There is again another event that I think can say something about America and its conception of justice. Before I introduce the topic, which everyone has definitely already heard about, I want to establish why it’s important to think about a sort of national consensus on justice.
That consensus is more important than what me or you think about how things should be, because what the majority of people believe is, in a functional democracy, what could ultimately become law. It’s the most important thing about justice. Whatever most people think is essentially the most important. If a bunch of people believe in something you think is wrong, then that either points to a problem in your thinking or in the society that has conditioned a more popular belief—if the latter, then a new task becomes trying to promote that less popular idea.
I bring this up as a kind of new thing because most of the problems I spread awareness on in this blog are typically a 50/50 split. Usually the progressive half of the country supports reforming things like mandatory minimums, cash bail, or harsher sentences. The only exception was Prop 36, but that wasn’t a nationwide point of interest.
There are some events where I expect that to be different, however. Where I expect the country to, for at least one moment, to come together on an issue and unite against it. And sometimes I’m surprised.
Early on Dec 4th, United Healthcare chief executive Brian Thompson was shot and killed in Midtown. The attacker escaped the city and was later found and identified as 26-year-old Luigi Mangione. As he has been taken into custody and put through the criminal justice machine, the media has been vigorously capturing his every move.
41% of 18-29 voters find the shooting acceptable. That was a number I never would have predicted from an act of murder.
There’s a difference between sympathy for an act of violence like that and concern for the America’s current healthcare system. Read Mangione’s manifesto and you will clearly see that that was his concern. While I don’t doubt that many are unhappy with the expenses of healthcare in this country that, despite its cost, seems to be less effective than in other countries, I was surprised that many still viewed Mangione’s actions as acceptable in response to that problem.
Within the group of people that see him as a hero, there were two groups. One group of people saw Thompson’s murder as a public spectacle that would send a message to his peers that their system needed change. Perhaps they saw Thompson’s murder as a necessary evil to promote their cause. Others, however, saw the very act of murder as a form of justice. It was what Thompson “deserved.” His company, notorious for denying claims and driving up prices, has likely had an indirect effect on countless deaths. In that way, he “had it coming.” I think this is a different moral sentiment from the first, and more extreme, because it makes a claim about justice. About who deserves their life. Apparently, a significant amount of people thought Thompson didn’t deserve his.
I honestly think that viewpoint is just the result of half-baked philosophical reflections (although maybe it’s just my perspective as a Catholic). To think that many of these progressives who support Mangione are also probably against the death penalty is illogical. If you believe enough villainy can forfeit one’s right to life, then why not leave execution in our justice system?
I wish more people would think deeply about this. The 40% figure shows how important this issue is. It’s not a majority, but 40% is significant enough to reveal a larger societal trend. I don’t really know how to address it; but I know that it’s present. That’s something at least!
Hope you enjoyed this longer entry. I would continue this, but it’s less sustainable than my typical size to do weekly, and I would probably have to take two weeks like I did this time. I don’t think I want that for this blog. Also, hope you have a happy holiday! See you next week.
Add comment
Comments