next time I hear “there is just too many (brown) people” i swear
You must log in or # to comment.
Every revolutionary thinks their utopia is only a few decapitations away, and when those don’t work they move onto the next couple until your Stalin and executing kulaks who own a bit more land than their neighbors.
The reality is that a large chunk of normal people benefit from the current system and will fight to keep their cars, meat, AC, 401k evaluations etc. The largest shareholder, the ones who really control these companies, of any of these oil companies is vanguard which your current retirement plan is probably in. And that’s just the minority of oil that’s extracted by private companies, most is extracted by state owned corporations, and although most of that usually goes to corruption and war, a lot of it goes into welfare for some of the poorest people in the world. A lot more people rely on fossil fuels than just a handful of billionaires.
Should I be worried that my initial response to this is “Hmm, so we might be able to improve the world with a serendipitously timed anthrax outbreak at the next WEF summit?”
About the response itself? No.
About the situation that made that response understandable? We’re way past “worried”.
I mean, somebody is going to have to do a little terrorism…
Just a little bit, as a treat.
It’s a reminder that large problems are often tied to concentrated power. Holding systems accountable while still pushing for collective change is probably the most constructive path forward.
So call a convention and when they all bus in, 3 RPGs could clear a lot of air
Money like that, you fly in on your own helicopter, so you don’t have to ride in the less comfortable helicopter for your entourage.
Yes, if we just shoot the CEOs, the customers will magically stop wanting fast fashion, fast food, waste amounts of cheap meat, cheap and new electronics every year…
I don’t disagree that it would have a positive effect, but I hate the overly reductive takes on systems being completely disconnected from the people. We need to realize that our (western) life style is simply not sustainable, capitalism or not. That requires serious changes for everyone, not just the “rich”.
Something I think about from time to time: if everyone would boycott TicketMaster for a year, TM would vanish.
It’s really not a big ask for people to skip sports and concerts for one year. Buy merch from struggling artists if you’re worried about them.
But, this will never happen because of FOMO and selfishness. They’ll just bitch about the monopoly while giving them endless money.
The people have massive power if they pull together. But ‘fuck you, I got mine’ is the primary American motivation.
TicketMaster is one of those things I know about because apparently Americans fucking hate TicketMaster.
Keep cutting off the heads of these companies and eventually no one will take the jobs
Apropos that, I wonder sometimes how “100 bullets” might play out IRL
historians estimate about 200,000 to 300,000 germans were directly involved in the Shoah. many more profited from it.
They’ll find new executives, bud. Executives are just the lackeys for shareholders and the board of directors. A new one will grow for each one lost.
And?
Make them find new ones. And new ones after that. And after that.
Eventually that well will dry up.
Giving up hasn’t worked yet.
I’m just saying the aim isn’t the most effective. Shooting someone’s foot certainly will hamper someone, but the pain will go away eventually. Gotta aim for a more lethal part of the body
Ok so not 90 people. But more like 2,000. Still a rounding error that is willfully exterminating the rest.
Yeah, kinda like that time Brian Thompson got shot, and the next day United Healthcare ceased to exist.
Not saying that the general point of corporations doing more harm than people is wrong. Just that if you think that the corporation is just one person, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Within a week of the killing, BCBS backed out on some of their upcoming bullshit and United Heathcare’s pre-authorization rejection rate has decreased dramatically in the aftermath.
Thimpson’s death (at the hands of someone whose identity we’ll never know for sure) was objectively good for the insured.
United Healthcare’s stock is down 60% since the incident. United Healthcares board and new CEOs lowered the rejection rate of patients out of fear as well. Say what you want about the morality of what was done. The efficacy speaks for itself
The stock drop would be expected, but is there any credible source that denial rate dropped?
The efficacy lasted for all of a month before returning to where it had been before.
So, UHC stock was up around 600, dropped to a bit over 200, and is lately around 300. So like ¾ of the drop is still there in linear terms, or something like ⅔ in logarithmic terms.
That’s true, and my bad for implying otherwise.
But I also think much more critically, they’re back to denying coverage exactly the way they were before Thompson died.
I have no knowledge to refute that latter point, and I am inclined to think it is very likely true.
Well then we just need to stagger the killings in intervals to keep them in check. Simple solution.
tl;dr Find a better method.
Repeated use of the same drug will bring marginal gains.
Companies will evolve to create lower cost (lower impact) figureheads.Cruelty works best when it is used all at once.
Operant conditioning, as stated by EldritchFeminity above, is better applied in a case where you have higher levels of control over the subject’s environment.If you do want to continue doing so slowly, then you need to accompany this with other operations…
like using the shock period to gather opinions into a voice gives a clear-ish indication to what behaviour caused the event and what change in behaviour would prevent further repetition.
One might think that it is something very obvious and everyone knows the difference between what they are doing vs what they should be doing, but sometimes just saying it out loud makes a big difference.This is one methodology where an authority would excel at. And this particular methodology would horribly fail with a non-authority.
But any authority needs to be trustworthy, which requires consistency. And considering how all pre-established authorities are collectively deciding to fall towards inconsistency, I see authorities failing and hence, the methods that work with authority.
They seemed pretty mortal to me yeah, idk why anyone would say otherwise
Then maybe the treatment needs more than a single dose.
if that continues to happen, trust me, eventually none of these fuckers will be left in line.
deleted by creator
Yup. After 9/11 for a while it seemed every week or two the news would report that “The leader of Al Qaeda” had just been killed or captured. Not a false statement, yet it happened again the next week.
Maybe we should assign these fuckers playing cards like Bush did 👀
I just want to say that the idea that we could develop a crowdsourced bounty system on the dark web using cryptocurrency would be illegal and I would never publicly support it.
Yeah, kinda like that time Brian Thompson got shot, and the next day United Healthcare ceased to exist.
Their HP definitely went down. And, anecdotally, I heard from a pharmacist friend that they were approving claims like nobody’s business for the next day or so
Operant conditioning, also called instrumental conditioning, is a learning process in which voluntary behaviors are modified by association with the addition (or removal) of reward or aversive stimuli. The frequency or duration of the behavior may increase through reinforcement or decrease through punishment or extinction.
The way in which Luigi was arrested is part of their safety checks. A way to motivate working class to turn people in, without paying them. I generally thought reward money worked.
I learned it did not work from a podcast that no longer exists. Michael Bazzel’s OSINT podcast talked about it within the context of people who used OSINT to find people on wanted lists and how reward money collection actually works. (Podcast doesn’t exist any more, the copies of the casts went away with the podcast.). Sadly, there’s no replacement for this type of news and info condensed down into one place. It’s also a niche area of information, not followed by many.
Those McDonald’s workers were not paid for turning Luigi in. But they thought they would be.
Even so, look at the bigger picture. How many Luigi’s have there been since 1981?
Most people avoid confrontation, spending most of their days sitting in a chair or lying down, and thinking/hoping/wishing a white knight is going to rescue them from their situation. It’s one reason why so many people exist in bad relationships (1 or a chain of them). Because they think that other person is going to rescue them from their sad days of avoiding confrontation while sitting in a chair or lying down, most of the day for most of their days. Hoping. But never doing. Thinking about doing. Maybe spouting off on the internet about doing. But never doing.
find people on wanted lists and how reward money collection actually works
How does it actually work?
Generally? It doesn’t.
See making the call to tip off the cops makes you eligible for the reward. If you called the correct tip/reward phone number. So that’s the first road block.
Even then, you aren’t automatically getting the reward. No. There are still hoops to jump through.
As a note these additional hoops also apply when there isn’t a specific phone number.
According to the FBI’s website, I’d link but I’m on my phone, someone (an agent, a prosecutor, etc) has to put your name forward in a nomination package.
This is then reviewed by the FBI and other agencies, it’s kind of vague.
Anyway these agencies decide if you get a reward and what percentage.
And none of this can start until after a conviction is secured.
A lot if time, as one example, it’s conditional on conviction. So not only do they have to cat h the guy they have to win in court. That’s not money in exchange for the tip itself.
Wait, holup
Didnt bazzel stop doing podcasts way before luigi happened? Or are you talking about an old episode
Looks like it was back in March 2022 so still a little while before Thompson’s final claim denial. Show notes are available but it’s not saying much more than what you get from the title of the episode:
EPISODE 254-OSINT+Fugitives=Rewards
This week I release the previously-canceled show about finding fugitives with OSINT and collecting large rewards.
He did his Irish Goodbye before Luigi. I’m saying, the high potential for not getting reward money was known prior.
Kemp is alive and governing Georgia as far as I know but I’m happy to be corrected if that’s wrong. You may be thinking of Brian Thompson who involuntarily resigned his position as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare on a NYC sidewalk.
Ah damn, you right. Should have Googled it. Too many Brian’s in the news, lol. Got the wires crossed.
Editing to fix.
You did have my hopes up for a moment.
… So kill the entire board.
That’d probably make a more uh, substantial material impact on their bottom line.
Oh, they keep doing evil shit with a new board?
… repeat.
Or, I guess you can just either … well, either try to run away and hide, pray to the normalcy bias gods that one of these days the legal systems they own will do something against them, or just resign yourself to a kind of smug, self defeating moral solace in being doomed, but being right while being doomed.
Maybe find an economic system not dependant on exploitation? There’s gotta be one out there somewhere
Sure would be cool if anyone had any realistic plans for achieving such a thing.
Which one of those things are you doing?
That’s a fed question.
It would be if the answer weren’t so obvious
You act like they’re doing any of it besides the smug moral solace
No I don’t.
I’m capable of being honest, and judging myself by thr same standards I judge others.
You just assumed that I’m not.
I didn’t “assume” that, it was indicated by the smugness of your keyboard warrior “just do such-and-such, or succumb to doomerism” argument.
No, you’re not getting it:
Yep, I am smug, hence the smug description of being smug.
Meta-smugness.
You’re assuming that I do not count myself amongst being smug.
I do.
Its also not the only of those 3 things I do, see my other comment where you decided to give a pretty good, though mostly off topic explanation of Nietzche vs Schopenhauer, totally missing the part wherr I established being smug is not the only thing that I do.
At the moment, a bit of the first, and a bit of the third.
Its hard to be an agent of one’s own will to power when one is seriously crippled.
So mostly what I am doing is physical therapy so that I can get back to being a more effective agent of my own will.
I prefer Schopenhauer’s Will to Life which Nietzsche plagiarized during his psychotic ramblings.
If Nietzsche was right about the Will to Power being the essence of life, then fascism would be justified. What is fascism besides an exercise in Will to Power devoid of empathy? Hitler loved Nietzsche. He corrupted a lot of the things Nietzsche said. Nietzsche wasn’t inherently fascist, and actually abhorred authority. But his Will to Power rhetoric did lend itself to the development of fascist ideology.
Life isn’t merely some competition between rivaling species of plants that will overwhelm the other if the other doesn’t overwhelm them first. That’s what happens when there’s an imbalance in an ecosystem, such as with the introduction of non-native plants. If that were perfectly fine as an analogy for human society and behavior, then what argument could be made against colonization and ethnic cleansing? The same argument would justify capitalistic exploitation, extractive industry, “infinite growth,” and zero-sum economic systems.
To be clear, those things are evil, but that’s why I don’t believe in the Will to Power. (True that Nietzsche didn’t mean it that way, because he personally was anti-authority, but he failed to consider what it would mean for an authoritarian figure with the intention and capability to enforce an evil Will to Power).
But in a balanced ecosystem, life isn’t a zero-sum game. Lots of species symbiotically work together to maintain the balance, a sort of ecological homeostasis. On the species level, even predator-prey relations are symbiotic (without wolves, deer overpopulate and overconsume, then they starve and experience population collapse).
So that’s why I favor Will-to-Life over Will-to-Power.
There’s also Will-to-Good, which sounds great on the surface, but “Good” is hard to define, so it’s mostly useless and can lend itself to corruption and perversity just as easily.
… Ok.
I didn’t mean to get into a philosophy argument, I meant to indicate my capacity to act in the world.
Bring crippled significantly hampers that, when it comes to most kinds of physical actions.
Okay, you can’t just mention a desire to be an agent of your own will to power and expect me not to discuss the differences between Nietzsche and Schopenhauer…
The phrase “will to power” has an origin, and it was coined by Nietzsche as an adaptation of Schopenhauer’s “will to life.”
In my view, power is a means to an end and not an inherent good worth pursuing for its own sake. Life, on the other hand, is an end in itself and is an inherent good worth pursuing for its own sake.
It makes sense to ask “Why do you want power?” But if you ask “Why do you want to live,” it seems kinda pointless like asking the wrong question.
This is because living is the reason for everything else that we do: work, get paid, buy food, eat. We fight for better systems because they’re more conducive to life. We might sacrifice our own lives for an ideal that makes life possible or better for others, presumably people we care about, and even then, life is the goal, just not for ourselves.
A will to power requires further justification. A will to life does not.
There is also a societal dependance on some of the status quo. The bigger issue is how hard they actively resist the change. A lot of places still rely on trucking at a minimum to fill the groccery store with food wrapped in plastic, most of which is powered or made by fossil fuels. We need to electrify and diversifying but they cling to oil and have way too much power in governmental decisions to prevent or reverse any reduction in dependance for their products.
the post is about who is doing it, who is responsible,
it’s supposed to make the problem less abstract
I said nothing of the sort. But I ask once again: If we execute these 90 people, will that make us stop burning oil? Is it at least a helpful step down the path of stopping to burn oil?
If not, then please just don’t act as though these 90 people are all we have to overcome to save the planet.
Of course something will happen. If the bosses or big corporations would be killed constantly, the next in line would be thinking about changing things. Just remember Luigi.
https://factually.co/fact-checks/health/luigi-mangione-healthcare-accessibility-impact-288343
It costs 7.5% of GDP to halt climate change.
But each 12.5% of GDP is lost per +1°C
The problem is that the people who need to pay are not the people who will be most affected.
Soon you are ready to realise that no, they are sock puppets of what is essentially a giant demonic entity that is Immortal and Controls human and replaces these humans when they misbehave or malfunction
And it’s name is Greed.
I call it Mammon and it lives inside the minds of every capitalist. Every worker who believes in markets, in states, in police, in corporations. We must kill the capitalist in the heads of every worker.
From Wikipedia “Mammon (Aramaic: מָמוֹנָא, māmōnā) in the New Testament is commonly thought to mean money, material wealth, or any entity that promises wealth, and is associated with the greedy pursuit of gain.”
More or less the same thing, I reckon, but Mammon sounds cooler, so I’ll defer to your’s.
I specifically refer to megachurches and “prosperity” Christians as Mammonites.
IMO killing them is the only way to have any real change. It’s the very first step in any plan. We must get rid of the existing filth, before we can build anything new.
No, it’s not the only step, but it’s the biggest and most difficult and most impactful.
As the saying goes “you can’t polish a turd”.
Billionaires are turds.
Yes I’m sure the corporations beneath these people will simply evaporate and everything will go perfectly fine.
If you took out certain key people you would absolutely change the course of history. Probably a certain 5-10. Maybe less. Who? No idea.
Hell, look at all the shit epstein was involved with and think about how much better the world would be if he was baby hitler’d
that feels, for some reason, profound.
I mean, sure let it be 200 or 400, 1000. It’s still a rounding error compared to all of humanity.maybe that is why there is a period of prosperity after large wars. The losing side being wiped out reduces that number by half and everyone can breathe a bit more freely.
Those people never die in the wars. The reason there are periods of prosperity after wars is because when many young adults have died, labour has more bargaining power.
damn. somehow my version, which is pretty dark, is still not that dark.
There also tend to be periods of great prosperity following plagues, due to inheritances and what not. But capitalism has made sure to rinse you of every past penny to prevent generational wealth from being passed down to the poors… So that didn’t happen after COVID
Ps. Fuck magnum pi and kurt browning for scamming seniors out of their homes and into reverse mortgages
Wait what did Magnum PI do? We’re not talking about the mustachioed investigator, right?
If only there was like a deck of cards with their faces on it.
So you’re saying me taking out some replaceable oil execs is going to make people have less demand for oil and everything that comes from it?
But there isn’t a “demand” at least not as much as years ago. We are trying to switch to renewables but the oil execs keep killing the renewable progress. The horse fucker in the white house won’t let us move on. He kills wind and solar and forces the coal plants to stay open.
And that horse fucker won more votes than Kamala.
There’s a whole party where resistance to green tech is one of the items of faith, hundreds of millions of people. Not just a handful of oil execs. (And yknow, the millions who still use gasoline in their cars etc.)
Edit: That’s not to mention all those who like to fly places.
You could argue it, but at the same time no one prevents you from going to AliExpress and buying cheap solar. The fact that US decided not to invest, does not mean solar on global scale is doomed. Rest of the world is doing pretty well
People keep curling out small humans, so oil-derived fertiliser is the only thing preventing a famine that would kill billions.
https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/
Sometimes I like to gaze lovingly into their faces while writing their names in my diary.
Something to remember about the Forbes List: the most terrible people of all, aren’t even on it. There is a level of wealth that floats above mere billionaires, for which there almost isn’t even a category. Forbes knows not to mention these families in the context of some tawdry popularity contest among nouveau riche Techno Trash. They are mostly centuries old multi-generational wealth like monarchies, the Rothschilds, sheikhs, organized crime families, dictators, etc.
They aren’t on the list, but they hold the real wealth, and more importantly, the real power. Everything else is an illusion of their making.
My understanding of it is that its not really some conspiracy to hide the top wealth; the forbes lists are all opt- in. They reach out to a bunch of Uber wealthy, people, and those who want in send back bios and stats for them to rank and publish.
At least that’s the way it was explained to me. I dated an heiress for a while, and at one point her dad told me hed only ever had his name on the list for one year, and that was as part of the ‘debut campaign’ for his second wife.
Of you look ar the list it makes sense. It’s mostly the new rich, people still seaking validation and status from their wealth, the sociopaths and a lot of the tech bilionaires like elon and zuckerberg who treat it like a competition, and people who benefit from the name recognition and status perception for their company, like all the fashion and design company owners using it to help associate their brands with luxury, and the investment banker types like Bloomberg, ken griffin, etc, who use it to show success of their companies and get other rich people to invest with them.
So, vampires. They’re vampires.
That page 404 errors for me. Here’s an alt:
