to lose which are being minted daily by thousands will do their thing… I always wonder why the old are such bootlickers. Seems like a fine way to go out. But boomer is too selfish, too scared of death to do anything but bootlicker the capital class while telling his child to work harder.
Funnily, German law did not change during the holocaust, and Germany still convicts people for being accessories to murder in concentration camps under the laws of the 1940s.
And yet… German ruling oligarch clan is made up of people who obtained their capital from slave labour.
Amazing how that works, aint it?
“There is only what is and that’s it. What should be is a dirty lie.” — Lenny Bruce
There’s no justice inherent in the world. The nature of things is that the ruthless and powerful will prosper. That is why setting up systems of justice and maintaining them is important. They will never be perfect or even close to it, but having them is better.
If the system is only applied to the working class, how much justice is there within the system?
Such system is not about justice but about the ruling class maintaining order to protect their assets from the slave labour that generates wealth for them.
I do get what you’re saying. The system is unjust. It is. What I am saying is that the unjust features of the system have nothing to do with the system. It’s just the nature of people. You could have the American system, or the Soviet, or anarchism, or Star Trek, or whatever, but the people with more power assembled to themselves will always be able to dominate the less powerful to some degree. Until you start doing a full Harrison Bergeron power-equalizing system, which of course is enforced by a Harrison Bergeron central all-powerful wait wait wait….
I do get what you mean, that the American system is corrupt and oligarchic. It is. I just am saying that any theory where you want to do whatever-else instead of the American system needs to take into account where the corruption in the American system comes from, and put up some strong defenses against it in whatever new way we’re doing instead.
I don’t have any lofty goal about system being fixed… but the criminals who currently are getting benefit of it, instead of getting the dick of the law must be exposed.
They should not feel comfortable living among people they exploit.
Asset owners hate being discussed in such light online, so I think they should be discussed more. It aint much bu it is honest work.
Condemning murder wasn’t the argument though, it was condemning all murder including against particular people or groups who want to or have committed murder like nazis. Luigi is the evidence that if a system protects those types of people from repercussions, the person who corrects them tend to get support from general public which runs counter to condemning all murder.
At this point it’s just semantics between physical violence and actions that lead to death like economic or social violence like what we see from united health and nazis.
A discussion that no self respecting regime would permit in a broad day light…
So writing the policy that deliberately withholds rightful treatment, causing thousands of people to die, is not similar to actively strangling them? And a self respecting regime shouldn’t be having a discussion about how people with power use that power to the detriment of their fellow man and what the consequences should be to prevent the fallout of more luigis?
you sound like a domestic terrorist mate, final warning.
I sound like a domestic terrorist for articulating that physical violence isn’t that far off from economic or social violence and that the failure to enforce penalties against them will lead to people lashing out as we have seen multiple times historically? And that we should have a discussion about that to avoid people continuing to stew in poor conditions that ultimately lead to someone lashing out? You sound like an apologist and someone who is unconcerned with the general welfare of their fellow man.
I just want peace, love and unicorns, Luigi’s act upset the fantasy world I live in… where hard work pays, the leadership is good, healthcare quality is good, and the poor deserve being poor.
Neo liberalism has brought prosperity for all the best people and I can’t stand see lazy people now trying to roll back the reforms that permitted us to prosper this well.
Are you having a stroke or are you being serious?
To be clear, at no point have I advocated violence. I have pointed out why some people may be moved to violence in response to non physical kinds of violence that do not provoke consequences Then said it was semantics between a murderer and a person who kills by policy, which would reason that it should result in harsher penalties for the people who kill by policy.
All that to prevent more abused people taking power into their own hands.
Again, at no point did I advocate for violence or terrorism. Please learn to read.
I never seen anyone on fedi advocate for violence but I have seen a lot of mods remove content they did not like and claim that tit was “advocating violence”
Also, I apologize I was being sarcastic, I agree with your analysis.
Who is bringing Putin, Trump or Netanyahu to justice?
One is a corporate executive, the other three are sovereigns.
Your point is?
Legally one can be held accountable, the other three have to be deposed or theoretically could be impeached but legal process doesn’t work for that
Thus my question - who is bringing them to justice. Your point is?
Nobody, because they are leaders of nation states so unless the nation state fails or there is a regime change, they are above the law. That’s the entire premises of being a ruler, no matter what “democracy” lovers would like to believe. That’s port of social contract people implicitly accepted.
Nobody accepted oligarchs living above he law, albeit historically they sure have enjoying their best lives…
But there were always counter forces within a few generation to clip their excesses.
Now read the comment I was originally responding to.