Morality isn’t as black and white as mainstream media makes it out to be.
In Grade 12, I discovered my fascination with philosophy through a single lecture by Harvard University professor Michael Sandel, titled “What’s the Right Thing to Do? The Moral Side of Murder.”
Sandel examined how right and wrong are often far from black and white, posing a central question: would you harm one person to save millions or save one at the expense of the millions? This philosophical dilemma is eerily relevant in light of the murder of the UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, allegedly carried out by Luigi Mangione.
This act has sparked heated discussions about the United States healthcare system, thrusting issues like insurance claim denials into the spotlight. Forbes reports HealthCare.gov issuers rejected 17 per cent of claims in 2021, with some issuers denying nearly half.
A 2023 KFF survey revealed nearly half of adults who faced insurance issues couldn’t resolve them, with 15 per cent reporting a decline in health and 28 per cent incurring unexpected costs. These figures highlight the systemic struggles Americans face, but I remain deeply uncomfortable with the growing glorification of Mangione’s actions that continue to pose his crime as a righteous act of rebellion.
Murder, regardless of its context, remains murder. While some argue this killing might force the rich to confront human suffering and bring about meaningful change, I doubt such an outcome would occur. If history is any indication, this act will do little to shift corporate policies or often the harsh inequalities within the healthcare system. Instead, it risks reinforcing the age-old cycle of the rich growing richer while the poor suffer further.
Even more troubling is the bizarre idolization of Mangione himself. Social media is rife with thirst traps and inappropriate language romanticizing his actions. This kind of discourse reflects an unsettling echo of past trends of criminals turned into cultural icons—with figures like the Menendez brothers or Ted Bundy being idolized and whose heinous acts were disturbingly glamourized. Such narratives trivialize genuine societal problems, reducing them to sensualized stories that overshadow the need for meaningful activism.
Philosophy teaches us that morality is rarely straightforward, but there’s a difference between understanding moral complexity and glorifying a crime. While Thompson’s death highlights the discrepancy between average American citizens and those in positions of power, the solution isn’t to romanticize an individual on trial to place our hope for change in an act of violence.
Unfortunately, Mangione’s crime won’t scare the powerful into reforming the healthcare system. Instead, it perpetuates cycles of harm without addressing the root causes. The narrative surrounding his actions distorts the real issues, glorifying violence while offering no tangible solutions.
For meaningful change to occur, we must focus on dismantling systemic injustices through alternative forms of collective action, such as protesting and advocating for reform, rather than idolizing those who resort to murder—because, contrary to social media’s assumptions, I don’t think “pretty privilege” will sway the jury.
Meghrig is a third-year Philosophy Student and The Journal’s Senior News Editor.
Tags
Activism, crime, morality, UnitedHealthcare, violence
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.