Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

People cheering the murder of Brian Thompson is a bad sign for democracy

Police working on a sidewalk

Police officers investigate the scene where UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was fatally shot in Manhattan near a hotel on Dec. 4.

Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

For many people, America has become a country where nothing works. And that is very bad for American democracy.

Daily life is filled with frustration, disappointed expectations and routine indignities. And that is very bad for American democracy.

For millions of Americans, it is hard to imagine a better future. And that is very bad for American democracy.


These lessons were driven home in the wake of the murder of UnitedHealth Care CEO Brian Thompson last week on the streets of New York. That this could have happened in broad daylight in a busy city is shocking, but commentators were doubly shocked at the reactions to his death and the outpouring of anger that followed it.

They should not have been.

Some attributed those reactions to “the latent anger felt by many Americans at the healthcare system — a dizzying array of providers, for profit and not-for-profit companies, insurance giants, and government programmes. ….[C]ritics of the industry pointedly said that they had no pity for Thompson. Some even celebrated his death. The online anger seemed to bridge the political divide.”

They are right to note the anger registered in public reactions to the New York shooting. But they miss the mark when they say it was directed only toward the health care system.

The reactions to what happened in New York are much more than that. They are a real-time demonstration that America today is a very unhappy place.

It is unhappy because people experience the same kind of frustrations with their children’s schools, crumbling infrastructure, indifferent service providers, or their banks as they do with the treatment they receive from health insurance companies.

Before examining the problems those frustrations are causing for our political system, let me say a little more about the reactions to the murder.

On Dec. 5, The New York Times reported that the brutal killing of Thompson “unleashed a torrent of morbid glee from patients and others.” The Times went on to say that online commentary showed “a blatant lack of sympathy over the death of a man who was a husband and father of two children.”

It quoted one grotesquely witty comment: “‘Thoughts and deductibles to the family. … Unfortunately, my condolences are out-of-network.’”

Another source for the story said, “I pay $1,300 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible. ($23,000 yearly) When I finally reached that deductible, they denied my claims. He was making a million dollars a month.” Still, another captured the breadth of the anger surfacing after the killing: “This needs to be the new norm. EAT THE RICH.”

The author Joyce Carol Oates captured the essence of the reactions to Thompson’s death when she said, “The outpouring of negativity ‘is better described as cries from the heart of a deeply wounded & betrayed country.’”

Other evidence of those “cries from the heart” and the pervasive feelings of betrayal that Americans experience daily are easy to find. Just do an internet search using the term “frustration” and the name of a cell phone company, a cable provider, or a bank.

You’ll find things like this: “My elderly mother has Xfinity tv. It stopped working 2 weeks ago. She tried calling customer service, got a link texted from the automated attendant, then tried numerous times using the link to the automated service to get help. At some point she was finally put into a chat. She went through the troubleshooting steps, and it was determined that she needed a new cable box.”

“Someone was supposed to contact her to set an appointment but she never received a call or text. The next day she tried the chat link again but received an automated generic answer. Again she tried numerous times but finally was able to get into a chat. She was told there was no record of her contacting customer service so she had to go through the troubleshooting all over again.”

Or take one more example: “Verizon has absolutely horrible customer service. ... They pass you off to a different person each time you call, they don’t care about their customers at all. … [T]he things they’ve promised don’t happen, and if they say they’ll call you back, they never do. ... You will not get what you [were] promised and you will be very frustrated. … All they care about is getting their money.”

Sound familiar?

That exclusive focus on the bottom line is surely part of the problem, as customer service gets outsourced and customers are treated like problems that agents wish would disappear. But the situation is surely worse in 2024, compared to even a decade ago: We suffer from what the American Psychological Association calls “the lasting psychological impacts … of era-defining crises. An inspection of pre- and post-pandemic mental and physical health reveals signs of collective trauma among all age cohorts.”

The frustration and trauma help explain why the 2024 edition of Gallup’s longstanding survey measuring “satisfaction with the way things are going in the U.S.” found that “Three out of four Americans (75 percent) claimed to be dissatisfied.”

Who can blame them? Our infrastructure gets a D+ grade from the American Society of Civil Engineers. In education, “U.S students consistently score lower in math and science than students from many other countries. … [E]ducation rankings have fallen by international standards over the past three decades” because “government spending on education has failed to keep up with inflation.”

The United States ranks low in health care compared to other countries, in access, equity and outcomes. We rank at the bottom in health care outcomes compared to other developed nations.

And if you want good customer service, go to New Zealand, Canada or Norway, not the United States. You may even get a better customer service experience in Russia.

Finally, there is the problem of growing income and wealth inequality. Recall the “eat the rich” reaction to the Thompson killing.

“There is little that leaves people as pissed off and frustrated,” Mother Jones’ Michael Mechanic writes, “as the feeling that no matter how hard they work, they can’t ever seem to get ahead.”

Again no surprise. But all of this signals danger for American democracy.

Generations of political scientists have written rote about what they call “the economic and social prerequisites” of democracy. They note that when people are deeply dissatisfied with the conditions of their lives, they are ripe for the appeals of strong men and demagogues.

That is why Italian fascist Benito Mussolini could gain popularity by promising to “make the trains on time.”

Today in this country, Alana Newhouse argues, Americans don’t have to “Give up on our current institutions; they already gave up on us.” She asks whether education, housing, farming, cities and religion are all broken. Newhouse conclude, “Everything is broken” and “What used to work is not working for enough people anymore.”

Anyone who lives in this country knows that to be true.

Yet, as political scientist Damon Linker observes, “for the most part, the people who run our institutions have done very little to acknowledge or take responsibility for any of it, let alone undertake reforms that aim to fix what’s broken. That’s no doubt why angry anti-establishment populism has become so prominent in our politics over the past decades.”

Or as Maria Wagner and Pablo Boczkowski put it, "an angry and overwhelmed citizenry does not seem a good recipe for a healthy democracy.” Creating the environment for that return to health is no easy task. But one thing is certain: No one can Make America Great Again, or preserve our democracy until they Make America Work Again.

If we don’t want people celebrating when the head of an institution that leaves its customers angry and overwhelmed gets shot, and if we want American democracy to thrive, we need to take on the mundane, but essential, task of addressing the brokenness that the people of this country experience every day. There is no time to waste.

Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College.


Read More

The statue of liberty.

David L. Nevins writes how President Trump’s $1 million “Gold Card” immigration plan challenges America’s founding ideals.

Getty Images, Alexander Spatari

Give Me Your Rich: The Gold Card and America’s Betrayal of Liberty

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words, inscribed on the Statue of Liberty, have long served as a moral and cultural statement of America’s openness to immigrants and those seeking freedom. They shape Lady Liberty as more than a monument: a beacon of hope, a sanctuary for the displaced, and a symbol of the nation’s promise.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meet the Faces of Democracy: Karen Brinson Bell

Karen Brinson Bell

Photo provided

Meet the Faces of Democracy: Karen Brinson Bell

Editor’s note: More than 10,000 officials across the country run U.S. elections. This interview is part of a series highlighting the election heroes who are the faces of democracy.

Karen Brinson Bell, a Democrat and native of North Carolina, is the former executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, serving from June 2019 to May 2025. As the state’s chief election official, she was responsible for overseeing election administration for more than 7.5 million registered voters across 100 counties in North Carolina. During her tenure, she guided the state through 20 elections, including the 2024 presidential election held in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, as well as the 2020 presidential election during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Under her leadership, North Carolina gained national and state recognition, earning four Clearinghouse Awards from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, two national Election Center awards, and the inaugural Partnership Award from the North Carolina Local Government Information Systems Association.

Keep ReadingShow less
Social media apps on a phone

A Pentagon watchdog confirms senior officials shared sensitive military plans on Signal, risking U.S. troops. A veteran argues accountability is long overdue.

Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images

There’s No Excuse for Signalgate

The Defense Department Inspector General just announced that information shared by Defense Secretary Hegseth in a Signal chat this spring could have indeed put U.S. troops, their mission, and national security in great peril. To recap, in an unforced error, our Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President conducted detailed discussions about an imminent military operation against Houthi targets in Yemen over Signal, a hackable commercial messaging app (that also does not comply with public record laws). These “professionals” accidentally added a journalist to the group chat, which meant the Editor-in-Chief of the Atlantic received real-time intelligence about a pending U.S. military strike, including exactly when bombs would begin falling on Yemeni targets. Had Houthi militants gotten their hands on this information, it would have been enough to help them better defend their positions if not actively shoot down the American pilots. This was a catastrophic breakdown in the most basic protocols governing sensitive information and technology. Nine months later, are we any safer?

As a veteran, I take their cavalier attitude towards national security personally. I got out of the Navy as a Lieutenant Commander after ten years as an aviator, a role that required survival, evasion, resistance, and escape training before ever deploying, in case I should ever get shot down. To think that the Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President could have so carelessly put these pilots in danger betrays the trust troops place in their Chain of Command while putting their lives on the line in the service of this country.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza
An Israeli airstrike hit Deir al-Balah in central Gaza on Jan. 1, 2024.
Majdi Fathi/NurPhoto via Getty Images

A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza

Trump's 21-point peace plan for Gaza has not and will not go anywhere, despite its adoption by the UN Security Council. There are two reasons. One is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ultra-orthodox nationalist allies will not agree to an eventual Palestinian state in the occupied territories. The other is that Hamas will not stand down and give up its arms; its main interest is the destruction of Israel, not the creation of a home for the Palestinian people.

Democrats should operate as the "loyal opposition" and propose a different path to end the "war" and establish peace. So far, they have merely followed the failed policies of the Biden administration.

Keep ReadingShow less