I’m talking about the human, not the employee.
They’re one in the same, he had power, he could have changed things. He MADE the decisions he did, he CHOSE to pump up those denial numbers and profits at the expense of human life. Nobody is forced to be a CEO.
Fuck. Him.
That’s a one-dimensional reduction of a human being. I’m sorry, but I’m just not that closed-minded.
Imagine defending a sociopath and then having the utter gall to claim the moral high ground.
Tim Walz is a sociopath? He’s who I’m defending. I didn’t write a single nice thing about the CEO, only that his death likely devastated his family and politicians should be respectful for the sake of his loved ones.
You haven’t actually suggested any way in which the guy’s work and behaviour could be viewed “three-dimensionally”. While I can agree that discourse especially online slips into dehumanisation of (real or imagined) enemies too easily… this is really not a case where this is the incorrect approach.
Edit: Regarding the guy’s family, I can agree that they did not deserve the death of the father/husband. But that does not really concern the guy by himself, his own moral character, it’s someone else’s problem. When a criminal gets sent to jail or executed, does anyone really give a crap about how much his family will suffer from that? Not really, the criminal is assumed to be a morally independent being that can tell right from wrong by himself, and his failure to do that is his own.
I agree, It is really sad for the family of this guy, and I feel bad for them.
That being said, I feel WORSE for the millions of families who have lost a family member due to this CEOs sociopathic decisions.
I think you put it really well with the criminal comparison. This CEO was a criminal, just one that was above the law of the US, who was never going to be brought to justice for his crimes in any other way.
