Luigi Mangione has drawn lots of defenders on social media. That’s a challenge for platforms when it comes to moderation — and for users.
Why does it need to be moderated?
Because you can’t let people realize that they are not alone with their opinions about rich people. That’s the first step to change, and you can’t have that.
We are in a abusive relationship with capitalism. Straight up Stockholm Syndrome with our oppressors.
I guarantee there is a way to have a discussion about the validity of Luigi’s motives without it seeming like a call for more murder in the streets.
We’ve had decades of that already without much change.
We have had decades of what? Just because you suck at doing something, and fail doesn’t mean the answer is murder. The same challenges that you can’t overcome to solve this problem probably exist all over the place so cutting corners here isn’t going to solve everything.
In fact the problem is just going to get harder to solve with the shortcut because these problems have so many resources at their disposal and they’re experts at scheming… and the original problem you say “we’ve had decades of” is still here with us.
Shut up.
We have decades of attempting to alleviate grievances with the system by using the avenues offered by the system and are instead met with hostility by the system we are supposed to be able to affect change through peacefully.
Weve been conditioned to believe the only acceptable option to facilitate progress for civil rights and labor rights causes is peaceful protest while those who dictste what we are taught in schools through the textbooks they publish also militarized our police agencies and granted them impunity to use lethal violence against us.
All while our society glorifies retributive violence when that violence is targeted against those whom the ruling class has deemed a threat to the order they wish to maintain.
We are supposed to have a right to instigate a revolution if our social institutions have failed us and we’ve literally exhausted every other option at this point so its time to use the avenues that the wealthy deem to be good enough to use when they want to progress their agendas. If non violent means were so effective at initiating and maintaining progressive change then those in power would be initiating sit ins and marches instead of insurgency, coup de tats and assassinations.
Brace for high shool history because we have been dealing with this for a lot longer than a few decades.
The usa as a whole has only existed for 2 dozen decades. Decades is a more apropos chronological quantifier than centuries.
Why not both?
Yeah but we kinda need both
Despite what this echo chamber would lead you to believe, you are wrong.
Convincing /s
Funny /s
The word they’re avoiding is “suppress”. It needs to be suppressed because they don’t want anymore CEOs getting what they deserve.
Because if you let it go enough, people will break the law and someone will come knocking on the instance owners door.
Luigi didn’t do anything wrong why would you need to moderate that
Sentences like yours don’t need to be moderated, but calls for violence or solicitacions of a crime are illegal in most countries and need to be moderated, so an instance doesn’t get taken down.
Because it’s typically the glorification of murder, the incitement of murder, or the direct threat of murder, which are all typically illegal in most jurisdictions.
I mean you’re not wrong, but at the same time, fuck Healthcare CEOs. Buncha fucking parasites.
I think the problem is that the population at large has the same problem that you seem to have. You can look at the message that he was trying to send and say, “he has a point” but to be “pro luigi” because he has a point is low IQ.
Luigi isn’t just someone with an idea now also he’s a murderer. Now, being a vigilante murderer is part of Luigi, and to be pro Luigi because of his ideas is to also be pro vigilante murderer. The unibomber had some good points too, you know?
If everyone were to aspire to be more like Luigi you know that would also mean more mass stabbings more mass shootings, more “im over this merraige so I’ll slaughter my partner and the kids” kind of shit. Society will devolve back to before laws and social contracts and it’ll be whoever can kill their opponents before their opponents kill them.
Found the bootlicker.
I do not understand what you’re trying to show off here.
Another bootlicker.
My feelings are hurt and now I’m going to rethink my position, and my life.
You do that.
Thought police much?
And that last paragraph… You’re doing an awful lot of projection based on some guillotine memes and nintendo character photoshops.
Society will devolve back to before laws and social contracts and it’ll be whoever can kill their opponents before their opponents kill them.
Really?
Yes, really. If it’s normal acceptable and cool to walk up to someone in the streets and execute them because you’re angry, society devolves. It is a devolution because we have been here before, it is a societal regression, back to a more primitive order.
Before, one would just rape when they’re horny and murder when they’re angry or bored. If you think I’m being hyperbolic go look at monkeys, or like the rest of the animal kingdom. What’s the number on infanticide, 30% of all animals engage in baby murder for one reason or another, or none. Same with Luigi.
Again, does Luigi make a good point? Sure, but Jordan Peterson makes some good points too, he hasn’t murderered anyone to get the word out. Make your case and make it well and it will last vs being a violent flash in the pan, outlash at a single part of a very large system. It’s short-sighted, and doesn’t solve the problem that Luigi is mad about. It’s childish.
Let’s not make him an idol and order more of that. Let’s condemn it and say, but yes he made some good points and build on that.
If it’s normal acceptable and cool to walk up to someone in the streets and execute them because you’re angry, society devolves.
That’s not what happened. The dude got shot for being a serial killer, not because some dude was angry.
Luigi wasn’t angry, mad, or upset about the situation?
This is a gross oversimplification.
* Allegedly
The rest of this is just horseshit
It’s mob rule, which is why I cannot sympathize with the people with their Luigi memes and shit. If we just run around and murder all he people who rub us the wrong way, then we basically turn into some shithole like we’re seeing in many places in the Middle East or Africa, where warlords rule over everyone else.
I also find this particular topic somewhat stupid when I see alleged Trumpanzees criticizing their far right pundits for calling the Luigi fanboys out. Like, you fuckers voted for someone who’s about the same caliber as that asshole that got murdered, who is supported by even more of the same kind of people. You cannot cry about this type of America, and then keep voting for this type of America (or even worse versions of it). It’s not even just hypocritical but straight up deluded. And then they all cry how voting doesn’t change anything. Stupid. Just stupid.
Here’s the deal, if we want law and order, it must apply to everyone. It does not, and there really isn’t mechanism right now to change that. The issue with the healtcare exec’s killing is that healthcare execs etc. and oligarchs that make decisions that kill people have to be held to account for their crimes, and that’s not happening. Their egregious denials of life-preserving coverage should be a crime if it isn’t already. The Oligarchs/healthcare insurers have rigged the system such that it does not bind them nor hold them responsible for their behaviors that kill people. This is where the lawlessness issue in our system began, not with Luigi’s vigilante act. Luigi committed murder, the health care execs and oligarchs also murder people with their decisions. Only Luigi’s actions are getting legally punished. As long as such unequal treatment in the law exists, it will inevitably end in vigilantism.
You’re not going to achieve that by throwing out the rules, quite the contrary. You’re just giving those people a reason to lobby on harder crackdowns on people, making it even harder to achieve actual change. The problem is that people keep voting against their interests, and not just on a presidential level but even starting on a local level. Hell, if there’s no one worth voting for then you should probably get active in politics yourself before you end up murdering people yourself. Either way, crying about murder and then becoming a murderer yourself is not the solution, but hypocrisy and will invite others doing the same for whoever they think deserve it.
Dark thoughts, in claiming that people vote against their interest being the cause for an unresponsive legal system, you ignore the fact that people’s votes in the US no longer really matter. This study https://www.upworthy.com/20-years-of-data-reveals-that-congress-doesnt-care-what-you-think. Details that Congress really doesn’t care what the voters want, they only care about what the donors want. The US is an oligarchy and voting doesn’t matter, whether or not such voting is in the voter’s interest.
It was self defense. The ceo had murdered before, he would murder again!
Yep, he had spreadsheets right there on his laptop and was planning on adding a whole new year of patient deaths to them.
He was even in the city to present the plan to his co-conspirators
Corporate DeathNote
It was self defense. The ceo had murdered before, he would murder again!
Considering he was headed into a meeting and was gonna plan to bring in even more profit likey by denying even more care I’d say it was certainly self defense.
The amount of hate speech online that goes unmoderated, and this is where they try to draw the line. Pitiful
Hating poor people doesnt scare billionares.
Well, plenty of hate speech is fueled and paid by the oligarchies running troll farms and owning social networks. They don’t like the idea of someone rich getting shot at because of abusing society either.
Since he’s innocent until proven guilty, there should be no need to moderate, right?
Also innocent if proven guilty with a big enough bank account
Lmao Reddit banned me for praising Luigi. Fuck reddit
The fuck are you doing on reddit?
Praising Luigi
not any more
Also trying to
Fuck Reddit
… which is prob a Reddit-furry thing.
But that was not the reason for ban.
Praising Luigi
Reddit is a corporatist pearl-clutching hell hole. With no reason to exist. I left it quite a while ago when I got banned for asking if something would get me banned. Fuck those assholes.
they meant “censor it”.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Business Insider is on the side of the corps here.
Posting our celebration is the moderate response.
They seem to have had no trouble deleting anything I put up or banning me.
moderate equals erase.
Turn the extremist sympathizing public back into a moderate public. The former is scary, a problem, intolerable, requiring correction. Moderation.
Yeah dont wanna let people say how they really feel.
A challenge to moderate, or a challenge to censor?
Good.
Political memes on lemmy.world included
Garbage mods who get pissy because their shit metaphors don’t work
“How is trump different from Luigi”?
Idk how many political rapes are you aware of @[email protected]?
Luigi shot a guy on fifth avenue instead of just talking about it?
Edit: And I’m getting downvoted… Bro I was agreeing with you, Why downvote me? Apparently I’ve ran into the classic blunder of sarcasm not being readable on the internet…
So let me clarify
Luigi and Trump have literally nothing in common outside of being Americans born into wealth, my “Luigi shot a guy” comment was not an endorsement of Trump, but a playful way of saying Luigi gets shit done instead of doing what Trump does and pretending to be America’s champion when in reality being the perfect symbol of literally everything wrong with the country.
Trump being a lazy lying pedophile who was never kept his hands to himself nor had a coherent thought.
Are you genuinely so brainwashed you’ve bought into MAGA propaganda, thinking Trump is just “saying some offensive things”?
No man.
He’s a literal rapist. In several cases.
This case, Carroll II, was tried in April and May 2023. Ms. Carroll contended that Mr. Trump had assaulted her in a dressing room at a New York department store where, among other things, he forcibly penetrated her vagina with his fingers and his penis. She testified in person for most of three days and was cross-examined intensively. Her sexual assault claim was corroborated by two “outcry” witnesses in whom Ms. Carroll had confided shortly after the attack, and was supported by six other fact witnesses. Mr. Trump’s defense – based exclusively on an attempt to discredit Ms. Carroll and her other witnesses – in substance was that no assault ever had occurred, that he did not even know Ms. Carroll, and that her accusations were a “Hoax.” Mr. Trump, however, did not testify in person or even attend the trial despite ample opportunity to do so.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html#caselaw-content
I’d know about you, but the dressing room of a department store isn’t exactly private even if it’s not “broad daylight” public.
So what non-self-serving political agenda does Trump’s raping(s) serve in your opinion?
Are you genuinely so brainwashed you’ve bought into MAGA propaganda, thinking Trump is just “saying some offensive things”?
That’s quite the conclusion you’ve jumped too considering I said nothing positive about Trump, do not see him as a legitimate president, and have more respect for Hitler than Trump as Hitler at least had the decency to put a bullet in his own head.
“Moderate?” Is that that a dog whistle for anti-Italian discrimination?
It’s a challenge to
moderatequash it, they mean.
