Explanation for the CEO bloodlust

Author: WyIted

Posts

Total: 37
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
We have a society that is celebrating murder of the CEO of UHG. I can see how this can be scary for somebody with a lot of influence or power. Perhaps somebody scared they may be perceived the same way, particularly healthcare CEOs or perhaps war profiteers.  

Some of those liberally inclined who understand but do not partake in the bloodlust of the masses seem to think that the bloodlust is a result of a frustration with the healthcare system. 

I can't speak for the left in this instance, though maybe after more study I can. However I can speak for the right.

  Insurance companies say "buy my product and we will cover your healthcare costs" 

We go " that,s awesome" then if we get sick or hurt and file a claim with the insurance company 

They say: "we won't cover that"

We are much more likely to also believe our doctor when they tell us what we need then the insurance company who will reccomend ignorant shit like a lifetime of medicine as opposed to doing a one time surgery as well. 

That sort of thing is just undeniably evil. If you are an insurance CEO. I want you being a millionaire. I want you challenging insurance fraud. I do not want you fucking me out of whatever my doctor believes I need. He knows better than you.

This of course doesn't explain the blood lust. However it does explain how the media and some some very public liberals misconstrue the bloodlust in what I think is an attempt to get us socialized medicine. 

To get to this bloodlust, which I think is healthy though those with a stick up their ass may disagree 


# hints of a violent past

Some phrases that are in common parlance and also hint at our more bloodthirsty past.

"Don't mess with a man who has nothing to lose"

That isn't a pleasure for mercy but a warning about the potential for violence this person has.

"Always leave the enemy an escape"

Again a hint at how blood thirsty we can be. If you put the enemy in too much of a corner and give him no option he will gladly become extremely blood thirsty.

"Surrender with honor"

# The underlying calculus that built society

Society is and was built on the ideal of vengeance as an inherent cost built into our transactions. If you screwed a man hard enough, he may just come after you. 

The shopkeeper of modern times may no longer have to beat thieves and can just call the cops, but doesn't mean we have forgotten that this value underpinning civilization and why the court system exists at all.

The mob no longer has to seek justice against the degenerate who wrecked the communal green, but the abhorrent disgust in such an action is there long before it needs to be acted on, because of the justice system. 

# modern society

In modern society we got to such a point that we priced vigilantism in so we'll that we forget it wad priced in at all. This is what allowed people like Brian thompson to legally murder more people than 100 Jeffrey Dahmers and still feel untouchable. 

Many CEOs aren't concerned with taking a fractional hit if they can be profitable murdering thousands of people. .

# conclusion 

Sure this is a sign of a type of decay of society, but it isn't a drift away from the norm. It is a return to the norm. For a while a type of ball hung in the air, unrecognized, even forgotten but now it has dropped. CEOs who murder people now are crying that they need society. These are smart guys but they just forget or never learned what society was built on. This underlying and consistent threat that hangs over all of us and keeps us civilized. That forgotten calculus in out interactions is what bad actors took advantage of. Now they must increase security if they are to become serial killers. 


Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I dont believe in revenge. Am I alien?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
I dont bellieve in revenge because it would be impossible for me to punish all people who have done me wrong, and it would take great effort too. An easier path is to just forgive but also complain about it forever. That way you can make people serve you instead of punishing them.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
I don't know if I stated that we all do and  if I did it was hyperbole. I think the point I was trying to make was that revenge is an underlying calculus that is a necessary precursor for the existence of society.

This is not to say you aren't alien. Perhaps you are. Perhaps kryptonite is your home planet. I am only saying that exceptions within humans are more likely to exist. 

It's also a fact that many people aren't aware of their subconscious. For example when somebody smokes a cigar, they are unknowingly simulating sucking a cock, but they are unaware of this repressed desire to suck a large black cock and it manifests through smoking. Those people might say "I don't want to suck a large black cock, while my wife watches and mocks me for it", but those people would be wrong. They would be repressing the fact that they want a large load of cum on their face.

This may or may not justify the rape of men who smoke cigars by gay black men. That's not the point I am making at all. I am only saying sometimes we repress things and may not even be aware we are repressing them. 
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
I am only saying sometimes we repress things and may not even be aware we are repressing them. 
Oh I am aware. Its just that revenge is rarely a path of least risk. As one Chinese guy said: "If you take the path of revenge, dig two graves."
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
How do you send the message that you aren't prey?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
How do you send the message that you aren't prey?
Its usually done by avoiding those who are dangerous, or just endlessly complaining so even those who are dangerous cant get enough will to attack you. But other than that, its hard not to be prey. Kinda like animals in the wild. They run away, hide, position good or get eaten.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
"fight or flight" is in all animals.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
"fight or flight" is in all animals
Yes. A chicken cannot fight or kill a wolf, but chicken can run away and hide. I am the chicken.
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,076
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@WyIted
It's the free rider problem. The common good requires that everyone (or at least most people) agree not to do extrajudicial killings. People are fine with that as long as those who do extrajudicial killings are consistently punished. But as soon as it seems like some people in power are skating by and taking advantage of everyone else's participation in the system, others will resent them and stop abiding by the common law.

This can happen to any society, because there will always be someone who manages to get around the system (like O. J. Simpson). And the more everyone else resents those exceptions, the more likely a snowball effect becomes. If one person breaks the law and gets away with it, and 3 people see them and manage to do the same thing, and 3 people see each of those people, etc. Right now criminals are easy to catch because most smart people don't decide to break the law and most crimes aren't premeditated, but that can change. If most of them get away with it, we have laws in name only.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
If you have been around chickens, the males are fairly vicious.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
But other than that, its hard not to be prey. Kinda like animals in the wild. They run away, hide, position good or get eaten.
Predators generally want easy prey so you can just choose to not be the lowest hanging fruit
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Savant
Right now criminals are easy to catch because most smart people don't decide to break the law
Average person breaks the law 10 times a day during peace time, and up to 50 times a day during war time. And thats just for written law. If we went with moral laws, the numbers would be somewhat higher. Everyone is a criminal. They are just too stupid to know it.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Savant
How do we keep insurance lobbyists from rewriting the laws that allow them to ride free?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
Predators generally want easy prey so you can just choose to not be the lowest hanging fruit
Tell it to the chicken.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
If you have been around chickens, the males are fairly vicious.
I guess, but they would be somewhat stupid to try fight a wolf unless they are sacrificing themselves so that other chickens can escape. Otherwise, pointless fight.
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,076
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Greyparrot
How do we keep insurance lobbyists from rewriting the laws
By breaking the law, obviously
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Savant
Like murdering the lobbyists that are rewriting the laws to favor them over everyone else? Ok I guess. That's one solution.
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,076
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Greyparrot
That's the only route everyone seems to agree on. But until people can agree on what policy changes they want, lobbyists will be replaced by other lobbyists. I don't think vigilantes can keep CEOs or lobbyists in line forever as long as they have institutional power. French Revolution worked because everyone committed to completely overthrowing the government. But as soon as they stopped agreeing on the levers of power, they fell into chaos.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Savant
I asked AI to come up with a workable utilitarian plan. This is what it came up with:

To radically change the system and eliminate the influence of lobbies that write laws against the public interest, we need to rethink the very structure of politics, governance, and economic power. One bold approach would be to implement direct democracy mechanisms, such as Citizen Initiated Legislation (CIL), allowing citizens to propose and vote on laws directly, bypassing traditional legislative bodies. This would diminish the power of lobbyists who often influence lawmakers behind closed doors. Additionally, instituting the power for citizens to recall elected officials at any time would ensure that lawmakers remain accountable and less susceptible to corporate influence. (this is something feasible in the digital age)

Another radical solution could involve the government itself becoming an active lobbyist. A publicly funded "People’s Lobby" could counteract corporate lobbying efforts and advocate for laws that protect public welfare, giving the public an equal voice in the legislative process. To further empower the people, crowdfunding platforms could be created to allow citizens and organizations to pool resources and support public-interest lobbying efforts, enabling them to compete with corporate power in influencing laws. (I kinda like this idea)

In a more technological direction, blockchain could be used to create a fully transparent legislative process. Blockchain’s immutable records could track every interaction in the legislative process, making all lobbying efforts visible to the public in real-time and holding lawmakers accountable instantly. Additionally, smart contracts could be employed to ensure that laws are automatically passed only if they have widespread citizen support, based on predefined public criteria, ensuring that corporate influence is minimized. (this is pretty awesome too)

One of the most radical proposals would be to overhaul the way legislators are selected. A randomly selected legislative body, or sortition system, would remove the influence of money in politics, as those chosen to serve would not owe their position to campaign donations or special interests. This could also be complemented by large national citizen assemblies that have direct decision-making power on major policies, sidestepping traditional legislative bodies and removing corporate sway over laws. (not too sure of this idea)

Further, we could abolish corporate personhood, overturning the legal notion that corporations have the same rights as individuals. This would prevent corporations from influencing politics through unlimited political donations and lobbying efforts. More extreme measures could include complete separation of business and politics, banning executives from political contributions, lobbying, or even appearing in political ads, ensuring that corporate interests are not intertwined with political power. (I like this)

To address economic power, implementing a Universal Basic Income (UBI) would provide all citizens with financial security, lessening their dependence on corporations and making them less susceptible to corporate influence. Furthermore, creating a job guarantee program or automation dividends would reduce the leverage that employers have over workers, thus decreasing their ability to manipulate the political system. (don't like this, we saw what too much money chasing too few goods does)

Radical restructuring could also involve abolishing political parties altogether, shifting to individual platforms and ideas in elections, which would diminish the power of party donors and corporate backers. Compulsory voting and easier access to voting, such as online registration and voting, would ensure a more representative electorate, making it harder for lobbyists to influence laws. In terms of punishment for corruption, severe penalties for politicians found engaging in corrupt lobbying practices, such as life sentences, could serve as a powerful deterrent. (I don't think this will really address the problem much)

Finally, establishing new forms of economic democracy, such as worker cooperatives, would shift power away from concentrated corporate entities and into the hands of individuals and communities. This shift would reduce the disproportionate influence that large corporations hold in politics, as workers in cooperatives would have more control over both their economic conditions and the laws that govern them. Similarly, participatory budgeting could allow citizens to directly decide how public funds are spent, ensuring that financial resources are allocated according to public needs, not corporate interests. (this seems messy in practice)

These radical ideas propose a comprehensive transformation of the political and economic system, aiming to redistribute power from corporate interests to the public. By rethinking the structures of governance and economics, we can begin to dismantle the entrenched influence of lobbying and create a system that serves the people rather than the powerful few.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
establishing new forms of economic democracy, such as worker cooperatives
Yeah, bunch of brainless workers who have no clue about economy but are running a buisness. What could go wrong? Great idea.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
There a plenty of successful cooperatives that operate fine
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
There a plenty of successful cooperatives that operate fine
No, they are minority everywhere. China tried worker's cooperatives on large scale, but had to bail them out all the time because dumb workers just use money and buisness loans to buy themselves expensive cars and houses, and then there is never enough money to grow buisness.

Worker's coops almost always work on "short time preference" buisness model because they prefer increasing their wages over buisness growth. Its a great way to fail.

These coops didnt even work in countries where government gave them special treatments and protections. They wont work anywhere on mass scale because most workers are too dumb to run a buisness.
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,863
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
There are literally Coops in the United States who have operated successfully for over 50 years and you are probably near quite a few if you live close to any major city

Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 363
Posts: 11,017
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@WyIted
There are literally Coops in the United States who have operated successfully for over 50 years
Yeah, apply it to a mass scale and see what happens with coops.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,264
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Yeah, like I said (seems it would get very messy)

We have something like 'worker co-ops' in the form of worker unions, but history has not been kind to collective work unions, particularly in terms of the long-term sustainability of their industries (e.g., auto workers).

Turns out, the expertise to make a car on the assembly line doesn't automatically transfer as expertise in maintaining a competitive advantage in the global market.
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,896
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@WyIted
It is absurd to associate smoking a cigar with that of killing a healthcare CEO.

I don't know if I stated that we all do and  if I did it was hyperbole. I think the point I was trying to make was that revenge is an underlying calculus that is a necessary precursor for the existence of society.

This is not to say you aren't alien. Perhaps you are. Perhaps kryptonite is your home planet. I am only saying that exceptions within humans are more likely to exist.

It's also a fact that many people aren't aware of their subconscious. For example when somebody smokes a cigar, they are unknowingly simulating sucking a cock, but they are unaware of this repressed desire to suck a large black cock and it manifests through smoking. Those people might say "I don't want to suck a large black cock, while my wife watches and mocks me for it", but those people would be wrong. They would be repressing the fact that they want a large load of cum on their face.

This may or may not justify the rape of men who smoke cigars by gay black men. That's not the point I am making at all. I am only saying sometimes we repress things and may not even be aware we are repressing them.

Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,076
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Best.Korea
What could go wrong?
King Louis XVI was condemned to death by a majority of only 1 vote. Amongst those who voted in favor of the execution was the king's own cousin, Philippe Égalité, whom the king did not have positive relations with. Philippe himself would be guillotined on the same scaffold a year later.

There's a lesson here, but it seems most people haven't learned it.

Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,896
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Savant
King Louis XVI was condemned to death by a majority of only 1 vote. Amongst those who voted in favor of the execution was the king's own cousin, Philippe Égalité, whom the king did not have positive relations with. Philippe himself would be guillotined on the same scaffold a year later.

There's a lesson here, but it seems most people haven't learned it.

Here the Healthcare CEO was killed by a lone shooter. Big difference in American justice.
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 2,076
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Shila
King Louis XVI was killed by a lone executioner. But let's not ignore all the people cheering his death.