740
goals (slrpnk.net)
submitted 3 months ago by blibla@slrpnk.net to c/memes@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] grue@lemmy.world 52 points 3 months ago
[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Terrorism doesn't have an agreed upon definition, we've charged people with terrorism for occupying a forest, we've also done it for flying a plane into a building. The only unifying factor is a political action the government doesn't sanction.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Which is ridiculous and should be called out as such. Meanwhile we're letting grown men with guns threaten kids over religious ideas.

It's like we all forgot what terrorism actually is.

[-] poVoq@slrpnk.net 9 points 3 months ago

It has a clear definition. Maybe look it up some time?

[-] grue@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

In the absence of consensus my opinion prevails (because I said so), and I say the thing OP referenced doesn't count as terrorism. Anyone who disagrees with me is, to put it simply, wrong.

(Occupying a forest sure as Hell doesn't count either, by the way -- and that's one I can speak about with particular authority, being a resident of a nearby neighborhood and personal acquaintances with some of the people involved. Frankly, the Atlanta Police Department and Georgia State Patrol are the terrorists here: their actions have not been legitimate enforcing of laws, but rather the acts of a gang trying to claim turf to build their jackbooted-thuggery theme park.)

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip -3 points 3 months ago

I disagree. The governments try to make all terrorism sound evil, and they call anything they don't like terrorism. The word needs to either stop being used (which isn't going to happen) or associated with as many good and relatively peaceful things as possible as well. As long as the state has a monopoly on terrorism and anyone labeled a terrorist is viewed as evil, the state has all the power on dissent.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Why the fuck would I accept their definition?

[-] Tiresia@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 months ago

Because by using their definition consistently you ridicule and defang the phrase, same as 'queer'. Even by your definition, there have been good terrorists like the abolitionist John Brown, so it is in everyone's best interest to stop acting like terrorism is worse than fascism.

this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
740 points (98.2% liked)

solarpunk memes

2902 readers
400 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS