No One is “Against Vigilante Justice on Principle”

Andrew Anglin December 13, 2024

Previously: Luigi Doesn’t Have to Go to Prison – The People Can Choose to Let Him Go Free

There is a whole movement of people in the government and media talking about how they are so opposed to Luigi Mangione taking out a fat cat corporate terrorist because they are against vigilante justice generally.

Many of these shills are “right-wingers” or “libertarians.” None of them will say that it is only through bribing the government, and the Obamacare system, that UnitedHealth was able to become the massive company that it is. The company is worth nearly 15 times as much as it was when Obamacare was implemented in March of 2010.

As their profits increased, they also increased their government bribery campaign.

In the United States, there simply is no way to distinguish between large corporations and governments, and anyone who supports these corporations is de facto supporting the government. There is no clear left-right line to draw here.

But when it comes to the shills, they are not even admitting that they are taking a side, but rather claiming that they oppose all vigilante justice on principle.

In reality, no one has such a principle.

Does anyone actually believe that Josh Shapiro would be condemning vigilante justice if someone did an extrajudicial killing of the Ayatollah?

The “right-wing,” Josh’s cousin Ben, has also condemned the execution of Brian Thompson.

Obviously, these Shapiros would support a vigilante killing their enemies, just like everyone supports vigilantes killing their enemies. The only people condemning Luigi are people who support the American Empire’s system of corporate and state power coming together to dominate the world for the benefit of a tiny elite class which contains a drastic overrepresentation of Jews.

With the Shapiros specifically, you might ask what the difference is between a vigilante street killing and Israel’s actions all through the Middle East, which have been declared illegal by the rest of the world. With that you would be getting into the nature of law and power, and you would have to eventually come to the conclusion that Israel is able to kill people in other countries because they have the power to do that. This gets into an interesting question about the nature of power and the “rights” of individuals in relation to states. The ultimate and probably difficult reality is that no one actually has any “rights” beyond what they are capable of doing, and the IDF only has more “right” to kill people than Luigi Mangione because they are capable of it. A state that offers its citizens various “rights” is only capable of doing that because it has the ability to commit violence.

That’s a bigger issue, however, which is largely beyond our scope today. The immediate issue at hand is a clip of Jesse Waters AKA “Gay Tucker Carlson” who condemned Luigi for being a vigilante before in the same breath saying that he hopes a vigilante kills him in prison.

This is nonsensical tripe. He’s against vigilante killings but he thinks vigilantes should be killed by vigilantes.

That’s all of these people whining about Luigi, who are all faggots.

I’m aware that much of the support for Luigi is coming from the left, but that is actually good. Why would anyone on the right be against leftists having the correct position? This is the same bullshit that Ben Shapiro did with the anti-Israel protests: “You should support Israel because the left is against them.” This is not the way adults form opinions.

The correct way to form an opinion is to ask whether something benefits you and your personal agenda. If this is the way you are thinking, you are not going to make a judgement call on the morality or lack thereof of vigilante killings, you’re going to ask: “Well, who are the vigilantes killing?” All of this stuff about morals and principles is just bullshit for plebs. Morals and principles have to come from a rational place that is not abstract, but based on ones own interests.

Ask the Shapiros or Jesse Watters how they would feel if a Russian vigilante took out Vladimir Putin.

Meanwhile, outside of Jews and their shills, what about Gary Plauché, who in 1984 killed the man who kidnapped and raped his son? Is there anyone who is opposed to that? Plauché did zero prison time, by the way. In the same year, Bernhard Goetz shot four blacks who were hassling him on the New York subway, and despite crippling one of them, only served 8 months in jail. He was widely supported by the public.

This is a complete joke, this idea of “our principles and values mean only cops and the military can kill people.” No one believes in it and anyone claiming to believe in it right now is simply a shill for the medical industrial complex. Further, they are probably also just generally uncomfortable with the idea of vigilantes targeting elites, and the masses of people considering that justice can exist outside of the legal system.

From a religious perspective, it is fine to say “murder is immoral.” Certainly, a society should not allow murder. But the response to that in the Luigi case is that the health insurance companies are killing people constantly, and the government, who is paid off by the insurance companies, refuses to stop them.

Everyone has to come up with their own view on this. I think it’s fair to say that everyone would prefer to live in a society where the government represented the masses of people instead of a minority elite, where the government did not accept bribes from corporations, and collude with corporations, against the masses of people. Unfortunately, we do not live in such a society.

I’m Not Endorsing the Killing

I’m not endorsing the killing of Brian Thompson. I do think he deserved it, and I don’t think Luigi should be punished, but I will not endorse murdering people on the streets.

Again, no one wants to live in a society where people feel so helpless and so incapable of receiving justice from the government that they start killing people. Unfortunately, through the democracy project, the ruling elite of the United States have created a system where the masses of people have no ability to petition grievances, and the secular nature of the state means that it has no guiding principles to which it has to adhere. Any principles the state does have are constantly shifting, and there is no way to hold the government accountable for anything.

It would be ridiculous to create a situation like the one we have in America and expect that the population will not become radicalized and ultimately become violent. It’s basic cause and effect.

What you are going to see, as the gap between rich and poor continues to widen, and the government continues to get more and more lawless, is that the elite are going to further militarize against the population. This means more cops, it means more suppression of speech and crackdowns on dissident movements, it means more elite enclaves where the rulers are protected from the peasantry.

It’s not nice. It’s not a good future. But it is the inevitable result of democracy and secularism, an out-of-control government that is not accountable to anyone.

© Copyright Daily Stormer 2024, All Rights Reserved -- Join the Daily Stormer site chat for future updates in case of further domain seizure.