On December 4, Luigi Mangione, 26, allegedly shot and killed UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a Manhattan hotel. Mangione now faces federal charges, including first-degree murder, which could make him eligible for the death penalty.
Mangione’s notebook, recovered by authorities, revealed his deep-seated frustration with the healthcare industry, according to a federal complaint. He wrote, “The target is insurance” because “it checks every box,” highlighting his apparent motive to attack what he perceived as a flawed system.
The public response to Mangione’s case has been polarizing. While many express shock and condemnation, a surprising number of people have shown support for Mangione online. Social media platforms are awash with memes, hashtags, and even merchandise glorifying his actions.
The glamorization of criminals on social media isn’t new. However, Mangione’s case diverges from the usual romanticization of serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer. It goes beyond mere fascination or morbid attraction— supporters paint Mangione as a martyr, a symbol of rebellion against the healthcare industry’s perceived injustices. Mangione’s act of violence against Thompson, while undeniably immoral for taking a human life, is inextricably linked to the systemic violence perpetrated by the healthcare industry—a slow, relentless harm that breeds frustration and desperation.
“Violence begets violence”
Unjust healthcare laws and practices exemplify what author Rob Nixon calls “slow violence”: “violence that occurs gradually and out of sight,” manifesting through systemic issues that inflict long-term harm on individuals and communities. The U.S. healthcare system embodies this concept. Rising costs, inadequate coverage, and bureaucratic barriers create an ongoing crisis that denies millions access to care.
According to a 2023 survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation, nearly 60% of insured Americans reported difficulties using their health insurance within the past year. Many delay or forgo essential care due to exorbitant costs, with one in four avoiding treatment altogether. Even those with insurance often face high deductibles and unexpected bills, plunging families into financial chaos. This systemic failure does more than cause inconvenience—it strips people of their dignity, health, and, in some cases, hope. As healthcare spending in the U.S. continues to soar without corresponding improvements in health outcomes, the frustration felt by many is understandable and palpable.
The reaction to Mangione’s flash of violence exemplifies how “quick violence” serves as a tool for drawing attention—it is designed to shock and force society to confront an issue that might otherwise remain ignored. In contrast, the slow violence of the healthcare system often goes unnoticed as it festers in the background, requiring sustained effort to address its root causes. Both forms of harm expose deep societal fractures. One is not inherently worse than the other, especially when the failures of the healthcare system have resulted in countless lives lost.
The roots of radical action
It’s easy to assert that violence is never the answer, but history paints a more complicated picture. When individuals feel their voices are silenced, their suffering ignored, and they have no other recourse, desperation often escalates to violence. Inequality, when left unaddressed, has repeatedly pushed both individuals and movements to extreme measures. The Gilded Age in the late 19th century, marked by wealth disparities, exploitative labor practices, and political corruption cloaked in prosperity, saw workers resort to organized—and sometimes violent—strikes to demand fair treatment. Similarly, the slow, systemic violence of slavery fueled John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry, an act of rebellion that, though it resulted in the deaths of several men, was intended to ignite broader change.
Violence, while inherently destructive, has historically been a catalyst for reflection, reform, and, at times, progress. Whether Luigi Mangione’s actions will lead to such outcomes is far from clear. Yet his act underscores the desperation and disillusionment that arise when institutions fail to address legitimate grievances—much like historical rebellions fueled by systemic injustices—forcing society to confront the injustices it often prefers to ignore.
Moving past violence
Critics of this viewpoint that examines the root causes of violence, particularly in cases like Mangione’s, argue that justifying vigilantism or excusing violent acts as a response to systemic failures risks undermining the legal system and inviting chaos. This concern is valid; a society governed by laws must prioritize order and accountability. However, examining the root causes of violence does not mean endorsing lawlessness. Instead, it aims to reveal systemic failures that push individuals to extreme actions like Mangione’s when they feel powerless.
Ultimately, the focus should be on reforming the healthcare system, not on glorifying or condemning individual acts of violence. Only by confronting the injustices that drive such desperate actions can we hope to build a society where individuals no longer feel compelled to resort to violence as a last cry for help. The true measure of progress will not be in how we react to the tragedy, but in how we prevent it from happening in the first place.
