"Left Wing Or Right, I'm Pro- Violence"

The UnitedHealth CEO assassination was a self-defense killing

Daniel Penny is free. Defending white civilization isn’t against the law. It must be protected at all times: ignore all blackpillers, pretenders, and liars!

Over the last decade, the right has consistently supported white men committing violence, often against blacks, in self-defense or in the upholding of the social order. In some cases these were police officers, and in others, regular citizens either reacting to circumstances or actively engaging the agents of disorder. One major common denominator in every case was the media smear campaign, and in many cases outright lying, against the man committing violence. The right has taken up these causes as a defensive position in a wider racial war against white people and the empowering of criminal elements and social anarchy as a broader campaign to disenfranchise middle-class white voters, with the end-goal of leftist rulership in America. For some reason, some on the right-wing are suddenly in lock-step with the media, veritably doing its job for it, in the case of the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

One of the major pitfalls of internet media personalities is that they don’t feel they can afford to stay in their proverbial lane, that in order to maintain a presence in the torrent of “takes” and avatars spattering your timeline, they have to have an opinion on everything. So when a major media story pops up, they just take the same ideological stance that they use with everything else, based on their understanding of the situation at hand within the context of the current day. In some cases, this is very easy. Darren Wilson (the police officer who shot Michael Brown, kicking off the Ferguson riots) and Derek Chauvin were fulfilling their civic and professional duty apprehending and subduing large, out of control black men in the middle of committing a crime. Kyle Rittenhouse was defending private property - and his own life - from a violent mob who were in the days-long process of burning down a city, and Daniel Penny was restraining a psychotic, drug-addled madman who was menacing commuters. Even George Zimmerman was protecting his own life and, in his mind, the property of others (his is the only case in which the deceased was perhaps not actively committing a crime).

These cases are not only depthless beyond first glance, nothing about their context requires expertise, knowledge, or experience in any field whatsoever. All of these “perpetrators” were viciously smeared and lied about by a hostile media and shouted down by a demented, bloodthirsty horde of liberals, radicals, and non-whites who, ultimately, wish to cheer on blacks as their crimes continue unabated until society crumbles and they get to pick over the scraps of white civilization. But who, really, is hastening the decline and eventual fall of white society? Black criminals? Leftists? The permissive liberals who continuously vote in favor of policies that empower these violent agents of chaos? In part, yes, these people bear a large amount of responsibility for the situation. But there are people who commit crimes against whites and the middle-class at a scale no black civilization could ever conceive of even if given 1,000 years and free rein. Regardless of how it looks, black criminals do not have full institutional support to rapaciously exploit, impoverish, rob, and in some cases murder (through opioid prescriptions) working white people. Insurance company (and other) CEO’s do.

The right wing is especially keen on calling out black crime, it’s one of the very few issues all conservatives and right wingers along the spectrum can agree on. Normal people should have the right to defend themselves and their property, and when the need to do so arises it’s disproportionately in response to black crime. Fortunately, right-wingers remain united even if the criminals aren’t black. I can’t think of any instance in which a white murderer, spousal abuser, homeless drug addict, etc, has been defended by the right because he was white, and when the perpetrator or the cheerleaders of the perpetrators are leftists white people, the right spontaneously takes up position against them. So why, suddenly, is this unity not the case for Brian Thompsons murder?

The most likely explanation is that those denouncing the act simply don’t understand how health insurance works, and don’t see how even they themselves, regardless of their own wealth, are being pilfered by these companies. In that case, they don’t see Thompson as a criminal at all, and see this case as entirely disconnected from the others. Why can Kyle Rittenhouse take it upon himself to do the job police wont or can’t do, but a disgruntled citizen or a hitman can’t take out the perpetrator of wide-spread extortion? I’ve had a self identified “antifa” member tell me to my face the reason he doesn’t support Rittenhouse is because its not his place to confront violent mobs, its the job of the police. Whose job is it to confront high-powered CEO’s enriching themselves and their companies at the behest of the corrupt, illegitimate policies of the regime, which right wingers supposedly hate? You could argue “we didn’t support Obama, so Obamacare is not our fault,” but when Trump, ostensibly “our guy” got in power, he didn’t touch Obamacare. So either the support for the killing of the CEO is denounced because some on the right don’t understand how Obamacare works, or they’re disingenuously opposing the support due to factionalism: the right wingers they disagree with over this disagree with them on other fundamental matters, and this is just another way of distinguishing themselves from one another.

It’s also possible that these right-wingers identify less with working, middle class, or poor white people than they do with rich CEOs, thereby making this a class issue and not a racial one or, put another way, an issue in which they allow class to trump race. If that is the case, then these people aren’t really “racist” or “nationalist” in any meaningful sense, which of course means they’re not “dissident” right, they’re either equivalent to - a new breed of - color blind conservative boomers, or worse. And by “worse” I mean the most historically reviled class of person who has ever lived: the nouveau riche, the petit bourgeoise, consistently blamed for decadence and societal decline more than anyone else, including the Jews.

Considering the fact that America is basically a highly productive manufacturing facility for the nouveau riche and petit bourgeoise, this shouldn’t be surprising, nor is it necessarily a bad thing. The problem is that these people act like cutting edge radicals blade-running the razors edge of the arc of history, a vanguard of bloodthirsty fascists whose out of control testosterone levels have them foaming at the mouth for “aristocratic violence,” a return to classical manly virtues, and are chomping at the bit to sign up for the first private military contracting firm with a job opening. Yet at the first sign of violence against the regime, of someone acting like a man and taking matters into his own hands (yeah he shot him in the back but just admit the whole affair required huge balls), they retreat back to their true positions: garden variety 1950’s “law and order” republicanism. To make this case even more absurd, the victim here was literally a fat neckbeard, while the perpetrator was a handsome, fit, well-dressed white boy.

In many corners, the shooter is being denounced as a leftist, which we of course can’t know yet. The killers politics don’t matter, nor does it matter if he was a hired killer or an aggrieved customer, or the family member of someone who died because of denied coverage. He doesn’t look like he’s dying of cancer, or suffering any other chronic condition for that matter. The words “deny, defend, depose” written on the bullet casings raise many questions, creating the aura of a Travis Bickle-type avenging angel of death meticulously preparing his murder-gear to kill a perpetrator of societal crimes. Speculating on his motives is a fools errand currently, but some on the right are calling him an agent of chaos, equating his act with that of violent communists and anarchists, or that he is simply targeting the wrong person.

What they seem much more shocked by than the murder itself is the cheering it’s received from the masses, both left and right. It’s the murderers folk-hero status, rather than the murderer himself, which is really the problem. Once again the “dissident” right find themselves aligned with, among other things, the New York Times, the national mouthpiece for the nouveau riche and the petit bourgeoise. This seems to keep happening, from how offended they were by the hurtful language of big bad Kanye West to the murder of “innocent” Israelis on Oct. 7th, time and again we find those whose political views are supposed to be beyond the pale clutching their pearls right along with millions of cable news viewers and New York Times readers over the same issues. The Times is just as shocked and appalled that the left has been celebrating the CEO’s murder as the “right” is about other-right wingers celebrating it.

Those of us unmoved or slyly grinning over the murder of the CEO are doing so because we see him as not merely a symbolic figure being made to pay for a decade of extortion and the tangible lowering of the quality of life, but as a footsoldier of the regime, upholding and profiting off of their larcenous policies that are made explicitly to disenfranchise white working people. While this was in fact an act of disorder, the order it opposes is the very same order the right wing supposedly wants to see eradicated, the policy of an illegitimate regime whose apparent reason for being is the liquidation of the middle class and the abolishment of the means of sustainability for white people, the very group who has spent the last 80 years following the rules and upholding order.

For those who don’t know, Obama care was veritably a hand-out to private insurance. It was not conceived of that way, however it was reworked specifically by the insurance companies so that they could continue to profit despite covering more people. Obamacare consisted of a number of things, and unlike the vast majority of citizens and politicians, I’ve actually read it. I also read the ostensible republican counter proposal, which was more or less non-existent. Obamacare did initially include some rules that would by and large be good for a great number of Americans while not harming others. Obamacare got rid of the ability for companies to opt-out of coverage for “pre-existing conditions,” and it also required them to allow parents to cover their children up until the age of 26. These are good things that only hurt the insurers bank accounts. The mandate for coverage and expansion of medicare and medicaid was basically a disaster for everyone involved when it was first conceived. However, the insurance companies finagled their way into making it profitable for themselves, in part because they and their lawyers help write parts of Obamacare.

This is perhaps where some people don’t understand how Obamacare works. The expansion of Medicare and Medicaid is not covered by some government entity in which offices exist to process the claims and cover recipients, like some state-run insurance company equivalent where the actual “coverage” is carried out. Rather, these expansions were handled by the private sector, who either processes the claims as government contractors, or provides the coverage and is then reimbursed - to the insurance company - by the tax-payer. Through this expansion, several private companies have seen profits increase, in some cases greatly, and none moreso than UnitedHealth. In fact, over 30% of their revenue is generated by these claims, and Thompson grew their profits by 4 billion during his truncated tenure. And as anyone reading this knows, costs were further offset by raising both premiums and deductibles. So white middle class people ended up with the same medical care they’ve always had while they saw their costs increase exponentially. Instead of fighting the regime tooth and nail over this, the private insurance company helped them enact it in a way that ensured they profited. Therefore, they themselves are appendages of the leviathan sucking the lifeblood out of white Americans, the last redoubt of western civilization.

It is possible, however, that some on the right aghast over this killing and its support do understand this, in which case they must be lying, which is not out of character of course. Sure this was a handout to poor, lazy, unproductive, drug abusing, obese parasites who don’t deserve anything. But everyone knows this. All conservatives agree with this. Any idiot on Fox news can call these hand-outs and they have been saying just that for decades. It’s not even a discussion point really, so to accuse other right wingers of not getting this is a waste of breath. It’s on these grounds that they call cheering the murder “stupid,” stupid for supporting and agreeing with the undeserving recipients of tax-payer funded handouts. Well, there isn’t anyone on the right who thinks like this, its a phantom opponent. So there must be some other motivation, unless of course they are in fact too dim or disconnected from reality to be aware of the state of affairs outlined above, regarding Obamacare.

The end point of this argument is to denounce this celebration as “leftist,” just like the cheering of Hamas on Oct. 7th and the wish for Israel’s demise. According to them, this is another stupidity, we don’t understand that the leftists cheering and committing this violence, or the Palestinian and Islamic terrorists and soldiers opposed to Israel, don’t share our interests and would turn on us at the first chance. There are myriad problems with this, but fundamentally the problem with this line of argumentation is that no white man on the right is actually that stupid, no one who sees themselves as “right wing” truly aligns with the brown hordes, communist murderers, and Islamic terrorists. There simply isn’t any white man on the right making these arguments. At least, not one that anyone takes seriously. Rather, in most cases they wish to redirect righteous anger at infinitely spawning NPC’s rather than the final boss. In these cases, they’re typically just lying, misrepresenting a right wing anti-Zionist position with left wing “third worldist” anti-Zionism. While nothing could be further from the truth, this is a different issue than the one at hand, but bears mentioning because those on the right celebrating the murder of the CEO are being denounced as “communist,” the same faction that opposed Zionism during the cold war.

The simplest way to understand their mischaracterization of right-wing touting of the CEO murder would be that we suffer from “class envy,” and that his death serves as wish fulfillment for our resentment over their success. This is merely a projection on the part of the “dissident” right who are themselves strivers looking to identify themselves socially with not just the “rich” but with an even more haughty class, the intelligntsia, the one social sphere from which they are forever shut out, or have been up until very recently. While their pedigree, wealth, education, and success in their respective fields may allow them to live the life of the leisure class, their political views leave them forever out in the cold of the dinner parties, speaker circuit, book publishing, television interviews, and general attention from the famous and “in” crowd. With Trump around, all that has been changing, but still, they can’t push their political views too far or their chance to get invited as a talking head in some documentary, appear on Tucker, or whatever else it is they want (get retweeted by someone big?) is gone. So instead, they “punch right” to distance themselves from the unwashed horde of the “low IQ anti-semites” who sully their brand.

In many cases, they are lying. For example, the right-wingers who aren’t mortified at the death of the CEO are equated with George Floyd rioters. While it may be the case that we find ourself suddenly in agreement with the teeming communist hordes on this one issue, it’s common knowledge that we do not align with them at all in any general or consistent sense. The simple fact that none of us supported BLM and the Floyd riots, and the entirety of the right wing supported Kyle Rittenhouse, should tell you all you need to know about where we stand on these issues, and that our alignment with the liberals on the UntiedHealth killing is an anomaly of alignment of the sort that occasionally comes up. The thing is, those who disagree and denounce us know this. They point and scream during moments like this as a general smear tactic to discredit other beliefs we have, which they want to equate with brown people, communists, and the mentally handicapped.

The difference between right wingers, fundamentally, is over Israel and foreign policy, and this of course has a ripple effect that causes disagreements on issues that have nothing whatsoever to do with Israel. The health insurance industry in America in general, and the issue of the UnitedHealth killing specifically, are wholly unrelated to Israel, foreign policy, and “the Jews” as a boogyman. However, there is overlap between the parties disagreeing over this and parties who disagree over Israel because the parties happy about or unmoved by the UntiedHealth killing are concerned primarily with the exploitation and subversion of white people as a race. It has nothing to do with class, at all. In the case of the right-wingers who support Israel, their alignment with mainstream conservatives and moderate liberal on this issue is consistent and sustained. As long as their opinion on Israel remains the same over time, they will always align with the mainstream media and mainstream politicians.

Conversely, the anti-zionist right is explicitly not aligned with Islam or BLM on anything except in instances in which we happen to see white people being exploited and disenfranchised by the same people doing it to them. There is no equivalence in our political agenda with theirs, nor is their any equivalence between these groups, be they BLM, Hamas, or any others. BLM, for example, is explicitly our enemy here in America, but Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, and in the past Libya, Iraq, and Syria have never been the enemies of America and, were it not for Israel, we would never have to care or argue about them. But yet here we find ourselves in a discussion about the enemies of Israel when we are supposed to be talking about the CEO of a rapacious insurance company extorting money from the white middle class for reasons that have nothing to do with the white middle class. See how that works?

The reality is that the insane violent criminals roaming the streets who are black are there as beneficiaries of the regime, whereas health insurance CEO’s are agents of the regime, and white people should be just as free to protect themselves from the agents of “order” as they are from the agents of chaos, white, black, homeless, or rich. Assassinations like this don’t often happen in America, this is third-world tier levels of societal breakdown. But just like out of control black people are resultant from regime polices, so too are extortionist healthcare polices. What we must ask ourselves is who benefits from these policies, poor people? Or the private health sector? I choose not to look at this as some form of socialized medicine, but rather a money laundering racket in which white middle class tax revenue is filtered through unemployed black drug addicts and octogenarians on life support in ICUs and languishing in overcrowded/understaffed nursing homes, to end up in the pockets of the private “health” sector.

The killer of Brian Thompsons motives are irrelevant. Politics in all of these cases are irrelevant. The only thing that matters anymore is white survival as a race, and it looks like this shooting may have already made the industry blink. This is not an advocacy for violence, but it is an endorsement of white self-defense. Defending their race was certainly not in the minds of any of the men discussed here, but that is invariably what they ended up doing. But just as Daniel Penny, who acted against the order of the regime that wants criminals to roam our streets, the killer of Brian Thompson was also acting against the “order” of the regime that is crushing white people under its anti-white policies, little by little, year by year.

Daniel Penny is now free, giving us a sign that the leviathan is not as all-powerful as some would have us believe. While the murder of the CEO probably won’t lead to any major overhaul of the health insurance industry, the reaction revealed a deep-seeded and widespread discontent with the regime as it is, across all the political spectrum, which is unequivocally a good thing. It’s a sign that we are not happy with their rule, and it must be remembered that Obamacare is a liberal policy! You’re defending someone who killed a proprietor of one of the most hated policies in the last 25 years! Politics don’t matter in the Daniel Penny trial, and they don’t matter in the CEO shooting. There’s no right or left anymore. It’s Nationalism or nothing, and all enemies of white peoples are on the same footing. If they’re white themselves, then they are just as much race traitors as the coal burners the “dissident” right love to pick on. Like middle schoolers.

Theres a quote floating around (mis?)attributed to Yukio Mishima that reads “Right Wing or Left, I’m pro violence.” It is now clear this is just a funny meme, like everything these people “believe,” and apparently, Mishimas’s homosexuality is where their alignment with him ends. No matter. Acceleration is happening, many were invariably fated to be left behind.

Hail freedom, Hail Daniel Penny. Blackpillers infinitely BTFO’d

ADDENDUM: I’ve been instantly vindicated. The killer is a ripped handsome upper-middle class white man with an engineering degree from the university of Pennsylvania, not some dysgenic “agent of chaos” leftist freak, which should’ve been instantly obvious to anyone. His supposed manifesto about the health care industry reinforces my depiction of him as an avenging angel of death. My only misgiving about this is that it is all pretty “on the nose.” Does it glow? If it doesn’t glow, if this is all there is to the story, then the guy is a bit of a fool. He was arrested eating lunch in McDonald’s with the murder weapon - a reviled by the regime “ghost gun” - and the manifesto on his person. This seems like something the FBI would set up but in this instance I can’t fathom why or who they’re trying to smear, unless he just so happens to be a “white nationalist.” Could also be about demonizing ghost guns, but we have to see where it goes. Either way the detractors here look even dumber and more cucked than they already did

ADDENDUM TWO: this is supposedly a review he wrote about Industrial Society and It’s Future, more or less completely vindicating everything I wrote here. My description of this killing is exactly what it was. Note this story broke as I was writing this.

ADDENDUM THREE: a note was found on his person by police, not exactly a manifesto, and possibly planted. He claimed the money was planted, so what else. I’m rather convinced it was him, he wasn’t set up, and his motivations are what he says they are. Here a quote from the manifesto that couldve been a passage from this essay.

Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”