Burnwinter — it wasn’t just HTS though. As they began to grow in stature a number of other groups committed to attacks and demonstration of power.
Kurdish groups and other Syrian rebels have been involved, and smaller local militias/groups.
Lots of players involved.
MistaT Yes, it's similar to during the civil war of 2011–2016 or so, when the "Free Syrian Army" had dozens of different groups and tendencies before IS appeared but we were initially told they were all democratic revolutionaries, at least until that became untenable.
Apparently al-Golani (or al-Sharaa now) is having to shut down other rebels as much as slam the door shut behind Assad.
Re-posting to a more appropriate thread:
Couldn't help but have an ironic chuckle that the accused guy's manifesto apparently rails against the evils of corporate America....yet he was seen just prior to the shooting at a Starbucks and then later arrested eating at McDonalds.
This one has definitely divided opinions on both sides of the political spectrum. Even people on the right while they don't condone the murder aren't exactly mourning his death either. A deeply flawed system in America that something like this would need to happen to bring it into the media spotlight.
I cautiously approve of the logic of the murder committed by this kid. He seems pretty confused overall, but it'd be hard to argue the defence of the man he shot, and I'm impressed by his follow through.
It might well be a better world if a few more CEOs of predatory insurers got assassinated: it sounds as if UnitedHealthcare has a lot of blood on its hands. Anyone who mourns Brian Thompson could pause to think about the people whose lives his company's procedures shortened.
This clip is hilarious. They have no sense of irony whatsoever.
Murder is a bad solution for any problem, in all cases without exception.
Coombs I look forward to the day we can accord similar gravity to deaths inflicted by policy and procedure.
I just had a look at the stats in order to write this post, obviously take these back of the envelope estimates with a grain of salt, but I doubt they are too dramatic.
UnitedHealthcare serves around 50 million customers, and since this murder occurred it has become notorious for having a claim denial rate double the industry average. The company is currently in the news for delaying or denying claims to stroke and fall victims, and for being sued for using AI known to be faulty to classify claims.
Let's hypothesise that every year, 10,000 customers of UnitedHealthcare are denied a claim that would otherwise pay for some standard medical treatment that would prolong their life by at least 1 year.
I'd say it's a fairly conservative figure, not unreasonable:
Off the top, that would be a minimum 10,000 years of human life foreshortened by UnitedHealthcare claim denial each year. Quite possibly more of course. I put it to you that I'm being quite modest here, and a fairer estimate would actually be higher.
If instead UnitedHealthcare performed at industry average levels on claim denial, and only denied 15% instead of 30% of its claims, its customer base would receive a hypothetical minimum 5,000 years of life extension.
Every year, mind you. So that's a conservative estimate of 5,000 extra years of life every year that could be lived if UnitedHealthcare was only as shit as the average health insurance provider, instead of a lot shitter. That's a hell of a lot more years than Brian Thompson had left in him.
Murder's no good, but a vast corporation that does nothing to moderate its profiteering at the expense of life and happiness is no good either.
I accept you can follow this kind of "systemic" argument into the weeds of cause and effect quite quickly, and run aground on questions of whether the kind of methodology I'm using to score the impacts of UnitedHealthcare's business practices is fair. In fact, that's just the kind of analysis insurers pay actuaries to do. However, on the face of it, CEO assassin Luigi Mangione seems to have picked out a target who really deserved it. I think it's very, very likely Brian Thompson personally signed off on decisions which led to a gratuitous, stochastic kind of human carnage.
In the absence of a workable political system and mass political power capable of bringing companies like UnitedHealthcare to heel, I'd say let the murders continue until CEO behaviour improves.
To put it another way, my old man has had six months of chemotherapy and also spent two months in a rehab hospital after a stroke-induced fall in the past couple of years, as well as receiving countless other forms of ancillary treatment both at home and in clinical facilities.
He looks like he'll live another few years, now that he's clear of cancer and his cognition and bodily health have become more stable. If he were a UnitedHealthcare customer in the US health system, I reckon he'd either be dead or a pauper.
Burnwinter generally agree but the murders continuing won't change CEO behaviour beyong better security and lobbying the state to lock up anyone who cheers when one of them dies.
Qwiss Yep, this murder definitely doesn't do much for ordinary people on the face of it ... but it really does draw attention to the fact Medicare for All still hasn't passed after 20+ years of delays and debate in various forms.
That's even though the introduction of universal single payer care has been estimated to save the United States economy hundreds of billions annually. So I'd say yep, shoot a few more until they stop fucking around.
Burnwinter yeah fuck them. Its a big deal of all a sudden because a CEO is killed instead of a kid in some ghetto? Or a child in Palestine? I'm supposed to give a shit about this guy who made peoples live miserable, beyond miserable, ruinous. Fuck him and fuck everyone like him. Not everything has to be deep. Some people just deserve it.
"Killing some kid in the ghetto or Palestine is also bad."
Burnwinter CEO assassin Luigi Mangione seems to have picked out a target who really deserved it.
This I would never contest.
However, I don't think spreadsheet logic will solve US healthcare any more than it'll solve the genocide in Palestine.
Burnwinter So I'd say yep, shoot a few more until they stop fucking around.
I don't think we want them to get serious. They'll kill many more if they ever stop fucking around, not less.
Coombs They'll kill many more if they ever stop fucking around, not less.
In history the struggle between labour and capital was far more even than it is today.
Today those who don't hold mountains of capital must either strike it rich, build power or face a seriously unpleasant future.
I don't think putting bullets in CEOs can solve the left's half-century crisis of political methods—particularly if the shooters get caught—but I do think they're more interesting, and maybe more effective than poorly attended protests, vigils and email-harvesting clicktivism campaigns. Can't see many positive changes occurring within the US system as it stands without a ton of real or speculative external pressure.
Burnwinter I don't think putting bullets in CEOs can solve the left's half-century crisis of political methods—particularly if the shooters get caught—but I do think they're more interesting, and maybe more effective than poorly attended protests, vigils and email-harvesting clicktivism campaigns.
It isn't one or the other, though. There are so many victories to be won that people just aren't interested in. All they want is to stick it to the other side, they don't want to do any political work. They moan that they don't have time or energy, but we know that isn't really true. The presence of the oligarchical super-rich hoarders of capital is a convenient excuse for people to pretend that nothing can be done.
People are mean, stupid, and lazy. Just because they die horribly at the hands of wealthy CEOs doesn't change that. And killing those CEOs in cold blood for all the world to see is just going to turn their attention on those of us who are trying to improve our communities where we still can. This killer isn't a hero, he's just another delusional glory hound fucking things up for the people trying desperately to do real work.
Coombs All they want is to stick it to the other side, they don't want to do any political work. They moan that they don't have time or energy, but we know that isn't really true.
People have considerable resources to resist everything that's happening but that if anything is cause for optimism. The Nick Land thesis is incorrect: capitalism is not an unstoppable, adaptive and inhumane machine, but a Rube Goldberg job that barely keeps operating.
People simply don't believe in the plans and efforts put before them, and that's not least because left vanguardists would rather refine their judgements than do anything. Which is another reason for anti-politics and the electoral successes of pseudo-fascist clowns.
Coombs The presence of the oligarchical super-rich hoarders of capital is a convenient excuse for people to pretend that nothing can be done.
It's just a descriptive fact about an absurd and historically unprecedented situation.
Coombs People are mean, stupid, and lazy.
And generous, intelligent and hard-working. But it is neither here nor there. People are people and fundamentally similar all over the world.
Coombs This killer isn't a hero
It's not important to me whether he is good or bad. That said, when I read his manifesto and his online output, the seeming broader landscape of thought struck me as conceptually incoherent, while his manifesto seemed comparably inarguable.
What is important is the pragmatics: what killing the CEO of a vast corporation does. So far, I would say it does little more than draw attention to the fact that these officials are just flesh and blood like everyone else. However, that's not nothing.
Captains of industry like Brian Thompson can be murdered as readily as their companies murder the public, and their wealth and privileges can be appropriated as readily as they appropriate the wealth and diminish the lives of others.
It's a banal orthodoxy that post-industrial economies have accepted a huge widening of the gap between the richest and poorest since the 70s at the same time as our labour movements have disintegrated and our parliaments have descended into an unrepresentative, managerialist farce.
Not controversial judgements, just descriptive facts. The system is killing people daily, so why shouldn't they kill it back? Why shouldn't the murder of CEOs be just as "systemic" as the losses of life and freedom inflicted by corporate abuses?
Burnwinter It's just a descriptive fact about an absurd and historically unprecedented situation.
can't really say it's unprecedented. We're just not comfortable with the prescription.
banduan I'm not sure it's really salient, but although we've seen Gilded Ages in the past, I think there are differences this time. One is the fact all this is occurring when the United States and its historical allies represent a power with a slowly but steadily declining influence. Another is that it's occurring in the wake of history's greatest wave so far of economic globalisation.
