Authorities Sunday arrested 57-year-old Vance Boelter following the largest manhunt in state history. He's charged in the targeted fatal shootings of Minnesota House DFL leader Melissa Hortman and her spouse, and the shooting of state Sen. John Hoffman and his spouse.
It’s not unclear to me why people feel differently toward the victims - what I’m pointing out is the inconsistency in how people react to vigilante violence itself. I’m not asking anyone to mourn a murdered healthcare CEO - though I do question the celebration of it. And likewise, I feel sympathy for the recently murdered politicians.
What I’m criticizing is the double standard in how the shooters are treated.
And it’s not really about political leanings specifically, even if there’s overlap. It’s more about the broader “us vs. them” mentality - where people’s moral judgment flips depending on which side they perceive someone to be on.
Okay this went a totally different direction than how you made it sound at outset, which you presented like an “our guy versus your guy” argument and why you’re reaping downvotes and people willing to challenge you.
what I’m pointing out is the inconsistency in how people react to vigilante violence itself
So then is this what your actual problem is, that there is any celebration of vigilantism at all?
I have a tendency to present my views in a provocative way, so I don’t exactly fault people for misreading me or my intentions.
that there is any celebration of vigilantism at all?
Pretty much, yeah. I think violence should, for the most part, only ever be a response to immediate violence - not a tool for political or ideological expression. I believe in due process, reason, and honest discourse as the means to influence those we oppose - not bullets, or even fists. So when people cheer for acts of vigilante violence, even against those they despise, I see that as both morally bankrupt and strategically self-defeating. It undermines the claim to the moral high ground and reinforces the very hostility many claim to oppose. We should hold ourselves to the same standards as we do others.
Mostly yeah.
It’s not unclear to me why people feel differently toward the victims - what I’m pointing out is the inconsistency in how people react to vigilante violence itself. I’m not asking anyone to mourn a murdered healthcare CEO - though I do question the celebration of it. And likewise, I feel sympathy for the recently murdered politicians.
What I’m criticizing is the double standard in how the shooters are treated.
And it’s not really about political leanings specifically, even if there’s overlap. It’s more about the broader “us vs. them” mentality - where people’s moral judgment flips depending on which side they perceive someone to be on.
Okay this went a totally different direction than how you made it sound at outset, which you presented like an “our guy versus your guy” argument and why you’re reaping downvotes and people willing to challenge you.
So then is this what your actual problem is, that there is any celebration of vigilantism at all?
I have a tendency to present my views in a provocative way, so I don’t exactly fault people for misreading me or my intentions.
Pretty much, yeah. I think violence should, for the most part, only ever be a response to immediate violence - not a tool for political or ideological expression. I believe in due process, reason, and honest discourse as the means to influence those we oppose - not bullets, or even fists. So when people cheer for acts of vigilante violence, even against those they despise, I see that as both morally bankrupt and strategically self-defeating. It undermines the claim to the moral high ground and reinforces the very hostility many claim to oppose. We should hold ourselves to the same standards as we do others.