[perrygeo]

> there's no serious theory of change that begins with murdering health care industry people.

You sure about that? Show me one theory of change where the oppressed somehow rise above without violence? Even the groundwork for Ghandi's peaceful protest were laid by a strong anti-colonial military force that led assassinations of British military officers. You think Britain left because Ghandi said some profound things and changed their minds? The official position was that continued occupation of India would be met by violent resistance and they retreated.

There have been many many examples throughout history of oppressed people rising up with violence against their oppressors. The majority of the substantial changes in culture happen this way - things reach a boiling point and it spills out on the streets.

I'm not saying mob justice is an ethical or principled way to instill change. But historically it has been extremely successful.

[tptacek]

Yes, I'm sure, in that it's mathematically incapable of solving the problem people have.

[perrygeo]

Bullshit. Show me the proof. Given that nearly all successful revolutions against oppressive powers have been backed by violence, I'm curious what you come up with.

There is one group, the insurance companies, which have unequivocally stated that they will physically harm other people if it yields marginally higher profits. That's not up for debate, that's the stated business model. It is extra-judicial killing for profit, backed by the state. And when the state abuses their monopoly on power, history shows that people will claw it back as violently as they feel necessary.

[tptacek]

The proof is that you'd be going to war over a 5% discount in prices, and it's based on an accounting of where the money in our health system goes. Sorry, the numbers here are easy to find and they are unforgiving.