On December 4, 26-year-old Luigi Mangione 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.
According to a federal complaint, Mangione’s notebook, recovered by authorities, revealed his deep-seated frustration with the healthcare industry. He wrote, “The target is insurance” because “it checks every box,” exposing his motive to attack what he viewed as a deeply flawed system.
The public response to Mangione’s case has been polarizing. While many expressed shock and condemnation, a surprising number of people have taken to social media in support of him. Memes, hashtags, and even merchandise that glorify his actions have inundated social media platforms.
This trend of glamorizing criminals online isn’t new, but Mangione’s case diverges from the usual romanticization of serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer. It goes beyond mere fascination or morbid attraction—supporters frame Mangione as a martyr, a symbol of rebellion against the perceived injustices of the healthcare industry. 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.
“Violence begets violence”
Unjust healthcare laws and practices epitomize what author Rob Nixon termed “slow violence”: “violence that occurs gradually and out of sight,” through systemic issues that inflict long-term damage on individuals and communities. The U.S. healthcare system embodies this concept. Rising costs, inadequate coverage, and bureaucratic barriers all contribute to an ongoing crisis that denies access to care for some or complicates the healthcare process for others.
According to a 2023 Kaiser Family Foundation survey, nearly 60% of insured Americans reported difficulties using their health insurance in the past year. Many delay or forgo essential care due to exorbitant costs, with one in four avoiding care altogether. Even those with insurance experience high deductibles and unexpected bills, plunging families into financial instability. This systemic failure is more than an inconvenience; it strips away dignity, health, and for some, hope. As healthcare spending in the U.S. continues to rise without delivering comparable improvements in health outcomes, it’s no surprise Americans are frustrated.
The public reaction to Mangione’s violence underlines two forms of violence: the immediate shock of “quick violence” and the relentless toll of “slow violence.” While the former cries out for immediate attention, the latter festers in the background, often overlooked. In this case, both kinds of harm are indicative of deep fractures in society that have been left unresolved.
The roots of radical action
It’s easy to end the conversation with “violence is never the answer,” but history paints a more complicated picture. When individuals feel their voices are silenced and their suffering ignored, desperation can escalate into violence. Unaddressed inequality has repeatedly driven 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 in their demand for fair treatment. These resulted in significant reflections on workers’ rights, spurring pro-worker legislation. 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, intended to ignite broader change. Brown’s actions, among others, played a role in accelerating the path to the Civil War and, ultimately, emancipation.
Violence, while inherently destructive, has historically been a catalyst for reflection, reform, and, at times, progress. In a society born of revolution, civil war, and conflict, extreme acts often force attention onto systemic issues. Acts of desperation, like Mangione’s, stem from legitimate grievances and sometimes serve as a wake-up call when other means have failed. However, the outcomes of violence are often unpredictable and carry terrible human costs; not all acts of violence result in meaningful change, and they risk perpetuating cycles of harm. While violence can at times be a catalyst for change, it must never be embraced as the default response to injustice.
Moving past violence
Critics of examining the root causes of violence, particularly in cases like Mangione’s, argue that such an approach risks justifying vigilantism or excusing violence, and thus eroding the rule of law and inviting chaos. This concern is valid; a society governed by laws must prioritize order and accountability. Yet, examining the root causes of violence does not mean endorsing lawlessness. Instead, it reveals systemic failures that may push individuals to commit extreme actions when they feel powerless—a necessary step towards breaking cycles of injustice.
It’s easy to understand why some glorify Mangione—he represented the anger and disillusionment of many Americans and took radical step that few others would. However, his violence, at best, was a tragic call to action rather than a solution to the problems he sought to address. Targeting Brian Thompson, a single individual within a much larger, deeply entrenched system, did nothing to resolve the foundational issues of healthcare inequality.
Non-violent methods like advocacy, collective action, and public awareness campaigns have brought about change in the past, however, they do not guarantee the same result each and every time. Nonetheless, they are significantly a more fruitful and sustainable long-term strategy than violence, which often aggravates the very problems it seeks to tackle.
Ultimately, Mangione’s act of violence cannot be fully understood without setting it against the violence he responded to. Thus, the spotlight must shift from glorifying or condemning individual acts of violence to reforming our healthcare system itself. Only by confronting these injustices can we hope to build a society where individuals no longer feel compelled to resort to violence as their last cry for help. The true measure of progress will not lie in how we react to tragedy but in how we prevent such tragedies from happening in the first place.
