The False Choice of Luigi Mangione

The problem with the reaction to Luigi Mangione is most of it is based on the assumption that the only choice open to Mr. Mangione was to point a gun and shoot a man in the back.

Jia Tolentina has noted that there are different forms of violence, one which was noted by Friedrich Engels in the 19th century: the violence perpetrated on the starving masses by predatory capitalists, and the implication is that shooting capitalists is, in a sense, answering violence with violence.  

She also remarked there are other forms of resistance beyond violence, organized street protests, like  Occupy Wall Street. She could have mentioned the Million Woman March with the pink knit hats with ears or, for that matter the marches against the Vietnamese war, all of which shared the common characteristic of having close to no effect to change anything at all.

That United Health Care is said to reject 30% of claims, if true, should speak for itself. That people have lost homes, gone bankrupt, got more ill, suffered strokes and some died as a result of insurance companies legally breaking contracts to prevent all that is beyond dispute because the experience in America has been so widespread: virtually everyone in America has had this happen to them, a vital drug denied, a procedure denied, a hospitalization not paid for with ruinous financial results, or if not to them, to a relative or someone they know.

Torentino notes with astonishment that the supposedly liberal media has reacted by publishing articles on the problem of protecting corporate executives, and by publishing op eds by corporate head of United saying we still care about the American public and public health, while it is patently obvious they care more about shareholder dividends.

But does any of this justify shooting a bad man in the back? 

Like the Penny killer who strangled a deranged homeless man on a subway, did Mangione have no other choice in his effort to protect the public from a dangerous man?

Well, duh, yes.

If he were a little more imaginative, he might have broken into Mr. Thompson's home and evacuated it of all living creatures, wife, kids, dog, goldfish, and then burned it to the ground. That at least would have not cost a life and would have been symbolic of the lives burned to the ground by the financial ruin brought upon them by health insurance companies.

There are dozens of creative ways of bringing home to the billionaire class the protest against their culture of vulture capitalism. 

Shooting in the back is one of the least imaginative, least effective ways.