“Good news! She’s dead,” begins the opening act of the newest talk of the town movie adaptation of the play Wicked. But what nobody else expected was this same celebration to the news of the death of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare. The internet is quite the wild place to be during moments of crisis, especially in the 20th century where humor and politics is ever-evolving into turmoil or intense acts of mockery. In 2021, Cameron Herrin was arrested for a second-degree felony of murdering a mother and her daughter during an illegal car race in Tampa, Florida. Netizens went wild over the young man’s looks with video edits and fan accounts made for the sole purpose of reusing the sole video of him available online: his court sentencing. It’s safe to say that these online fans were publicly deemed unhinged for glorifying a reckless driver who ended up taking the lives of two innocent women. However, the same chronically online audience that went off on these “fans” are the same ones defending the alleged murderer of Thompson.
Luigi Mangione has become an internet sensation with an audience so devoted, they clogged up tip-lines while he was on the loose and threw parties in honor of his “act of service.” There is plenty of information on him that has been made publicly known throughout the entire world, but what hasn’t been acknowledged is the contradiction of liberal content creators and influencers using their platform to preach his use of gun violence to take the life of the king of the dominating healthcare plan Americans are enrolled under. The United States is notorious for its poor healthcare system and its negligence of protecting lives, but United Healthcare itself had built itself a perfect motive for generating a vendetta for the alleged killer. Known for turning down basic medication for patients with terminal and chronic diseases and delaying life-changing surgeries, Mangione fell subject to this never-ending healthcare loophole. Suffering a spinal injury, he fell dark, according to his friends and family, in terms of anxiety and social contact. Without an official statement released, the public has connected to dots to presume that his delays in surgery have caused him psychological and physical trauma considering the precarious nerve damage he was suffering.
All things considered, his crowd of supporters have been creating ironic memes about his attractiveness with brains, beauty, and privilege. If he had a foundation of a wealthy family and great education as valedictorian of his private high school in Maryland along with a Computer Science degree at prestigious Ivy-League University of Pennsylvania, his take on privatized health-care and bigoted profit in capitalist systems carries more weight than anyone else's, so the internet assumes. He is mostly backed with the argument that his premeditated shooting of the CEO was the doing of a martyr, saving thousands of lives that are susceptible to the same painful bureaucracy he was going through. Not once has the topic of successors of big corporations fallen under the spotlight on platforms like TikTok and Instagram in regards to his “social service.” Instead, creators have created genuine videos speaking of how normalized the possession of gun silencers and personal vendettas are in their social circles. This raises the question of whether Mangione’s heroic act is blinding Liberals from maintaining consistent arguments on gun ownership.
Though improper to generalize the nuanced political beliefs of conservatives and liberals, openly Democratic audiences, who generally speak on gun-violence as a constitutional disaster, are now arguing that moments like these are typical to resort to having such saturated hatred. It is disturbingly common nowadays to speak so lightly about wanting to end or even destroy the lives of big corporate superpowers, but to actually execute it in ways like Mangione’s alleged precise calculations, is a reach. Gun ownership is a controversial constitutional right for every US citizen who is eligible to purchase one, but when proclaimed beliefs that one’s morals go against the sole possession of deadly machinery, internet liberals are quick to muffle them if the killer possesses the traits of an internet icon with revolutionary ideas. It may just be thanks to online cravings for something witty and never-seen-before acts of courage in our generation.
Netizens are quick to bend their rules and beliefs when faced with an intriguing and distant narrative. While this might suggest progress in understanding the gray areas of morality and political ideology, it also signals a troubling regression in consistency and care when proclaiming beliefs. Ideals are increasingly treated as flexible tools, molded to suit the spectacle of the moment rather than steadfast principles applied universally. As a result, it becomes inappropriate to hastily label individuals as murderers in some contexts—such as veterans acting in self-defense—while simultaneously idolizing others, like Mangione, whose actions align with a romanticized narrative of rebellion including a written manifesto found on him when detained. This selective morality raises a critical question: Are we evolving in our empathy and nuance, or are we losing sight of the weight of our convictions in the pursuit of sensationalism?
Comments