The Dec. 4 shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson ignited an unprecedented social media response, with alleged shooter Luigi Mangione becoming an internet phenomenon amid widespread frustration over America’s healthcare crisis.
As social platforms overflow with Mangione-themed merchandise and religious imagery, such as Jesus candles featuring his face, a deeply troubling narrative has emerged that frames this act of violence as a catalyst for change in a healthcare system long resistant to reform.
But in reality, nothing will change.
We’ve seen this cycle of outrage before. In the late 1990s, Americans revolted against Health Maintenance Organizations, which had become public enemy No. 1 for denying care to plan members in order to boost profits. By the mid-2000s, health insurers faced widespread fury for rescinding coverage after people were diagnosed with expensive illnesses like cancer. In 2013, insurers sparked another wave of public anger when they narrowed their networks, excluding major medical centers from their plans.
Each crisis generated headlines, congressional hearings and promises of reform. Each time, the system absorbed the outrage and carried on unchanged.
The unfortunate truth is that the same structural forces that have resisted insurance reform for generations remain firmly in place. Insurance companies continue to pour millions into blocking reforms, spending over $117 million on federal lobbying in 2024 alone to fight initiatives like Medicare for All and state-level public insurance options. Their influence runs so deep on both sides of the political aisle, funding both Democratic and Republican political campaigns, that even modest reforms face insurmountable opposition.
What makes the Mangione phenomenon different is that it represents the most violent form of resistance we’ve seen — and paradoxically, this violence only makes meaningful reform less likely. A recent poll found that 68% of voters consider the killing of Brian Thompson unacceptable, with sharp divides along generational and gender lines. When you add a moral debate about political violence to an already divided policy discussion, you don’t create change — you make it impossible.
The social media frenzy follows a depressingly predictable pattern we’ve seen repeated over decades. Public outrage flares hot and bright, generating intense but superficial engagement before inevitably fading into irrelevance. When the tweets stop trending and the memes lose their novelty, we’ll be right back where we started: facing the same broken system, now further divided by a debate over means rather than ends.
Real reform requires something far less dramatic than violence but far more difficult than viral outrage: sustained political organization. We need coordinated action at state and federal levels, coalition-building across party lines and pressure on elected officials that doesn’t fade when the news cycle moves on. The path forward isn’t through sensational acts or social media movements but through unglamorous work. Until we’re ready to commit to this long-term strategy, no amount of viral outrage — or violence — will bring the change we desperately need.