A dictionary definition of a moral compass is a set of beliefs or values that help guide ethical decisions, judgments, and behavior, an internal sense of what is right and wrong.
A dictionary definition of broken is something that is no longer whole or working correctly.
As has been reported regularly and with great public interest since early December, Brian Thompson, the CEO of United American Healthcare Insurance Company was ambushed, shot and killed while attending a business meeting in New York City.
After reading a recent commentary authored by Adam Panucco and posted on Montgomery Perspective on the aftermath of that assassination, I suggest we are experiencing an emerging crisis due to a broken moral compass in American society.
Case in point are recaps in Panucco’s commentary of widespread reactions to the formal accusation of and trial for Luigi Mangione on his alleged involvement in the assassination of Brian Thompson. Panucco wrote in part:
“Celebrations of the murder broke out on social media almost as soon as the killing was reported. The then-unknown assailant had provided a public service by taking out a leader in a predatory and heartless industry, the killer’s fans asserted. The jubilation grew in fervor as each newly released surveillance video confirmed the original impression that the killer, still at large, was young and handsome. Once an arrest was made, the lionization of the suspect, reached a frenzy. Luigi”—always “Luigi—was the ‘hot assassin.’ Merchandise featuring his image and phrases from a handwritten manifesto he had carried with him sprung up on Amazon. A video projection of Mangione’s face was cheered at a rock concert in Boston.
A crowdsourced defense fund quickly swelled with donations. Wanted posters appeared in Manhattan with pictures of other corporate CEOs. The names and salaries of health-care executives were posted online. Private citizens who had helped with the manhunt were vilified as snitches, police officers involved in arresting alleged killer Mangione received threats.”
While these may be relatively isolated incidents, even more distressing are Panucco’s recap of public polling results on this matter.
“Over 41 percent of respondents supported the Thompson assassination, or were at best ambivalent about it. Nearly 16 percent of respondents were “unsure” or “neutral” about whether the killer’s actions were “acceptable or unacceptable.” A little over 8 percent of respondents found Mangione’s actions “completely acceptable.” Another 8.4 percent found those actions “somewhat acceptable,” and 9 percent found them “somewhat unacceptable.” It is not clear how “somewhat acceptable” differs from “somewhat unacceptable.”
Four of every ten Americans, in other words, will not unequivocally condemn the killing.
The younger the voter, the greater the level of support for political killings. Sixty-seven percent of voters aged 18 to 29 were ambivalent about or supportive of Mangione’s actions, with only 33 percent finding those actions completely unacceptable. Fifty-seven percent of voters aged 30 to 39 were unwilling to condemn the killing unequivocally, with only 43 percent finding it “completely unacceptable.” Democrats were nearly twice as likely as Republicans to find it either somewhat or completely acceptable.”
In closing remarks in his thought-provoking commentary, Panucco asks:
“What has gone wrong with Americans’ moral compass that so many could cheer the extrajudicial killing of an innocent man? That question has not been deemed worthy of exploring.”
I suggest what is wrong with America’s moral compass is simple.
Our moral compass is broken.
To the best of my knowledge this brokenness has not been deemed worthy of exploring.
It is imperative that we individually and collectively embrace the timeless principles contained in the United States Constitution, especially with regard to due process and the rule of law in America.
While every American has a right to hold and express their opinion, every American has a right and an obligation to point out and challenge misguided and hypocritical opinions that reflect a broken moral compass.
It is indefensible that anyone would support, celebrate, or glorify any accused killer who already has constitutional rights to:
An assumption of innocence until proven guilty
A properly processed indictment, i.e., a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime
Access to legal counsel and representation
Opportunities during a trial for cross-examinations
Verdicts on guilt or innocence on all charges
Opportunities to appeal all verdicts
That person does not have any right to act alone as the judge, jury, and executioner, thereby denying a murder victim the same rights, regardless of who he is or his occupation.
In his book, Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, “America is great because America is good. If America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
If America does not take proper immediate steps to address the consequences of a broken moral compass going forward, our society will not only cease to be good and cease to be great, but will also ultimately cease to exist.
David Reel is a public affairs and public relations consultant in Easton.
Deirdre LaMotte says
And I would be asking instead: what has happened to our moral compass when a felon and parade of horrors have been “elected” to the Presidency.
Scott Sullivan says
Je suis d’accord
David Taylor says
Please do not talk about what has haapened to our “moral compass” if you don’t have the honesty and integrity to also refer to the Biden family.
Deirdre LaMotte says
Gee, i had no idea that President Biden was a felon, i need to start listening to Fox!
Thanks!
s/
Tom Hill says
David–So logical and thoughtful. Sighting Tocqueville and his quote about goodness is hard to disagree with and makes one really look in the mirror. Thank you for causing us to take a hard look at our moral compass.
Bob Parker says
Mr. Reel,
I wholeheartedly agree with your (and presumably Mr. Panicco’s) assertion that our moral compassion is broken. However, while the younger generation(s) seem to more likely to not reproach the murder of the UHC CEO, i do not believe that they have less firm moral underpinning that do older individuals. Their responses likely reflect anxiety, and frustration, that unlike those older persons they do not see an economy that will allow them to move up in life. I also wonder how our political rhetoric promising “retrobution”, denigrating those who have contrary views, threatening prosecution and excusing criminal behavior by elected officials contributes to their angst, their ennui. If we really are concerned with this loss of moral guidance, our leaders in our community and country must lead the way and set the tone.
James O. Siegman says
I second your comment. I could not communicate the sentiment as eloquently.
I feel that the “lionization” of the shooter is perhaps a poor label. It is more an identification with any entity in the current climate of nonaccountability among the upper tier of Americans as they pursue aims that disadvantage those on lower tiers…an entity, human or organizational that possesses the temerity to strike in some meaningful way at the unaccountable. Murder is wrong. But the sentiments have arisen in response to those who have power over those who do not and who exercise that power in pursuit of greed or personal gain.
Reed Fawell 3 says
Well, said, James. In that regard, read the front page of today’s Wall Street Journal titled United Health’s Army of Doctors helped it boost Medicare Payments, and the follow on article titled UnitedHealth Executives killing is Crisis Control Test for Insurer’s CE0.
In addition, the killing of the CEO and the highly varied reaction to it by the public is merely an example of a very typical response built into human nature, both when reaction in groups and individually. We human’s judge of death by violence of our kind and our friends, far differently that that of strangers and opponents. This is why wars and their attendant rape, plunder, and pillage, followed by oppression and tyranny of the “enemy” thrives within human history, indeed is the norm, rather than exception. more close to home, would the reaction to Trump’s assassination attempt been different had Kamala Harris been the target. And different yet again, had assassin succeeded in killing either one. Human nature is wondrous and terrible, generous and malevolent, and far more often blind than not to such ugly realities in ourselves.
And how about the endless insults, trashings, and demonizing of Trump voters and supporters found regularly and still almost daily on these pages.
Kent Robertson says
It has to start at home. Now that secularism has become the norm in much of our younger generations, and our schools have stopped teaching students common courtesy and respect, (opting instead to discuss society in terms of race and injustice, and gender identity), it is no wonder that we have lost our moral compass.
Where/how do we start to rebuild that belief in our connectedness to each other, and to stress the protection of that connectedness through building strong interpersonal relationships?
It has to start at home, and be reinforced at school, in the workplace and on the playground. It has to be enforced on social media and the news media. Do we have the desire and fortitude to take the necessary steps as a society? Sadly, I doubt it, at least right now. How broken will we let our moral compass get before we make it a priority?
Jim Wilkins says
@Kent Robertson. The assertion that our schools are teaching solely about things like gender identity and “race and injustice” reminds one of the propaganda distributed by a Delaware-based organization targeting Talbot County schools. This is an unfortunate (and inaccurate) take on what’s going on in our schools. While I agree that mutual respect is a fundamentally important concept to be taught to students and undoubtedly is being taught, part of that mutual respect comes in acknowledging differences between people that are sometimes gender based. And discussions of race and injustice are long overdue and are issues that should no longer be ignored. If we are to have a discussion about our moral compass as a society that means everyone should be treated fairly and that means acknowledging and discussing the above issues not sweeping them under the rug.
Deirdre LaMotte says
You mention “ours schools have stopped teaching students common curtesy and respect”. And then say it must “start at home”. If you expect schools to “teach common curtesy” then we need to fund
the publics schools equally, not based on property taxes. And pay more for exceptional teachers. Personally, I do not expect that from schools as this is what should be taught at home.
But curiously, how to teach that from home when 77 million Americans believe a rapist and felon would
be perfect with the nuclear code. Maybe 77 million people need to rethink what common curtesy and respect is. It is not continuously calling one’s opponents four lettered words and that is just the start of the juvenile,
disgusting behavior by the “victors”.
Sorry, but that group all need deprogramming and we who are disgusted need a stiff drink to comprehend such obnoxious and
uncouth behavior.
You figure this out and solve on your side and perhaps we can all have a meaningful conversation.
Kim Cassady says
Amen1