Trying to correct the Establishment's pillaging is a terrorist act — says the Grand Oligarchy — consider its allegations against Luigi Mangione

21 December 2024

When the Establishment tells us not to be violent . . .

. . . it is protecting its own oligarchically run, murder-prone pillaging system.

Parasitic Fat Cats do not liked to be slimmed

They will murder you — under color of law — to prevent ordinary people's exercise of morally legitimate societal self-defense.

An example of this

Consider the propaganda treatment accorded to Luigi Mangione's alleged murder of United Healthcare's chief executive officer, Brian Thompson.

Despite the fact that Thompson was not a celebrity, his murder continues to receive headline attention that far outweighs 'regular' homicides by the United States' constantly propagandizing media.

Being a big-corporation CEO raises a person to massive structural importance in the America's institutionalized way of squeezing We the People for loot.

Noticeably left out of most of the lamestream media's coverage of Thompson murder, was any attempt to uncover exactly how many people United Health had cheated out of already paid for insurance coverage and, therefore, assigned them to death, unnecessary suffering and/or impoverishment.

Society-wide murmurs of Magione's rise to quasi-public approval prompted the Establishment to add 'terrorism' to New York State's list of criminal charges:

The man accused of killing UnitedHealthcare’s CEO has been charged with murder as an act of terrorism, prosecutors said Tuesday as they worked to bring him to a New York court from a Pennsylvania jail.

Luigi Mangione already was charged with murder in the Dec. 4 killing of Brian Thompson, but the terror allegation is new.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said Thompson’s death on a midtown Manhattan street “was a killing that was intended to evoke terror. And we’ve seen that reaction.”

Can't have the lowlifes rising up, now can we?

Of this . . .

Australian Caitlin Johnstone observed that — here in mildly reversed paragraphs order:

[T]he label “terrorist” is nothing more than a tool of imperial narrative control which gets moved around based on whether or not someone’s use of violence is deemed legitimate by the managers of the empire.

Because Mangione’s alleged crime has ignited a public interest in class warfare, the label “terrorism” is being used to frame it as an especially heinous act of evil against an innocent member of the public.

Everything that led up to the unauthorized act of violence is erased from the record, because all of the violence, provocation and abuse which gave rise to the unauthorized act of violence were authorized by the empire. Authorized aggression doesn’t count as aggression.

Killing people by depriving them of healthcare because denying healthcare services is how your company increases its profit margins? That’s not violence.

Inflicting tyranny and abuse upon a deliberately marginalized ethnic group in an apartheid state? That’s not violence. Violence is when you respond to those forceful aggressions with forceful aggressions of your own.

Factually

Historically speaking, no structurally significant beneficial societal change has ever occurred, without an unpeaceful unseating of the people responsible for the previous levels of oppression, imperial occupation, slaughter and theft.

The moral? — Establishment propaganda keeps us enslaved . . .

. . . so as to profit the Grand American Kakistocracy.

When someone in power starts yapping about the need for We the Lowlifes to be and remain peaceful, what they really mean is that they do not want us squirming, while they parasitically suck our bodies dry of life.

Notice that District Attorney Bragg's statement that Mangione intended "to evoke terror" is a politically (not ethically) based moral allegation.

Alternatively stated, Bragg might as well have been saying that murder is bad, but if murder is intended to prompt societal change, it is worse.

Reasoning like Bragg's, of course, makes little ethical sense. Why would murder intended to profit the whole (necessarily and implicitly) be worse than homicide directed solely at self-benefit?

An obviously unreasoned moral shortcut of Bragg's type arrives only so as to protect whichever self-entitled Establishment reigns at the time.

A moral code that omits who did what to whom first, and from which comparative power level, lacks workable social and ethical worth.

Keep this in mind, when the United States' fascist Establishment is talking and acting.

PeteFree.com

Trying to correct the Establishment's pillaging is a terrorist act — says the Grand Oligarchy — consider its allegations against Luigi Mangione