Luigi Mangione and the Flawed Definition of Terrorism

Sat Dec 21 2024

Politics, Not Code

Most of my blog posts focus on programming challenges, coding problems, and advice for new developers. But today, I’m stepping into the realm of politics.

This post was prompted by recent news that Luigi Mangione has been charged with terrorism.

The Definition of Terrorism

The Oxford Dictionary defines “terrorism” as:

The use of violent action in order to achieve political aims or to force a government to act.

In my opinion, this definition is overly simplistic. It doesn’t capture the deeper complexities surrounding the term’s use and the power dynamics it implies.

Public Perception of Terrorism

When people in the Western world hear the word “terrorism,” they often think of Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, or ISIS. These groups dominate media coverage and shape the public’s association of terrorism with specific regions and ideologies.

Why Do They Attack Us?

Let’s step back to examine the historical usage of “terrorism.”

I was in first grade during the 9/11 attacks. I remember the confusion and fear among teachers and students. As a teenager in 2014, I watched news coverage of the Sydney Lindt Cafe Attack and asked my mother,

“Why are they called terrorists? What do they want?”

Her reply:

“Because they want people to be afraid.”

Her answer reflected the social consensus but missed the political reality.

The media often portrays terrorists as “evil people who want everyone to fear them.” But as I researched these events as an adult, I noticed a recurring theme: the goals and demands of these attackers were rarely reported. The media prioritized the fear and chaos of their actions over the underlying motivations.

After extensive reading, I came to this conclusion:

They aren’t “Terrorists”, they’re “Enemy Combatants.”

Every so-called terrorist attack is accompanied by a declaration of war against the targeted country.

Examples

9/11:

In November 2002, Osama bin Laden wrote a Letter to America explaining why he opposed the United States. He stated:

Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.

The American people pay the taxes funding the planes that bomb us in Afghanistan, the tanks destroying our homes in Palestine, and the armies occupying our lands in the Arabian Gulf.

The Sydney Lindt Cafe Siege:

One of Monis’s demands was for the media to broadcast that

“this is an attack on Australia by the Islamic State.”

This demand was not widely reported at the time. A year later, reviews of the incident revealed it.

These incidents reflect a sad truth: citizens often forget their countries are engaged in ongoing conflicts.

The Mismatch Between Perception and Definition

The public’s perception of terrorism doesn’t align with its dictionary definition. The acts described above are acts of war, yet they’re labeled as terrorism. Why?

Governments often use the term “terrorism” to downplay the reality of being at war. By framing these incidents as isolated acts of terror, they prevent citizens from recognizing the broader geopolitical context. This narrative fuels racism and xenophobia, as media coverage disproportionately labels foreign adversaries as “terrorists.”

Back to the Modern Day

The case of Luigi Mangione exemplifies this misuse of the term.

Luigi is accused of murdering Brian Thompson, the CEO of United Healthcare. While Luigi’s guilt has not been proven, for argument’s sake, let’s assume he is the gunman.

Is Luigi a Terrorist?

Technically, yes. But socially, no.

The media’s decades-long misreporting has created a public perception that terrorism involves:

“Foreign military adversaries in the Middle East.”

However, the dictionary defines terrorism as:

The use of violent action in order to achieve political aims.

This vague definition means even minor violent actions could be labeled as terrorism. It raises questions:

• Is terrorism limited to physical violence?
• Can causing death indirectly constitute terrorism?
• Is vigilantism always considered terrorism?

Is Luigi a Vigilante?

Absolutely.

The bullet casings found at the crime scene were etched with “Deny, Defend, Depose”, referencing a book exposing the corruption in the insurance industry. This system has led to countless preventable deaths due to corporate greed.

As PolSci aptly puts it:

One person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.

Should Luigi Go to Prison?

Yes. Murder is murder. But Luigi’s sentence should reflect vigilante justice, not terrorism. It’s likely Luigi accepted the consequences of his actions before pulling the trigger.

Will This Lead to Change?

Unlikely.

The ideal outcome would be global recognition of institutionalized, non-physical violence and laws to prevent it. Examples include:

• Denying life-saving medicine to maximize profits.
• Misleading people into harmful decisions.
• Damaging ecosystems for monetary gain.

These acts indirectly cause deaths and should be treated as crimes.

While I remain hopeful for systemic change, history has taught me to be pessimistic.