His actions touched a nerve. If you want to try and smear the alleged manifesto, go ahead, but I don't think you'll be changing many minds. And by the way, there's no shortage of "writers from both ends of the political spectrum and points between" who broadly agree with its points.
Luigi is more popular than Joe Biden lol [0]. 60% of New Yorkers would acquit him [1] (100,000 sample size).
Your second link seems to be fabricated. I'd guess it's an invention of AI. A survey of 100,000 people is extremely large, and would be quite expensive to administer, and its source as given as "PoliticsVideoChannel", a twitter account with 200,000 followers. There's no link to the survey. My guess is, if it's based on anything, the Twitter account ran a poll which got 100,000 votes. That's quite different than a survey of 100,000 New Yorkers.
The social media section gives quotes from several accounts that I don't think exist. Like, it's the only result is you search "@JusticeSeekerNYC".
Given you were talking about people being duped by a fake manifesto I am not sure why you'd share this link.
I don't think anyone who has been on the internet the last couple weeks can argue in good faith against Luigi's broad popularity across left and right; that's why I didn't put effort into verifying the source. I still ought to have tried a bit harder there though.
Sure they will. We now have actual polling about him. He is extremely unpopular. The number we were working from upthread was 15%, and I found (real) polls where Hitler did better than that.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had noisy fans on the Internet! Rolling Stone put a glamor shot of him on its cover. People misread Internet fandom as popular support constantly. There is nothing too stupid or repellant for the Internet to create a fandom for it.
No, you just tried to imply that the "real" manifesto was somehow difficult to dismiss. That's the one I was referring to. It's obviously easy to dismiss --- it literally dismisses itself at one point, saying that other people understand the problems better than he does. I'd be interested in what led you to think it was strong.
"The poll, conducted by PoliticsVideoChannel". Heh.
> It's obviously easy to dismiss --- it literally dismisses itself at one point, saying that other people understand the problems better than he does.
That's a failure of both logic and reading comprehension on your part, I'm afraid.
It's honestly odd that you'd think this to be true. It reads as if you're a little too keen to find a 'gotcha'.
The alleged manifesto outlines that while there are more knowledgeable experts on the corruption and greed at play, who have been opining for decades, no one has taken action and the problems have remained. To reinterpret this as it "dismissing itself" is far from justified.
> I'd be interested in what led you to think it was strong.
I never said it was strong, or implied such. I said it wasn't as easy to dismiss as the proven fake manifesto, and I said that many people broadly agree with its points.
As an academic essay, or as a finished draft to try and justify murder, it has serious flaws. However, I think that if it were as easily dismissed as you insist, then at least one of the mainstream news organizations would have published it.
The manifesto claims that our health care system is responsible for our lower life expectancy, which is trivially falsifiable; the causes of the gap between US life expectancy and the rest of the G8 (spoiler: cars, guns, heart disease) are well studied. In fact, when it comes to the treatment of illness, we outperform.
That is his central claim. He murdered someone over it. It's luridly false.
> The manifesto claims that our health care system is responsible for our lower life expectancy, which is trivially falsifiable
No, it isn't. If you want to claim that all of those numbers are explained by heart attacks and guns, then you need to ask yourself how many of the gun deaths are due to poor mental health resources, and how many of the heart attacks could have been prevented with more equitable and affordable healthcare.
And if you still believe it's so "trivially falsifiable", then why do you think most Americans (and the rest of the world, for that matter) believe otherwise? US healthcare is undeniably a global laughing stock. We are the poster child for why capitalism in healthcare is an evil and stupid idea.
Our system works well for people with either a looooot of money, or premium insurance through their employment.
It doesn't work so well for the hundreds of thousands forced into medical bankruptcy each year, or the diabetics dying because they can't afford insulin, or the 27% of Americans who skipped medical care because they couldn't afford it last year [0]. 27%! That's utterly indefensible. No society can long withstand such stress.
It doesn't work so well for non-white infants dying in childbirth at shocking rates, or the families left destitute due to over-costed end of life care. Try telling the people who had their lives financially ruined because someone called a $4,000 ambulance for them that we outperform in healthcare.
Etc, etc.
> when it comes to the treatment of illness, we outperform.
On a dollar per dollar basis? Nope. To all citizens with any approximation of equality? Nope. If you have a high 7 figure net worth? Sure; glad you're alright Jack - but don't expect America to believe you when you say the system works.
I think we have more gun deaths because we have vastly more guns than other countries, and more car deaths because we drive a lot more. I think researchers broadly agree with me. But you do you; this doesn't seem like an especially promising discussion.
Yeah, most of the world sees that as a mental health issue. "Gun nuts" is the term most often used.
And, over half of all gun deaths are suicides, so I stand by my statement that better mental health services would greatly reduce the number of gun deaths.
> and more car deaths because we drive a lot more.
I didn't say anything about car deaths. That was you, and I didn't take issue with it. That said, the fact that road safety has fallen so far over the past couple decades doesn't speak well to our collective mental health.
> I think researchers broadly agree with me.
This is at least your fourth distinctly misleading appeal to authority in our short chat.
> you do you; this doesn't seem like an especially promising discussion.
The social media section gives quotes from several accounts that I don't think exist. Like, it's the only result is you search "@JusticeSeekerNYC".
Given you were talking about people being duped by a fake manifesto I am not sure why you'd share this link.