AndromedaCeline

Long post warning lol.....

The Dateline special didn't really reveal anything new. If anything, it felt like a recap for the general public who haven't been following the case closely. However, what stood out to me was the consistent tone of disgust and confusion surrounding the murder (again nothing new), paired with the repeated attempts to humanize BT.

The reason I bring this up specifically, is because I think it's important to address this in more detail, especially after what happened outside of court with those 3 idiots during the last hearing. The conversation around why this murder has had such a huge impact is getting muddied and losing the plot. A lot of people, especially those who support Luigi, seem to struggle with reconciling two things at once: recognizing the murder as a terrible act while also understanding why so many people sympathize with the anger behind it. Here's my interpretation of how we as supporters can remedy that.

As I was watching the episode, Lester Holt asked the legal fund fundraiser organizer, Sam Beard (Bear? sp?), a very simple question:

"Did BT deserve to be murdered on the street?"

They started struggling and bumbling to answer it, eventually giving a sort of non-answer deflect, that didn't really make sense. Honestly, it was frustrating to watch for me. These are the moments where the message needs to be loud and crystal fkn clear. Whether you're standing with press on the courthouse steps or on national TV, people need to know exactly why this case is important. If supporters can't articulate their position clearly, it becomes easy for the opposing entities (like Dateline!) to distort it causing confusion, and confusion kills momentum in any movement.

So, here's how I would answer that question.

"Did BT deserve to die?"

My Short Answer:

No.

That's it. The answer is simply no.

No matter your view on the case, Luigi, or health insurance, BT did not deserve to die. He was a cog of a larger system that rewards profit over people. The real issue is the broader capitalist system we live in that encourages harmful business practices, not just one individual.

Here's the Long Answer/In Depth Explanation:

No matter how you feel about the alleged killing, Luigi, or the healthcare system, BT did not deserve to die. Simple.

Now before you jump down my throat for saying that, please note, this is NOT a sympathy post for BT or people like him. It's just a recognition of a larger reality that we all need to lock in on sooner than later if we want real, lasting change.

For real supporters, this was not some celebration of an innocent guy dying or a blind hatred for anyone who has CEO as a profession. However, where I think most supporters get confused is that they treat BT as if he was the sole villain, rather than a more visible representative of a much bigger and corrupt system. The reality is most of individuals like him, are just one of many cogs, operating within systems that reward the very behavior. The word system here is key. What is a system in this case? It's a group of connected individuals that make decisions and work together to achieve a particular purpose or produce a certain outcome. An outcome that consistently is favorable to those who primarily benefit from it.

The "system" that keeps getting mentioned is Capitalism. Lets just rip that bandaid off now. We all live under capitalism. That's not some pseudo political tiktok buzzword. It's a fact. At its core, capitalism rewards profit, growth, and returns on investment for the select few who benefit from it. In many industries and from certain positions of privilege, that's not necessarily controversial. The problem is what happens when that profit driven mindset expands and colonizes areas for the public good, like healthcare, housing, education, and food (to name a few). Areas that are essential for average people to survive, and are basic rights for ALL human beings, but especially those who are already paying taxes to facilitate those benefits in society in the first place.

Since the 1970s-1980s, when Reagan and neoliberalism first took off, profit focus initiatives have increasingly infected the basic needs of our everyday lives. And everything from our nightly news to the movies we watch, to the music we listen to, encourages us to abide by this economic system for the "greater good" even increasingly at our expense.  The result is that we are conditioned since birth to celebrate capitalism and what it values: Endless growth, record profits, soaring stock prices (The Dow is over 50,000 right now, guys!), billionaires, rag-to-riches success stories, and of course the highly revered and coveted position of CEO. And a lot of us do, without question, exchanging our liberties for the blind misguided fantasy that one day we will be just like them. Never ever asking ourselves how they got the money to afford all of that first place. 

What is the ethical and societal benefit of 10 billionaires? Hell, even just ONE billionaire, especially in a world where people can’t afford to eat? How do companies make record profits during a recession? During a pandemic?? Why do so many workers face layoffs or financial struggle while the companies they helped become profitable continue to do thrive?

Those questions rarely get asked or answered by the powers that be.

That's why I think as supporters, focusing entirely on BT misses the point. He wasn't the system of capitalism itself. He didn’t create it. He was just a cog within it. A big cog, sure, but still one part of something much larger and complex.

The clearest example of this is what happened after his death. Like any broken cog, he was replaced almost immediately after, I think within a week or two. UHC kept operating business as usual. The other predatory health insurance industries kept operating too.  The incentives that shaped his and other CEOs decisions remained exactly where they were. Sure, this murder caused their stock to drop and they are still fighting the negative press to this day (which something at least, that's great), but the reality is they have the profits to outlast and the PR to outmaneuver all of this backlash in the years to come. In other words, despite this bump in the road, they'll be fine, unless we start targeting the true underlying problem of why they exist in the first place.

So when I say BT didn't deserve to die, what I mean is that most people like him, operating and benefiting inside this capitalist system aren't waking up every morning thinking about how more efficiently and effectively they can hurt others. There's no evil mustache twirling plan for people like him. Often their money and proximity to power insulates them from truly seeing any of the consequences of their decisions. The people’s lives they affected get dehumanized and reduced to report percentages and numbers on a spreadsheets. They don’t ever see the harm they cause. So as a result, they don’t see themselves as monsters. Nor do the people in their lives. Even most of the general public don't even see them as monsters. They don’t understand all the love for this murder and "hate for the victim"...because, well, why would they?

No one can see their privilege. And the higher up in society someone gets, the easier it becomes to lose sight of the human impact of their decisions. That’s why the system is designed that way. To hide the consequences and so those individuals working within it only see the benefits, all so this system can continue to thrive for the few who benefit. Success of the employee gets measured by growth and profits. The Shareholders/Investors/PAC Donors, [Fill in Private Funding Entity] reward those results. Bonuses get handed out. Careers advance. Backs are patted. Rinse and repeat this across ALL political and business sectors. NOT JUST HEALTH INSURANCE. This is VERY important part to understand.

Meanwhile, the everyday people harmed by those profit driven decisions remain invisible. Just necessary collateral on the road to endless growth and profit for the few. But in nature do you know what we call entities that thrive on endless growth? We call them cancer. We call them...parasites. And the "few" that facilitate this will always reward their agents of capital (whether it be a CEO or the President), and will always use their money and influence to steer the public's discord to view their endless pursuit of profit as nothing but virtuous.

So this is why someone like BT can be viewed by his friends and colleagues as a kind, humble, hard-working fellow (he probably was) while simultaneously being part of a system that causes enormous and reckless harm to others. Those two realities exist at the same time.

And that is the part I think Dateline and other bs docuseries largely miss, and also what a lot of people on both sides are missing in this conversation as well.

We are talking about political and economic systems that have not centered on public wellbeing for a long time. And this is not new. This did not just start with Trump or just "the republicans". It is about how ALL major political and economic institutions for decades in this country consistently put profit ahead of people and how that negatively shapes nearly everything in our very lives.

In that context, BT becomes less of an isolated story and more of a reflection of a much bigger structural issue. One that does not excuse or simplify the murder, but does explain why people are reacting so strongly with all kinds of opinions, yet the conversation keeps getting muddied and more confusing as this trial goes along.

The point is BT should not have had to die in order for the powers that be to pay attention to the needs of their people.

If institutions were doing what they are supposed to do, regulating harmful business practices and prioritizing public health and wellbeing (or just simply ending capitalism), we would not be here trying to make "sense" of something like this murder at all. And we would not be calling the alleged murderer a hero. I think BT's blood is just as much on their hands as the one who (allegedly) pulled that trigger.

Overall the Dateline episode, was just one of many paid advertisements for Empire. It was less interested in examining the structures that created public outrage and more interested in reinforcing faith in the institutions themselves, by trying to still gloss over that this was just a senseless act of murder instead of a desperate cry for help. This is why the message needs to be crystal clear from us, the supporters, because entities like Dateline are just a mouthpiece for the very institutions we are fighting against. They are not going to investigate or incriminate themselves. They are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

The stench of propaganda in this episode was strong. From the framing of the "senseless" murder as some fringe event, to the circle jerk admiration for the asshats in the NYPD, to pride over the ever expanding Orwellian surveillance state in our cities, the episode's message felt clear:

Thank you ❤️! I know I haven’t wrote in a while, but I liked this ask, so thought I would weigh in.

There could be a lot of reasons why someone gravitates toward alumni networks, especially when they're new to a city or trying to build a social circle. I've done the same thing myself. Connecting with people from your alma mater gives you an immediate point of common ground, making conversations, friendships, and professional connections easier to establish. Alumni events exist largely for that purpose. People attend them to network, make friends, share experiences, and sometimes help one another with career opportunities.

Ivy League schools, in particular, have strong networking cultures, which is part of what makes them so prestigious and sought after. While it's fair to criticize some of the privilege and exclusivity associated with those institutions, that doesn't mean everyone who attends them is elitist or obsessed with status. For many people, the alumni network simply functions as a familiar community and a source of connection.

Some people have described him as shy, even though there are many examples where he seems the opposite. To me, he seemed like a social person, yes, but one who was more comfortable connecting through shared interests or experiences than approaching complete strangers. Thats relatable. Alumni networks provide an easy entry point because there's already something in common. You can skip some of the awkward small talk and build rapport more naturally.

That's why I don't think the fact that he reached out to fellow alumni necessarily says much about his values or motivations. If prestige and status were truly what he was after, there were plenty of places he could have lived and worked that would have offered more influence, wealth, and recognition than in Hawaii. He had the status, credentials, and intelligence to pursue a very conventional American path to success, but he didn't.

https://www.tumblr.com/andromedaceline/808895113882402816/from-this

It’s a great take (although it’s still a speculation for now). Thank you for answering. And I am curious of what do you think: If Luigi gets life sentence do you think he will keep to himself or do interviews, write a book or allow to make a documentary from his point of view? Or if he goes out one day or maybe even walks free soon (who knows, don’t come at me, it’s just WHAT IF) do you think he will completely disappear and start over (understandable tbh) or he will tell his story and try to help others in whatever ascpect?

I'm curious on your take on this and want you to know that I appreciate your blog. So far for what I have read/seen here, when you speculate, your doing in respectfully. It means a lot especially if people speculate on someone's life without being at least respectful, forgetting that the person they speculate about is also a human being. Just so you know. (And sorry for my ask for being so long).

Thank you! Appreciate you engaging with me! You ask great questions! ❤️

After this is over, will he go public or say anything?

Honestly, I don’t really know. I’m not fully familiar with how all of that works legally. It probably depends on what kind of sentence he gets and how strongly the Thompson family pushes back on him speaking out. Son of Sam laws generally stop inmates from profiting off their crimes, but they do not automatically prevent someone from speaking about their case. That said, there could still be gag orders, restrictions tied to his conviction, or even additional civil lawsuits that might limit what he is allowed to say. So it is hard to predict how that would actually play out.

If he is allowed to speak after everything is over, my guess would be maybe a one-and-done, big tell-all interview. I do not really see him writing a book, even though he is clearly a writer. Not just because of the profit issue, but also because the whole process of promoting and marketing a book feels out of character for him. It seems more likely he would choose a single interview to just answer questions and tell his story, without it coming across like he is trying to sell something. It would also let people see him and hear him for the first time, telling his side of everything, which I think he has for sure wanted to do for a LONG time. Especially after that small nod he gave at the end of the December hearing when asked if he had something to say. IDK, a one-and-done interview feels more like something he would do. A book feels too complicated and way too cringe, IMO lol.

Also if he were to go public, I think there would be heavy limits on what he could actually say about the crime. A lot would depend on the kind of message he wants to put out. There is no way authorities would allow him to justify violence or encourage any copycats, so I don't think it's going to be the interview most would want him to have. Just something very basic, surface-level, and heavily focused on his pre-crime whereabouts and reasoning.

If he were given a platform, there would almost certainly be conditions attached, especially on any mainstream institution still beholden to the capitalist status quo he was trying to defy. And again, I doubt the Thompson family would want any ongoing celebration of BT's death, so they would likely push back hard on him speaking at all or what he's allowed to say about it. Because of all that, anything he says publicly would probably end up being far more controlled and measured than people might expect.

It is also interesting to think about what the long term legacy of all this will be and how he may or may not change over time. I think some people hope he eventually has some kind of realization about his mental health and maybe shows remorse. But it is just as possible that he does not, and stays stuck in his ways, regardless of whatever consequences come after the trials. Right now the goal is to prevent him from spending the rest of his life in prison and/or facing the death penalty. I think he knows, either way, he is not walking away from this without serving serious time. So it will be interesting, years from now, to see how this experience shapes him and who he becomes, especially if he ever chooses to speak publicly.

That said, if he does serve his time and is somehow released one day, I would expect him to disappear from public view. My guess is he would return quietly and be absorbed back into the Mangione family circle, where they would likely keep him in check and everything private from then on, much like they seem to be doing now. I think he would just have a simple life and avoid the public eye, but again, that depends on how much prison wears on him and where his headspace would be upon release. Would he still trying to get his message across and fight the power? Or did would he feel he sacrificed enough, and now wants to live the rest of his life in peace? Time will tell, but I personally think it will be the latter. We'll see.

Maybe, but I don't know.

I think of a pick-me as having two main traits:

Someone who is desperate for male attention.

Someone who puts other women down for not acting like them, or who brags about how different or desirable they are compared to the "others" for male approval (e.g., “I’m not like other girls,”, “Girls are too much drama, I prefer hanging out with guys.”).

She seems insecure and self-centered, but I’m uncertain whether she specifically seeks male validation. I think those insecurities make her gravitate toward the wrong guys, resulting in a perceived connection that might not actually exist. It’s unclear if that’s due to naivety or a need for validation. While this can resemble “pick-me” behavior, they don’t automatically make her one.

Oooo great question!

Something I always found interesting was the fact not one of the people he encountered throughout his life ever said anything bad about him. Not one bad or unpleasant encounter. No arguments, fights, awkward energy, or no outspoken exchange. Even when he wasn't feeling well, he was always kind, loving, fair, great listener, great friend, just all around an amazing person.

Now, on the surface you can easily read this as he's just one of the most perfect, wonderful humans on earth, which yes, I don't doubt that being true. Or also that they are not going to publically share the negative bits for the sake of preserving his reputation currently. All true. But, just to play a little bit of a devil's advocate, I think you could loosely read that as someone who is nice, yes, but is also possibly an extreme people pleaser.

People pleasers are someone who feels a strong need to be liked, accepted, or approved of, often at the expense of their own needs, feelings, or authenticity. They are someone who gets really good at reading the room, reading others energy, and becoming whatever version of themselves feels easiest for that particular person to like. This can show up as laughing when they are drained, going along with things they are not fully okay with or feel like, or downplaying their real feelings to keep the peace. After a while, this can become exhausting and emotional taxing, constantly wearing a multiple masks for multiple people at any given time. All to stay palatable and easy to get on with, while inside they are quietly worrying that if they show up as their full, unfiltered self, they might not be accepted the same way. I know this, because, I am one too (takes one to know one lol).

So I think part of the reason not one person has anything negative to say and why he may not have found "connection" is because he was masking his true self.

As a child, whatever defiance he had in him, was probably quickly managed out at home, and when he was in public, he was groomed to always be a "good boy". Always have good manners, don't talk back, don't do anything to damage the family reputation. Don't embarrass us. Especially as Italians, I'm sure they had to endure and exhibit a lot of respectability politics over the generations to secure stability, upward mobility, and show they were the "good immigrants" to the elite white power establishments there. That kind of environment can teach you early to manage your emotions/authenticity carefully and stay within the lines.

I think when he started going to Gilman that intensified. It stopped being only about being the good, nice kid and started feeling more like survival and social currency. Boys (especially rich, competitive boys) can be mean, and they can immediately tell who's one of them and who's not. He was probably constantly navigating a minefield, almost like a game, where he had to always stay on top, always be the smart one, always one step ahead, just to prove he belonged there. I'm sure he was exhausted and anxiety ridden from it.

By the time he got to Penn, especially within a fraternity, it was just apart of this personality at that point. He was a masking pro. The connections you make in those spaces can genuinely shape your career and opportunities, so there’s a lot riding on how you’re perceived. You’re expected to project confidence and excellence at all times so people see you as someone worth investing in. Even if some of those values or pursuits aren’t things you personally care about, they become important because they matter to the people around you, so outwardly they have to matter to you too. It can start to feel like you’re performing a version of yourself that fits their expectations, rather than actually being yourself.

When he got to Stanford, I think a lot of those same habits followed him, but shifted to accommodate the new groups of people he was around. Being farther from Maryland probably gave him newer perspectives, but the people pleasing and the masking did not just disappear because he changed coasts.

Out there he seemed to shift to a very protective, loving big brother under his mentor role. I think about his friendship with Adam and Katy. I think about those text messages he sent that mentoree (don't know their name) where he was explaining how busy he was, working sixteen hour days, mentoring, apologizing for not even have time to say goodbye. The tone felt almost overly apologetic, overly careful. Like he could not stand the idea of someone being hurt or offended by him simply missing a goodbye (which is of course absolutely sweet, to be clear). That constant need to smooth things over, to make sure no one feels slighted, is also apart of that people pleasing mindset. "I'm sorry" becomes almost a reflex. You start apologizing for everything, for taking up space, for being busy, for having limits. To the people around him, he likely came across as nice, gentle, unassuming, the kind of person who is easy to like. But that does not always capture the whole picture of who someone is on the inside. His real self may very well have included those qualities, while also holding opinions, beliefs, and perspectives he might have felt others would not fully understand or relate to.

Then Hawaiʻi. New shift. Out there he becomes the comfort, the long walk, late night talks, cuddle bear guy. It feels like this is the first time in his life he's received more attention from women than he had before. That kind of shift could have felt new. And the new attention from all the beautiful hotties around him in this island paradise can be really validating, even a little intoxicating.

Not saying he was out there being a f***boy player. More that he may have enjoyed the warmth of being wanted, of being the reliable one, of having a certain status in the group because he was always so available: Need to talk? Need to vent? Need someone to hype you up? Need new ice cream? Need someone to watch sunsets with at Magic Island? Need someone to walk drunk you to the store at 1am for mochi? Call me! Day or night, I’m here for you! The more he showed up, the more people appreciated him, and that appreciation probably reinforced his role.

Disclaimer: To be clear, I am not saying he was fake or that his kindness was not genuine. It clearly was. It just stands out how often he was the one showing up for everyone else, being their rock. How no one saw or noticed any other sides of him except the one he wanted to show them.

But nobody can pour endlessly without running dry. At some point your cup empties, and you start scrambling to figure out how to refill it. You start losing yourself. By the time Kaitlyn came along, especially with everything he was dealing with physically, I think he was depleted, and just did not have anything left to give emotionally. It can hit you all at once, that realization that you have been living for other people your whole life, shaping yourself around what they need, and somewhere along the way losing track of what you actually want for yourself.

Even around those who likely would never judge you, it's hard to tell, it's hard to trust. Connecting deeper than the superficial can be very hard. That's a muscle you have to constantly work, it doesn't just naturally happen just from knowing someone for a long time or even living with them. You can be friends with someone for years, and never truly know them.

Being truly seen means taking off the mask, and for some people that can feel like losing control, which is scary. Control becomes the comfort zone because you decide what others get to see and what stays hidden. That sense of control feels safe. But the tradeoff is that real connection becomes harder. When you spend so much time being different things for different people, you can start to lose touch with who you really are. And if you are not fully sure who you are, it becomes difficult not only to find people who truly match your wavelength, but even to understand what that wavelength is in the first place.

It's not surprising that most of us find it hard to fully understand him or pin down his exact values, because he may still have been figuring them all out himself, on the journey to figure out himself. That could also help explain why he struggled to feel a sense of belonging with family or peer groups. Instead, he gravitated toward spaces that felt more outlier and fringe, searching for that connection in very different spaces from where he came from or where he was expected to belong all in desperation to find/explore others who might understand him.