Tag: news

Why people love Luigi Mangione

· Leave a comment ·

December 4, 2024, Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was fatally shot in a targeted attack outside the New York Hilton Midtown hotel in Manhattan.


UnitedHealthcare is one of the US’s largest health insurers, and they’re criticized for unethical practices like denying coverage to people in need of health care, delaying treatments, and making many patients incur out-of-pocket expenses.

The shell casings at the crime scene had the words “deny,” “defend,” and “depose” inscribed on them.

“Deny” – Denial of healthcare claims.
“Defend” – Corporate defense against lawsuits or negative public opinion.
“Depose” – Legal depositions taken during disputes or lawsuits, possibly implying taking action or forcing accountability.

Many people are rooting for the shooter. Why? Isn’t killing bad? Is this vigilante justice?

It’s clear that this isn’t a random act of violence. It was premeditated. The assailant had a reason or a possible justification for the killing.

Not all killing is morally wrong. Some killing is justified. For example, the easiest case is self-defense: if somebody is threatening your life or the lives of your loved ones, and the only way to stop them is to kill them, that killing is what most people think is morally okay. We reflect this in the law.

But what’s morally okay and what’s legally okay is not always the same. For example, if you kill somebody who abused thousands of children, it might be morally okay but legally not okay; legally, that child abuser should be arrested, have a trial, and spend their life in jail. We have a political structure where it’s the government’s job to punish people, and individuals can’t go around enacting their own form of vigilante justice. If you kill that child abuser, then you broke the law and will probably go to jail, but some would argue that you were morally justified in doing so. Going even further, some might say you did good or had a duty to kill that child abuser, even if it meant breaking the law. The moral justification here could be something like: you stopped an evil, you got revenge for the parents, or you’re sending a message to other child abusers.

Now, what are the possible moral justifications for the killing of Brian Thompson that make people think this killing is okay?

Justification 1a: Brian Thompson, the individual, is an evil that must be stopped.
I don’t know much about Brian Thompson, but it’s not clear that he’s a bad person. He’s just in a job that does bad things. I’m sure he’s just another corporate executive who had a long career of working in an office every day, eventually being promoted to CEO, and just trying to make money doing his job to please shareholders. He’s just doing his job.

In Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, Hannah Arendt wrote about Adolf Eichmann, who played a central role in the Holocaust and managed the logistics of deporting Jewish people to extermination camps. Arendt observed that Eichmann wasn’t some monster or psychopath but a pretty boring person who thought his job was helping society. She coined the term “banality of evil,” the idea that evils in society aren’t carried out by morally evil supervillains but by normal people doing their jobs, complying with orders in a wider system, and ultimately being distanced from the larger evil consequences of their actions. Is the mailroom employee at UnitedHealthcare morally responsible for the company’s evils of denying insurance claims? Probably not. He’s not the one making decisions.

Does the CEO make all the evil decisions? Again, no. The CEO plays one role in maximizing shareholder profit, and this duty to maximize value is probably the root of a lot of evil decisions. Apparently, there was an AI implemented on his watch that rejected claims and had a 90% error rate. But it wasn’t Brian solely responsible for this. There’s a whole board of directors, multiple executives, and people who need to sign off on these decisions, and there are many dirty hands. And the only reason they implemented this was to maximize profits for shareholders; they don’t just get off on denying claims and love doing evil stuff. Of course, the CEO benefits from this evil. He makes about $10 million a year, which is a lot, but isn’t even in the top CEO salaries.

Brian Thompson is just some guy who happens to be the CEO of a shady company. It’s important not to make him the scapegoat for UnitedHealthcare. He probably would have been happy with the same pay working at some charity feeding blind orphans. Brian Thompson didn’t do anything himself that justified killing him.

Maybe a truly morally upstanding person would have quit working at such a healthcare company out of principle. Sure, maybe he’s a bit greedy for money, but who isn’t? Is he really more evil than oil companies contributing to pollution? Clothing companies using sweatshop labor? Or any modern technology company exploiting workers worldwide?

Justification 1b: UnitedHealthcare is an evil that must be stopped.
Maybe the killer didn’t care about Brian Thompson personally, and he was just a means to an end. They were instead trying to take down the corporation, and the CEO was the first target.

UnitedHealthcare is a giant corporate monster alongside many other corporate monsters these days that exist to maximize profits and shareholder value. We become parts of these monsters in our professional lives by working at these companies, and our jobs are ultimately to keep growing this monster by increasing profits. People with important functions for this monster are rewarded with high salaries. Jeff Bezos is the creator and controller of the monster Amazon, and he’s one of the richest men in the world for it. CEOs are like the caretakers of this monster.

UnitedHealthcare has done some pretty evil things. Investigations revealed that UnitedHealthcare’s prior authorization denial rate increased from 8.7% in 2019 to 22.7% in 2022, significantly higher than the industry average. We mentioned the AI model with the 90% error rate, which they’re being sued for, but they also have a bunch of other lawsuits around improper denial of care and HIPAA violations. But the biggest evil goes something like this: imagine you’re paying for your insurance every month like a responsible U.S. citizen, and suddenly your doctor tells you that you have cancer. That’s terrible, but at least you have insurance—oh wait, they’re saying your cancer medication isn’t covered, and you have to use up your savings. Oh no, your insurance is saying your nausea medication isn’t necessary, so now you have to suffer through chemo. Yay, you beat cancer, but because your insurance didn’t cover much and you had to go out-of-pocket, you not only have no savings but are now hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. Or, much worse, you run out of money and can’t get any more treatment that UnitedHealthcare is denying coverage for, and now you’re left to die. Now your mother is left to die. Now your child is left to die.

But it’s not clear that the killing will stop the evil. Brian Thompson will be replaced, UnitedHealthcare will continue its practices, and it’s clear that the evil will persist.

Justification 2: revenge or retribution.
This leads to the next justification: revenge or retribution. Maybe the killer was trying to even the scales—an eye for an eye. Perhaps a loved one was denied coverage by UnitedHealthcare and died, and the killer wanted revenge. Although, again, it’s not clear if Brian Thompson is the one morally responsible for the death of their loved one. But maybe it’s more symbolic, and Brian Thompson was as good a symbol for UnitedHealthcare as any other employee there.

Popular ethical theories don’t really justify retaliatory killing or personal vengeance. Kant would probably say that killing out of vengeance cannot be universally willed without creating a world of chaos and lawlessness. Aristotle would probably say that vengeance is unlikely to be virtuous, and a virtuous person would seek justice through legal means. A utilitarian would probably say that retaliatory killing would cause more harm than good from cycles of revenge and social breakdowns, so if there’s more bad overall, then it’s morally unjustified.

But maybe this killing isn’t personal. Maybe the killer is vicariously acting for the millions of people suffering under UnitedHealthcare. This can be construed as some universal or divine form of justice carried out to punish UnitedHealthcare.

This is the world of Batman or the Punisher, where vigilante justice is the only justice left in a corrupt state. But again, it’s not clear that killing Brian Thompson really punishes UnitedHealthcare or makes things even with the victims. UnitedHealthcare, the soulless corporate monster, won’t feel this, and you can’t kill this monster with a bullet.

Becoming a Professional Comedian

· Leave a comment ·

Stand-up comedy is a distinctive art form where a single performer captivates an audience through humor, storytelling, and often poignant social commentary. Over the years, it has evolved from informal storytelling traditions to a structured and influential profession. This evolution reflects not only changes in entertainment but also shifts in societal norms and values. The journey of stand-up comedy offers deep insights into the dedication required by comedians and the myriad challenges they face in an ever-changing cultural landscape.

Historical Context and Global Evolution

The roots of stand-up comedy can be traced back to ancient civilizations where jesters and storytellers entertained courts and communities with humor and satire. In the modern sense, stand-up comedy began to take shape in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In the United States, vaudeville theaters became popular venues for comedic acts, where performers would deliver monologues filled with jokes, anecdotes, and observations.

The post-World War II era saw a significant transformation in stand-up comedy, with the rise of nightclub circuits and the influence of television. Comedians began to tackle more provocative subjects, reflecting societal changes and the push for civil rights. Globally, stand-up comedy started gaining traction in countries like the United Kingdom, where the “alternative comedy” movement of the 1980s challenged traditional comedic norms by incorporating political satire and personal narratives.

Today, stand-up comedy is a global phenomenon, with thriving scenes in countries such as India, South Africa, and Australia. The advent of the internet and streaming platforms has further expanded its reach, allowing comedians to connect with international audiences like never before.

Economic Landscape of the Comedy Industry

As a significant segment of the entertainment industry, stand-up comedy contributes substantially to the global economy. According to industry reports, as of 2021, the global comedy market was estimated to be worth over $10 billion, with stand-up comedy accounting for a significant portion of this revenue. This includes earnings from live performances, television specials, streaming services, merchandise, and ancillary rights.

Comedy festivals, such as the Edinburgh Festival Fringe and the Montreal Just for Laughs Festival, play a crucial role in the industry’s economy. These events attract thousands of visitors and generate significant income through ticket sales, tourism, and sponsorships. The economic impact of these festivals extends beyond the comedians themselves, benefiting local businesses and contributing to the cultural capital of host cities.

The Crucible of Open Mic Nights

For aspiring comedians, open mic nights are the foundational training grounds where they begin to craft their art. These events provide a low-pressure environment to test new material, develop timing, and build stage presence. Open mic nights are ubiquitous in major cities and have become integral to the comedy ecosystem.

Participating in open mic nights allows comedians to receive immediate feedback from live audiences, an essential component in refining comedic material. Moreover, these venues foster a sense of community among performers. Networking at open mic events can lead to collaborations, mentorships, and opportunities to perform at more prominent venues.

Cities renowned for their vibrant comedy scenes—such as New York City, London, and Melbourne—offer a plethora of open mic opportunities. These urban centers are often seen as hubs where comedians can immerse themselves in diverse comedic styles and cultural influences, accelerating their growth and exposure.

Ascending the Ranks: From Local Gigs to Global Platforms

Once comedians have honed their skills at open mic nights, the next step often involves securing paid gigs at local comedy clubs. Performing regularly helps comedians build a local following and gain the attention of industry professionals. Success at this level can lead to opening acts for established comedians, participation in comedy festivals, and appearances on radio and television programs.

The digital age has introduced new platforms for comedians to showcase their talent. Social media, podcasts, and video-sharing websites allow comedians to reach global audiences without traditional gatekeepers. Viral videos and popular podcasts have catapulted some comedians to fame, demonstrating the power of digital media in shaping modern comedic careers.

Television networks and streaming services have also become pivotal in elevating comedians to headlining status. Comedy specials on platforms like Netflix, HBO, and Amazon Prime provide widespread exposure and can be instrumental in establishing a national or international presence. These specials not only boost a comedian’s profile but also contribute significantly to their financial success.

Challenges and Realities of the Comedy Profession

Despite the potential for success, the path of a stand-up comedian is fraught with challenges. The industry is highly competitive, and the subjective nature of humor means that what resonates with one audience may fall flat with another. Many comedians face years of financial instability, performing for minimal compensation while trying to gain recognition.

Mental health is another significant concern within the comedy community. The pressures of constant travel, performance anxiety, and the demand to consistently produce fresh material can take a toll on comedians’ well-being. The industry has begun to acknowledge these issues, with increased dialogue around mental health support and resources for performers.

Survivorship bias further complicates perceptions of the comedy profession. The visibility of successful comedians can create an illusion that success is more attainable than it is, overshadowing the countless individuals who struggle to make a sustainable living from comedy. This bias can lead to underestimating the dedication and resilience required to succeed in the field.

Cultural Impact and Philosophical Dimensions

Stand-up comedy holds a mirror to society, reflecting and often challenging cultural norms and values. Comedians have the unique ability to address sensitive topics such as politics, race, gender, and religion through the lens of humor, making difficult conversations more approachable. This role as a social commentator carries both influence and responsibility.

The philosophical underpinnings of stand-up comedy involve exploring the human condition, questioning societal constructs, and delving into personal experiences. Through storytelling and satire, comedians can provoke thought, inspire change, and foster a sense of shared humanity among diverse audiences.

Moreover, comedy serves as a form of catharsis, both for the performer and the audience. Laughter can break down barriers, ease tensions, and create communal experiences that transcend individual differences. The comedian’s journey is thus not only a professional endeavor but also a profound personal exploration.

The profession of stand-up comedy is a complex tapestry of artistic expression, cultural commentary, and entrepreneurial spirit. It demands unwavering dedication, resilience in the face of adversity, and a relentless pursuit of authenticity. While the journey is undeniably challenging and the path to success uncertain, the rewards extend beyond fame or financial gain.

For many comedians, the true fulfillment comes from the ability to connect with audiences, share unique perspectives, and contribute to the collective conversation on what it means to be human. Stand-up comedy remains a vital and dynamic art form that continues to evolve, reflecting the ever-changing landscape of society and the enduring power of humor to unite and enlighten.