Since the tragic events surrounding Luigi Mangione and Brian Thompson have recently captivated public discourse, I have seen some absolutely unhinged takes on this subject. So, I couldn't help but notice how this incident offers a perfectly sobering reflection of how accreditation systems and alienation intersect in ways that massively complicate our understanding of morality, identity, and resistance in contemporary society.
((Please remember that I’m not making moral judgments about either of these men. The focus is on the public’s interpretations of their lives and how they’re being portrayed in media narratives.))
In recent weeks, I've been working on a blog about this concept: Accredited alienation, as a way for describing the disconnect that happens when societal validation (through explicit or implicit accreditation) leads to estrangement from authentic identity or moral autonomy.
To sum up that post, Accredited alienation is the tension people experience when:
1. Their genuine contributions (work, effort, creativity, or advocacy) are validated or recognized through systems of accreditation.
2. But the recognition misrepresents or commodifies their deeper intent, purpose, or meaning.
3. This leads to a sense of estrangement—from their work, their identity, or the larger purpose they were striving toward.
The public’s reaction to this entire event has amplified the archetypal portrayals of both figures, largely through memes and online discourse. Thompson, as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, epitomized corporate success. He embodies the idealized outcome of contemporary social structures that explicitly prioritize wealth and power. However, his position as a leader in a now despised industry has also distanced him from public compassion. In most news headlines and articles, his name isn't even mentioned. Instead, he's consistently referred to as "UnitedHealthcare CEO."
Thompson’s role as CEO is seen as a symbolic representation of the greater systemic inequities in healthcare and has led him to be perceived as an archetype of “corporate greed.” Meme culture has further dehumanized him by reducing his individual identity to a simplistic representation of perceived bureaucratic authority. Comments sections on posts about this event are flooded with people criticizing others for sympathizing with him or his family due to his job role.
It’s important to note that this perception is independent of any knowledge of the personal contributions or policies he enacted regarding UnitedHealthcare. Understanding this distinction doesn’t negate the potential harm or malevolence caused by health insurers; it simply contextualizes the role of any CEO in the day-to-day operations of any company.
The health insurance industry’s current structure alienates both its leaders and the public by perpetuating values that conflict with the foundational purpose of healthcare: alleviating suffering and promoting well-being. The very idea that health insurance CEOs are individually responsible for deaths and suffering caused by the system's inefficacy underscores the failure of accreditation systems to bridge public expectations and corporate realities.
The reification of executives as symbolic figures in capitalist society echoes the roles of monarchs and religious leaders in previous eras. The assassination of a CEO, therefore, transcends the act of murder, becoming a symbolic event that reflects the public’s alienation and frustration with systemic inequality.
By analyzing this through SAT, we can see how accredited alienation is as systemic as much as it's an individual dilemma, rooted in conflicting frameworks of validation. As societal norms evolve, this dynamic presents a critical challenge: redefining what it means to be accredited as successful or a leader in industries that hold immense power over human lives.
Simultaneously, Mangione’s background as the valedictorian of a prestigious private school and an Ivy League graduate underscores his privileged social status. Yet, his alleged violent act and the subsequent writings found in his possession, signal a rejection of the very system that's accredited him. His alienation is both personal and societal, reflecting a rejection of capitalist values he once embodied and pursued.
This dichotomy reflects broader anxieties about the perceived failures of class mobility to address wealth inequality. Thompson’s journey, though meritocratic success, fails to inspire any empathy or admiration because it's tied to a system increasingly seen as unjust. Mangione’s privilege, by contrast, is overlooked or reinterpreted because his rebellion aligns with public dissatisfaction.
The tension between these narratives illustrates a shifting paradigm in social accreditation: success within the system is increasingly viewed as complicity, while defiance of the system (even from a position of privilege) is framed as virtuous. This dynamic underscores the complexities of class stratification and inequality in contemporary society, where public perception is shaped as much by symbolic archetypes as by objective realities.
For many, the title “CEO” is no longer synonymous with professional achievement and value creation but is instead emblematic of wealth hoarding, corporate greed, and a detachment from the struggles of everyday people. In Thompson’s case, his leadership of a company associated with denying coverage and prioritizing profits over patients made him a focal point for collective frustration with the healthcare system.
Before joining UnitedHealth Group, Thompson worked as a certified public accountant, as mentioned in his LinkedIn biography. He graduated from the University of Iowa in 1997 with a bachelor’s degree in business administration. He started working at UnitedHealth Group in 2004, where he held several positions over 20 years, becoming CEO in 2021. He didn't attend a private high school or Ivy league college, like Luigi. His career trajectory follows the typical path expected in contemporary society, yet his assassination is being portrayed as a powerful victory in the campaign against the evils of capitalist elites.
Wanted posters appearing in New York City since his death, naming other executives in the healthcare industry, serve as a testament to the public’s growing awareness and reification of class disparities. This shift reflects a deeper cultural recalibration of accreditation standards, where economic success is no longer sufficient for public validation and in some instances, is now grounds for public sanctions. Thompson's accreditation as a successful CEO was reframed through a lens of public dissatisfaction with systemic inequities, making him an avatar for the perceived moral failings of all of corporate America.
Meanwhile, social media has embraced Mangione as a counter-cultural symbol. Through meme-ification, he is lionized for his intellectual and physical attributes and positioned as a “hero” for acting against perceived injustice. This framing echoes SAT’s insights into how collective narratives shape social validation and norms.
But this also details how modern media reduces complex events to simplified narratives when media consumers prioritize sensationalism. Memes exemplify this by creating a feedback loop where humor and hyperbole obscure the gravity of events, so the social representation of the event begins to matter more than the actual event itself.
In the case of both Mangione and Thompson, turning their lives and actions into a spectacle just minimizes the human and moral implications, reducing them into consumable archetypes.
Mangione’s case highlights a paradox within SAT: the same system that accredits individuals can also catalyze their rejection of it. For those disillusioned with societal norms, actions like Mangione’s offer an extreme form of validation—earning recognition by defying expectations.
More importantly however, the meme-ification of the violence reflects a deeper level of societal alienation from moral responsibility. The humor and dramatization of the events obscure the tragedy of Thompson’s death and the gravity of the systemic issues plaguing the American healthcare industry.
The celebration of Mangione in memes reflects how genuine critiques of corporate greed can be trivialized or co-opted into a form of commodified resistance. The memes provide a cathartic outlet, but they offer little to challenge the underlying systems of power. Siding with Mangione through memeing becomes a performative act of resistance that’s more about aligning with populist sentiments than any genuine moral stance. It has simply become another trend for the masses as they seek validation on social media, indulge in endless entertainment, and embrace consumerism. Even corporations and businesses have joined in on the meme.
By accrediting Mangione as a hero, the public is validating his alleged violence as a legitimate form of resistance, while the actual broader systemic critique of corporate greed and a dire need for universal healthcare in the U.S., becomes lost in the sensationalism.
This is how accredited alienation creates a cycle where validation systems absorb and neuter resistance, reinforcing the spectacle. The public’s inability to form a cohesive narrative of resistance here reflects the alienating effects of capitalist realism. The memes just serve as fragmented, individual responses rather than collective action.
This event encapsulates the complexity of accredited alienation in contemporary society:
• For Thompson: His accreditation as a successful corporate leader alienated him from public empathy. Despite achieving success through traditional means, he died as a symbol of systemic inequality and the moral compromises of corporate capitalism. This reflects a growing public disillusionment with the notion of class mobility, where even those who achieve success through conventional means are implicated in a system seen as fundamentally inequitable.
• For Mangione: His alienation from the values of the same elite system that raised him led to an extreme form of rebellion that is both romanticized and trivialized by the public. In a media landscape eager to portray him as a subversive figure, his elite background paradoxically enhances his symbolic status. Despite the privilege that enabled his rebellion, its his rejection of the same system that accredited him that's actually being celebrated.
• For Society: The public’s response—swinging between humor, heroization, and vilification—reflects a broader sense of alienation from genuine engagement with critical analyses of systemic issues. Plainly speaking, this is what happens when people "don't talk politics" and prioritize critical attitudes over critical thinking.
The contrasting social recognition of both Luigi Mangione and Brian Thompson underscores the evolving perceptions of class mobility and wealth inequality and also reveals the profound cultural divisions affecting how success and privilege are understood and perceived in contemporary society.
It will be interesting to see how this case continues to play out, but I do think it's important to contextualize the social dynamics involved here. By applying SAT to events like this, we can gain a deeper understanding of how societal dynamics perpetuate archetypes, alienation, and polarization in modern narratives. As we consume and share these stories, we must remain aware of the forces shaping our perceptions and challenge the simplistic binaries they present.
If you like this blog, buy me a coffee! https://ko-fi.com/callmebryy
Comments