Assassination of United Healthcare CEO

[plague311]

Since dann calls himself a communist, then I'm going to believe him that he's a communist.

Let me slow this down for you. I'm not denying that Dann is a communist, self-proclaimed or otherwise.

I'm not sure the basis on which you're trying to deny that.

I'm not denying it. I'm denying he's the representation of communists\ism.

I'm also not sure your basis for denying the connection between communism and bloodshed.

I'm not denying a connection between communism and bloodshed. I'm denying there's more than there has been under the guise of things like capitalism....or even democracy in general. Lots of bloodshed over the centuries when it comes to all forms of government or economy.

ETA: Oh, and I note that in none of any of these objections is anyone actually disavowing political violence.

I've disavowed it plenty in the past, including in this thread specifically. Why should I have to repeatedly deny it every time you get a bug up your ass to bring it up again?

Violence is bad, Zigg. Does that make you feel better? It can be understood, it can be rationalized like in self-defense, but it's bad.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm not denying it. I'm denying he's the representation of communists\ism.

I didn't say he was. I'm not attributing anything to communism because of dann. Communism's penchant for political violence and murder is established on its own. I'm merely noting that dann's tolerance for it comports with what we already know about communism independently.

I'm not denying a connection between communism and bloodshed. I'm denying there's more than there has been under the guise of things like capitalism....or even democracy in general. Lots of bloodshed over the centuries when it comes to all forms of government or economy.

Sure, all of human history is drenched in blood. But if you can't recognize that communism in particular is especially prone to mass deaths, then you don't know your history.

Violence is bad, Zigg. Does that make you feel better?

Yes, actually it does.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

ICE is using violence against migrants every day, having killed many this year already, hardly feeding them and refusing medical aid, including to minors.
I haven't heard you say that that violence is bad.

 

[Ziggurat]

ICE is using violence against migrants every day, having killed many this year already, hardly feeding them and refusing medical aid, including to minors.
I haven't heard you say that that violence is bad.

You haven't been paying attention.

 

[plague311]

I didn't say he was. I'm not attributing anything to communism because of dann. Communism's penchant for political violence and murder is established on its own. I'm merely noting that dann's tolerance for it comports with what we already know about communism independently.

Then why did you specifically call him out? You know what? It's not important.

Sure, all of human history is drenched in blood. But if you can't recognize that communism in particular is especially prone to mass deaths, then you don't know your history.

Has it caused more deaths than religion? Has it caused more deaths than "democracy"? The US has killed thousands in the name of "bringing democracy". WW2 had the largest death toll and had nothing, at all, to do with communism.

That's my point, do you have something specific to show that "communism" is a higher body count than a dozen other things?

Yes, actually it does.

Thank God for small miracles.

 

[Ziggurat]

Then why did you specifically call him out?

Because I was responding to his post. Why wasn't that obvious? Did you not notice that it was his post I was responding to?

Has it caused more deaths than religion?

In the 20th century? Yes. Absolutely.

Has it caused more deaths than "democracy"?

Yes. Absolutely.

WW2 had the largest death toll and had nothing, at all, to do with communism.

Nothing to do with communism? The Soviet Union was one of the participants, and helped kick the whole thing off. I wouldn't attribute all of the WW2 deaths to communism, but neither would I attribute none of them to it either.

That's my point, do you have something specific to show that "communism" is a higher body count than a dozen other things?

I just gave you something to show exactly that. Did you not see my link? Here, this should be harder to miss:

Democide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[plague311]

In the 20th century? Yes. Absolutely.

Ah, yes. Convenient, that.

Thanks for that. I should have known you had a particular goalpost in mind to suit your claim.

 

[Ziggurat]

BTW, you know someone who was really a fan of Luigi Mangione?

Jonathan Rinderknecht. Never heard of him? He's the man charged with intentionally starting the Palisades fire that killed 12 people and burned down more than 6,800 buildings (most of them homes). Apparently, he's a bit of a Luigi fan boy.

 

[Ziggurat]

Ah, yes. Convenient, that.

There's little point in discussing the Mongol invasions if we're looking at the forces in play today. So yes, looking at relatively recent history makes a lot of sense (which you label as "convenient"). Particularly since communism hasn't even been around that long.

 

[plague311]

There's little point in discussing the Mongol invasions if we're looking at the forces in play today. So yes, looking at relatively recent history makes a lot of sense (which you label as "convenient"). Particularly since communism hasn't even been around that long.

Stats from almost 50 years ago? Cool. Before you say, "I did say relatively" you can ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ save it. I get it, you always put in a backpedal because you know that, with everything you say, you'll need it. Most of what you say is so full of "ifs, ands, buts" that it's almost useless to address.

You could have just said, "There's little point in discussing facts that run counter to my preconceived bias. We're talking about how right I think I am, and how you should agree with me."

 

[Ziggurat]

Stats from almost 50 years ago? Cool. Before you say, "I did say relatively" you can ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ save it. I get it, you always put in a backpedal because you know that, with everything you say, you'll need it. Most of what you say is so full of "ifs, ands, buts" that it's almost useless to address.

You could have just said, "There's little point in discussing facts that run counter to my preconceived bias. We're talking about how right I think I am, and how you should agree with me."

If you have a preferred time period, pony it up, along with an explanation for why it's useful for our purposes. I happen to think that there's little point in examining history before communism even existed if I want to know what communism is like. So for example, do you think it's worth considering the mongol invasions? If so, why?

 

[dann]

Since dann calls himself a communist, then I'm going to believe him that he's a communist.

This is the dumbest argument yet, and I don't think you actually believe it, i.e. that since I call myself something, then you are going to believe it.
It is not as if members of the MAGA cult usually accept whatever people call themselves as reason enough to believe that they are what they claim to be. I would never believe somebody to be what they call themselves merely because they call themselves something. For instance, I have noticed that people calling themselves compassionate conservatives are hardly ever compassionate.

As for other reasons to believe that I'm a communist, I have noticed that you know as little about communism as Trausti knows about Marxism.
I actually am a communist and a Marxist, but don't make yourself ridiculous by claiming that you believe me because I told you so or that you actually understand what any of those things are.

Anyway, it's a stupid debate to have in this particular thread since neither Luigi Mangione nor Jonathan Rinderknecht are communists or Marxists. They aren't even communist or Marxist adjacent.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Musk's PAC claims $1 million 'winners' not chosen by chance

A lawyer for Elon Musk’s political action committee says the so-called “winners” of his $1 million-a-day swing-state voter sweepstakes are not chosen by chance.

www.pbs.org

one thing musks pac did was run an illegal rigged lottery offering voters a chance at $1m and fixed the winners. not sure that he wrote the giant cardboard checks but he did hand them out

Interesting. Seems like a poor way to swing an election. What was the theory behind it? Was any analysis done on its effectiveness?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

BTW, you know someone who was really a fan of Luigi Mangione?

Jonathan Rinderknecht. Never heard of him? He's the man charged with intentionally starting the Palisades fire that killed 12 people and burned down more than 6,800 buildings (most of them homes). Apparently, he's a bit of a Luigi fan boy.

This is irrelevant. Who cares what some nutcase is a fan of?

The problem with America is that nobody wants to have a conversation until some nutcase goes on a rampage, which encourages them.

It's entirely appropriate when dann's objection to murder isn't that it's morally wrong but that it's tactically ineffective.

No it isn't appropriate. When you dig down into them, all morals are actually about about utility. We make killing illegal because nobody wants to die, but there are exceptions. Some might be so concerned about it that they think abortions are murder, yet are willing to kill abortion doctors and/or withhold possibly lifesaving medical procedures to prevent them. In wartime killing hundreds of innocent schoolgirls is considered acceptable to many who perceive a greater (if imaginary) threat, or who simply support their government no matter what it does. But nobody accuses them of moral failing for believing in Democracy.

 

[Ziggurat]

When you dig down into them, all morals are actually about about utility.

No. Morals often have utility too, but if it's only about utility, it isn't morality at all.

 

[dirtywick]

Interesting. Seems like a poor way to swing an election. What was the theory behind it? Was any analysis done on its effectiveness?

i dont know the answers to those questions. but if you think about the margins being tens of thousands of votes in a few counties in swing states then little things can matter a lot

 

[catsmate]

Name 1. Name 1 lefty TV station that lied on behalf of an administration, knowingly mind you, to such an extent they had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

What an odd standard you're trying to construct. It has little to do with the actual topic of this thread, which wasn't about honesty or lawsuits or damages. You haven't used this standard because it's actually a measure of what we're concerned about, you use it because you think it's one sided. Do you actually think that lying, or even just bias, always comes with legal liability? It doesn't.

So you can't, but won't admit this fact. How typical.

 

[dirtywick]

In any event, surely it's clear by now that communism and conquistadors are not relevant to the recent assassination of a healthcare insurance executive so maybe stop posting about those things?

Mods: can these derails be split off?

when the events of the world has revealed your ideology to be fraud, retreating to the familiar arguments of past arguments you'd rather have again is like comfort food

 

[Helen]

I just explicitly said that communism wasn't the only form of grievance politics. What about that did you not understand?

True.

There is a fundamental difference between having a grievance and forming an ideology around a grievance. If you only have a grievance, then that grievance can be addressed and solved, and then you no longer have a grievance. You can get past it and move on. If your ideology is founded on a grievance, you can never solve it. You will always find something to fit that grievance, and it will never go away, because if it went away, you would have to abandon your ideology. Individuals are occasionally able to do that, but institutions built on grievance can never abandon that grievance. That's why communist revolutions enact never-ending "revolution". The grievance cannot go away. It must not go away. They will fight tooth and claw to make sure it doesn't.

That's a nice theory, i can see why you like it.

The nature of grievances can be vastly different, and of course ideologies can be based on what is essentially a grievance, which is in its turn a product of injustices. Like lack of affordable health care, for instance, as one part of a system that is not affording people any real chance of living a reasonably decent life.

That said, I don't condone violence. I sometimes understand why people resorten to it, but I don't condone it.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

guess it was a commie who said: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."