What, no, using violence is like the only qualifier to “terrorism” that everyone agrees on.
Now, we can - and should - discuss what violence means and the forms it takes in society. But actual physical violence is pretty universally agreed to be the key qualifier for a terrorist.
Never said that. 🙄 Don’t put words in my mouth. I quite literally said don’t mistake it as pro-Musk and here you are doing that. Obviously there is a difference between domestic violence against a spouse and violence against oppressors, don’t you agree? Violence is not inherently negative.
I’m saying intentional property damage is violence. I did not say defacing Teslas is terrorism. All terrorism involves violence. Not all violence is terrorism.
I think that’s a pretty narrow definition of terrorist. My mind went to the beliefs he preaches.
What, no, using violence is like the only qualifier to “terrorism” that everyone agrees on.
Now, we can - and should - discuss what violence means and the forms it takes in society. But actual physical violence is pretty universally agreed to be the key qualifier for a terrorist.
If it was universal the fascists wouldn’t call spray painting a Tesla terrorism
Intentionally damaging property is considered violence, yes. (Don’t mistake this as some sort of pro-Musk statement.)
Truly there is no difference between blowing up a passenger bus and graffiti.
Never said that. 🙄 Don’t put words in my mouth. I quite literally said don’t mistake it as pro-Musk and here you are doing that. Obviously there is a difference between domestic violence against a spouse and violence against oppressors, don’t you agree? Violence is not inherently negative.
Tell yourself whatever you want, mr vandalism is terrorism.
I’m saying intentional property damage is violence. I did not say defacing Teslas is terrorism. All terrorism involves violence. Not all violence is terrorism.