this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
972 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

66892 readers
5037 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kofe@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Gonna disagree with the anarchist viewpoint because physical damage to inanimate objects can still cause PTSD, battered spouse syndrome with enough incidents over time, etc. It's the threat of danger that matters.

Just because it doesn't fit your ideological view doesn't mean people are lying by looking at it differently

It’s the threat of danger that matters.

Correct! It is the threat of danger that matters. Domestic violence as you described is threatening and abusive, and therefore violent.

Is it the same thing when the property is owned by a company, not a person?

Is graffiti terrorism? It's property damage. It can be ideologically motivated. If someone had spray painted the cars, instead of lit them on fire... would it still be terrorism?

Who was threatened here?

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 10 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

Yep the idea of terrorism bad is honestly kinda overly simple. Can it be bad? Sure especially if you don't have a specific target but well the IRA, American Revolutionaries, and Zapatistas have shown that there is a good way to go about it. The term of the day is damage minimization.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

Yep. Nobody (okay, very few people) want to burn Teslas, or make car bombs, or dress up as indians and throw a shipment of tea into the Boston harbor, but when you live in a state where the government is no longer governing for the people (even if the people knowingly, or unknowingly selected that government), ignores it's citizens or even actively harms them, then you don't have much choice. You have to defend yourself.

[–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Surprisingly, Star Wars is a great example of this. A rinky dink political group (rebels) blowing up a military installation (death star) is terrorism. That does not mean the action was unjustified.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

Terrorism that succeeds is called revolution.

It's not terrorism if it's war.