4mo ago

No, Brian Thompson Wasn’t a “Working-Class Hero”

jacobin.com

United States | News & Politics @lemmy.ml

return2ozma @lemmy.world

4mo ago

No, Brian Thompson Wasn’t a “Working-Class Hero”

jacobin.com /2024/12/thompson-unitedhealthcare-working-class-hero

54 comments

I think a lot of rich people don't understand that being rich precludes them from being a part of the working class. They think that because they're working, that must mean they're a working class person. And then that leads to shit like this, rich folk calling other rich folk working-class.
Obviously, there are more reasons for people calling the CEO a working class hero, but I think what I said is still one of those reasons.
- Yeah the "hero" part doesn't equal "I made it big therefore I'm a hero"
  A real working class hero is a person who did make it big and gave back to the ones beneath them.
  
  On 9/11, Steve Buscemi, formerly a firefighter, son of a garbage man and a hotel worker, decided to don his old uniform and go back to his old station and help the rescue crews with no regard to his own safety. He worked 12-hour days taking living people and corpses (including the bodies of other firefighters) out of the rubble and did not bother doing anything like letting the press know about his selfless act. In fact, he said nothing about it. A firefighter posted on Facebook to thank him and that's how the world found out.
  That is a working-class hero.
  Brian Thompson was personally responsible for causing far more deaths than what happened on 9/11.
  
  Exactly. This guy made it big and did nothing to use his power to help people. Hell, if anything, he made it worse. He oversaw the cruelest company in a cruel industry.
  
  Like Luigi
- No one is working class as long as they can live the rest of their life in relative luxury/comfort with zero sources of income. If they choose to continue to work, it's because it's their choice to enrich themselves further, not because they will lose their home or need to start living off rice and beans.
  Even retirees who live off a few thousand a month from their pensions, retirement funds, and investment returns are no longer working class in my opinion.

Vigilante violence doesn’t lead to enduring systematic change.
Normally I agree with most of jacobin's articles but I don't agree with this. It's pretty obvious that things have already changed, even if it's just temporary. (Speaking as a non American spectator at least tbf)
- It's strange to cite what may be "just temporary" changes when you're quoting "enduring systematic change"
  
  Yeah that's fair, I did actually notice what I wrote kind of argued against itself 😅. My counterpoint would be that it's clear there's more work to be done to make it not temporary
- We could just depose them all and find out. I mean, that’s what they do to us.
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
  
  This is a historically illiterate reply. The French Revolution was enacted by organized political resistance, not random assassinations. As the author points out, such acts never achieve any substantial or lasting change.
- Has he heard of the French revolution? That was a bit of lasting change
  
  looks at current French government
- Vigilante violence can be distinguished from revolutionary violence because it is carried out without a Party. It's just random people on their own deciding to do violence i.e. adventurism. It can't bring enduring change.
  
  No, but it can inspire a populace to rise up and challenge their oppressors.
- So do the ends justify the means?
  
  Remains to be seen
- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign
  
  Did you actually read that link?
  The extent to which suffragette militancy contributed to the eventual enfranchisement of women in 1918 has been debated by historians, although the consensus of historical opinion is that the militant campaign was not effective.
  In fact:
  In May 1913 another attempt had been made to pass a bill in parliament which would introduce women's suffrage, but the bill actually did worse than previous attempts when it was voted on, something which much of the press blamed on the increasingly violent tactics of the suffragettes.[116] The impact of the WSPU's violent attacks drove many members of the general public away from supporting the cause, and some members of the WSPU itself were also alienated by the escalation of violence, which led to splits in the organisation and the formation of groups such as the East London Federation of Suffragettes in 1914.
  And women didn't get suffrage in the UK until 1918.

More like working class traitor.
- If you wrote a story about a class traitor murdering another class traitor in class, you'd get a failing grade for how ridiculous the concept was.
  
  Yeah this whole story is first grade script material.

I get it!
Random acts of violence won't work.
Random acts of violence
Random acts

Yeah he wasn't one.

Doesn't matter that he came from money. He saw an imbalance of power and did something about it.
- They're talking about Thompson, the guy that got shot. He is the one they are trying to paint as a working class hero because he wasn't born wealthy. It's just ignoring the reality of life in America and his part in it.
  
  Yeah, an odd interpretation of "hero", that he found success for himself and I suppose those closest to him. Even if his success story was getting rich from some more innocuous retail success, it is hardly heroic.
  Some may think it's a nice story about working hard to get ahead, but that wouldn't be heroic.
  Also doesn't really need to be, a decent life (generally speaking, not making a statement about this CEO0) that shied away from heroism is hardly shameful. Just don't like folks ascribing heroism to merely being successful.

54 comments