Summary
Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers are pushing to classify vandalism against Tesla as domestic terrorism.
Trump declared that those damaging Tesla dealerships would face terrorism charges, calling the company “a great American company.”
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and others urged the FBI and Attorney General to investigate alleged Democrat-linked NGOs behind Tesla attacks, though no evidence was provided.
Greene may have violated House ethics rules by advocating for Tesla while owning its stock.
I hate Elon and I don’t even disagree with targeting Tesla. But let’s be real. Mass targeted vandalism and especially arson are clearly forms of violence. The victims of this violence are civilians and the purpose of the violence is to achieve political goals through instilling fear.
Agree with the actions or not, that’s terrorism.
If people started targeting and burning down costcos for being woke/DEI, that would be terrorism for the exact same reason, not because the ideology is different.
People need to stop pussyfooting around the label and accept that words mean certain things. The issue is not whether or not it’s terrorism. The argument should be whether or not the actions are justifiable.
It’s like whinging about whether or not we say “Osama Bin Laden was killed” or if the person who shot him is a “killer” because killing in general is bad/wrong.
Now the government response of categorizing certain people vs others as terrorists matters. What it means for people resisting Trump matters. But those are different arguments.
Buddy. This is pure rage. Terrorism is calculated. And comparing burning a Tesla to Osama Bin Laden is fucking laughable.
I wasn’t comparing Tesla to Osama Bin Laden? I was making an analogy to clarify my point of calling an obvious spade a spade. Terrorism doesn’t have to be calculated, it just has to be politically motivated. I happen to agree with the political motivations and stance of the violence in this case. That doesn’t change what it is.
And what is an analogy?
Terrorism by it’s definition needs to be calculated because it’s required to be in the furtherance of a specific outcome. You can’t have that without it being calculated.
Those who make peace revolution impossible make violent revolutions inevitable.
It is bad practice to post links without also providing quotes from the source to support your claim. You are wasting the other person’s time.
It’s George Washington, his entire life is the support to their claim
You know, the founding father who lead the army during the Revolutionary War?
I thought a link to a George Washington with the phrase “political violence” was self explanatory.
After 9/11 terrorism gained a much more negative connotation I think. Idk fully about what it was like before since I wasn’t alive but in Deep Space Nine you literally have a character who said she was a terrorist and that’s not really seen as like an inherently evil thing like it would be in the current day. I think people understood the nuance back then that sometimes terrorism ends up being justified when you’re fighting for freedom against an oppressor.
