I don’t really know where I’m going with this. No attempt to ramble on, but hopefully, I have the energy to do it. If I do, great. If not, this becomes nothing, and no one will ever see it anyway.
I’m leaving my previous post up. I think it’s important to leave them there for context—just as well as to see the progression of my thinking. I believe those posts hold value. I don’t know exactly what that value is, but there’s something about the continuity, the “journalistic integrity,” so to speak. Erasing them feels wrong. It’s a way of keeping myself accountable.
But I digress.
I’ve had a few days to think. With the posts, conversations, tweets, and whatever I’ve put on Twitter and BlueSky—Tweets and, are we calling them skeets now?—I realize I haven’t articulated my position as effectively as I wanted. When I look back at what I was trying to say about UnitedHealthcare, I think it’s clear I was struggling to get the words right.
Here’s where I stand: what UnitedHealthcare does to people in the name of profit is, in my opinion, tantamount to state-sanctioned murder.
To be clear, I’m not saying it is, legally. They operate within the boundaries of the law. The state allows their behavior—it says it’s legal. But that’s the problem. UnitedHealthcare routinely denies coverage for life-saving treatments, stripping people of their ability to live their lives. It takes away their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. People die because of their decisions—decisions made for profit.
Let me say that again: people die because a corporation decides their lives aren’t worth the cost.
That is state-sanctioned violence. It’s violence perpetrated on the people of the United States by a profit-seeking company, and it should repulse you. It should make you physically sick. This is morally and universally reprehensible.
Under the direction of their CEO, UnitedHealthcare even brought in an AI system to deny claims more efficiently. And, of course, it was wrong 90% of the time. But what do they care? Deny the claim, save some money. Their behavior is revolting. Every decision they make prioritizes profit over human life.
And here’s the thing: I don’t believe people are the sum of their profession. But they are the sum of their actions. When your actions prioritize profit over human lives, you’re not just a professional—you’re scum. That’s the definition your actions give you.
Brian Thompson, or whatever his name is, wasn’t just a CEO. He was someone who traded human lives for profit. That’s what defines him. He wasn’t just part of a corrupt system—he perpetuated it.
This leads me to a broader conversation I had with someone recently about individuals versus systems. We were talking about movements, about how they start. I believe we’re seeing the first sparks of a greater awakening—an awakening of class consciousness.
Capitalism has brutalized people for too long. The assassination of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO might be a sign of something bigger. It might be the beginning of a revolution. And I think it will include violence.
When you brutalize people, violate their dignity, and deny their humanity for so long, what do you expect? How do you think people will respond? Do you think they’ll calmly navigate “proper legal channels” to seek justice against someone like Thompson? Against a company like UnitedHealthcare, which operates within the legal framework of the state?
No. People respond to violence with violence.
I don’t condone it, but I understand it. This is what happens when you oppress people for generations, when you make poverty an institution, when you strip people of their homes, their health care, their jobs, and their hope. You create a system where those without can never have. You make inequality so extreme, so insurmountable, that people have no choice but to resist.
And sometimes, resistance looks like revolution.
That’s what I think Luigi Mangione’s actions represent—the first sparks of a greater movement. While his singular act of violence won’t bring structural change, it could ignite something that does. It could awaken class consciousness and inspire collective action.
For too long, the working class has been distracted by culture wars. But maybe now, they’ll see that the real fight is the class war. Maybe they’ll realize the capitalist class isn’t untouchable. Maybe they’ll start to believe that change is possible.
Luigi’s actions won’t dismantle capitalism, but they might start the conversation. They might push people to organize, to resist, to fight for structural change. That’s what I’ve been trying to say. That’s what I failed to articulate in my previous posts.
Yes, the ultimate goal is to dismantle capitalism. And yes, one individual’s actions won’t achieve that. But those actions can still matter. They can be the impetus for something greater.
That’s what I want to leave you with: the idea that even small sparks can ignite great flames.