The murder of Brian Thompson unleashes anger and criticism of the healthcare system in the U.S.

The news of the assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson has shaken not only the business world but also public opinion, generating an avalanche of reactions on social media. The initial moments of the tragedy were preceded by a disturbing mix of anger and jubilation. Information about his death, which was revealed in downtown Manhattan, unleashed a series of speculations, many of which pointed directly to the healthcare insurance industry. In a chilling turn of events, the murder became a symbol of widespread frustration toward a system that many perceive as oppressive and dehumanizing. As more details about the crime emerged, images of the shooter surfaced: a hooded individual who approached Thompson and shot him multiple times. The words found at the crime scene—“delay,” “deny,” and “depose”—resonated in many minds as a critique of the usual behavior of health insurers. This violence was not just an isolated act; for many, it represented a cry against a system that, in their view, had left too many people without the medical attention they needed. Online reactions were swift. From comparisons to the character in the movie "John Q" to satire about the insurance authorization process, the overall tone fluctuated between outrage and sarcasm. The public response was so intense that UnitedHealth Group's announcement of condolences received tens of thousands of reactions, an overwhelming majority of which were in the form of laughter. This phenomenon revealed a troubling disconnect between the business elite and the citizenry, a gap that seems to be widening. Amid this storm, many felt compelled to share their own negative experiences with insurance companies, creating a space where frustration became a kind of collective catharsis. The harsh reality of the healthcare system echoed in the stories that emerged, a reminder that the anguish and pain felt by many can be a direct result of decisions made in distant corporate offices. The parallel with the Gilded Age in the United States is undeniable. Back then, the concentration of wealth and power generated similar discontent that led to movements of resistance and acts of violence. The stories of industry magnates were accompanied by accounts of exploitation and suffering among workers. Now, in the contemporary era, political violence and social discontent seem to be resurging, fueled by a deep sense of powerlessness in the face of a system perceived as corrupt and indifferent to the well-being of the population. As political violence increases, so does distrust in institutions. The 2023 survey showing that a growing number of Americans believe “patriots may have to resort to violence” is a troubling indicator of the current state of society. The connections people are making between personal suffering and aversion toward business elites are becoming more evident, and the discussion regarding the legitimacy of violence as a response to oppression has found a new resonance in the digital diaspora. Modern technology, in this context, adds an additional layer of complexity. With access to information and tools that facilitate tracking and surveillance, it is terrifying to imagine how this capability could be used to perpetrate acts of violence. The possibility that these tools could be used for nefarious purposes is not just a dystopian scenario; it is a very tangible reality that many fear could materialize. Although history teaches us that violence is rarely the solution to social problems, widespread frustration could lead society to a boiling point. Instead of a cycle of reform and positive change, we may be looking toward a future of greater division and confrontation. The security of the elites could become a central issue, with executives barricading themselves behind ever-taller walls and complex security systems, further distancing themselves from the realities of everyday life for most citizens. Ultimately, as we continue to process the impact of Brian Thompson’s assassination, it is essential to recognize that the anger and distrust this tragedy has unleashed are reflections of a deeper pain. The structures that perpetuate inequality and injustice in access to healthcare must be addressed comprehensively, or we risk facing even more devastating consequences in the future. History has a way of repeating itself, and the echo of the Gilded Age continues to resonate in our contemporary society.