Have seen a few posts popping up recently just straight up calling fo violence barely disguised as memes
Had thought Lemmy had chilled out a bit on that kinda thing for a while but seems to be coming back now
Anyone else noticing the same or just me?
Radical but not logical. Make a post about a violent criminal who murders someone. And then poll the community if that criminal should get the death penalty. And I’ll bet the majority would say no and be against the death penalty for all convicted criminals. But those same people have no problem cheering on the murder of someone that they don’t like. If a person can live with this contradiction I’d guess that they just aren’t thinking for themselves but following a crowd.
There is actually no contradiction. I’m pretty sure everyone would be on board with those CEOs going to prison for life instead of them being killed.
The difference is that a convicted murderer is being punished. Healthcare CEOs are instead rewarded with a life of luxury for killing people. The law does not punish them for their transgressions. A citizen can not imprison the CEO for life. What they can do is shoot em.
So what many people are saying is that “rather a bad person gets punished than rewarded”. And if the only realistic punishment possible is killing them, because it’s fast and easy to do, then that’s deemed as acceptable even though killing is bad. Being rewarded for being evil is worse.
A CEO doesn’t kill anyone.
It’s not execution, it’s class war.
It was clearly an execution of an innocent man.
The guy was shot with his own words. Nothing innocent about it.
He was shot with bullets by a murderer.
just because he didn’t use a gun doesn’t mean he wasn’t killing people
He wasn’t killing anyone.
The state has convicted and executed innocent people. The average criminal subject to capital punishment has killed an order (or several) of magnitudes fewer people than the health insurance industry.
As a country we seem to weigh more heavily acts of individual violence than those of systemic violence or violence borne of policy even when the latter 2 have far more impactful and wide spread negative results. It’s completely logical to draw a distinction between the 2 circumstances.
I’m not saying all vigilante justice is good, and I wouldn’t necessarily be against the state holding to account executives who have produced systems and policies that result in the harm or death of the state’s citizens, but in the current system justice is rare and in this act millions of people received justice.
Right, except if everything went exactly correctly as per the current justice system, the company would be found at fault, fined an absurd amount of money and closed. The wealthy executives who made the decisions that actually resulted in country-wide deaths would get sizable severance packages, take a short vacation, and 6 months to a year later open up the same business under a new name that imposes the same policies. It’ll be right back to throwing poors into a furnace to fuel their lamborgini’s until the next slap on the wrist.
We have no system to hold people accountable for their decisions as part of a company. We blame the company and then trust the company to police their staff accordingly. I’d love a widespread rework of the justice system to actually target the people responsibly for a companies actions, but we won’t get one, so instead, someone has been shot.