Brian Thompson's death was not just murder. It was terrorism.

(RNS) — When I turned 65 and became eligible for Medicare, I had to choose a supplemental health insurer. After careful research, I chose UnitedHealthcare.

Have I been pleased? That would be a strong word. "Satisfied?" More like it. "Resigned to the way the system operates?" Even more accurate.

Do I love the way some claims have been denied and others delayed? Hardly.

Would I have wanted any harm to come to its CEO, Brian Thompson, or anyone who works there? Hard "no."

I wish this were a universal response to last week's cold-blooded murder of Brian Thompson on a Manhattan sidewalk. That has not been the case. On Facebook and other social media, we found people saying he deserved to die because of their denied/delayed claims; people talking about his annual salary, refusing to weep crocodile tears over the demise of such a wealthy man; etc.

To quote Zeynep Tufecki in The New York Times:

The somber announcement by UnitedHealth Group that it was "deeply saddened and shocked at the passing of our dear friend and colleague" was met with, as of this writing, 80,000 reactions; 75,000 of them were the "haha" emoji.

On a prominent Reddit forum for medical professionals, one of the most upvoted comments was a parody rejection letter: After "a careful review of the claim submitted for emergency services on December 4, 2024," it read, a claim was denied because "you failed to obtain prior authorization before seeking care for the gunshot wound to your chest."

Some posted "prior authorization needed before thoughts and prayers." Others wryly pointed out that the reward for information connected to the murder, $10,000, was less than their annual deductibles. One observer recommended that Thompson be scheduled to see a specialist in a few months, maybe.

The term for this is "schadenfreude" — taking pleasure in someone else's misfortune.

Professor Tufecki goes on to cite historical precedents for this murder — violence during the Gilded Age, as well as political violence in contemporary America.

A recent Reuters investigation identified at least 300 cases of political violence since the 2021 assault on the Capitol, which it described as "the biggest and most sustained increase in U.S. political violence since the 1970s." A 2023 poll showed that the number of Americans who agree with the statement "American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save the country" was ticking up alarmingly.

Here is what sticks in my mind.

If we are talking about the schadenfreude that accompanies the killing of the rich and the privileged, let's go back to where this all starts — to the very beginning of modernity in the West — the French Revolution.

Then, let's jump to the Communists — to Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. Then, to the 1960s and the left's veneration of the Bolivian-Cuban revolutionary, Che Guevara, who seemed like a dashing romantic hero, but who was really a thug who killed innocent peasants in a failed attempt to recruit them to the Marxist revolution. (Che and Fidel Castro trained members of the PLO, which means that these charmers had Jewish blood on their hands.) Then, the late 1960s and early 1970s, with the violent Weathermen, who bathed themselves and others in what can only be called an ecstasy of rage.

And, from the right? You have already read Professor Tufecki's citation of increased political violence in recent years. Let's just go back to Jan. 6 — whose perpetrators are likely to be pardoned after Trump's inauguration. These are people who erected a gallows and were prepared to hang Vice President Mike Pence. There are people who wanted to murder Nancy Pelosi. There is every reason to believe such threats of political violence will continue, as Trump vows vengeance on his enemies.

"It's sad that Thompson's murder had to happen, but you need to understand…" "Sorry, not sorry."

Where have I heard that before?

On Oct. 7 — the Hamas attack against Israel — and following. "Yes, it is sad what happened on October 7, but you have to realize that Israel has been committing crimes against the Palestinians for decades." I am trying to discern what kind of mind rationalizes such acts of violence, mutilation and rape — not to mention the fact that Hamas somehow failed to mention the Palestinians during their rampage; neither was the phrase "two state solution" on their lips — rather, they exulted in killing "yahud" — Jews.

In particular, I am thinking about Professor Russell Rickford at Cornell University, who took the occasion of the Oct. 7 attack to announce he was "exhilarated" by it.

This attitude — not only critical of Israeli policy, not only critical of the existence of the state of Israel, not only critical of Zionism, but pro-Hamas — is very much a "thing."

My leftist friends and my anti-capitalist friends and my anti "anyone who makes a crazy big salary" friends and my anti-health-insurance-bureaucracy friends might choose to revel in the murder of an innocent man (whose innocence, of course, they debate). But, just as assuredly as they would condemn the violence of the far right, they should know that once you feed violence into a cultural system, it takes no prisoners. It just contributes to societal chaos, and you will be shocked to see who its victims might be.

The murder of Brian Thompson was an assassination and an act of terrorism. That it is an act of terrorism against a member of the prosperous, extremely well-paid class hardly mitigates its horror. In such a polarized historical moment, we dare not countenance anything that smacks of a class war, or a war against elites of any kind.

This is evil. Call it out.