this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
576 points (99.0% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

11133 readers
2221 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 29 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

If that's the definition, then I think it's textbook not at all terrorism. One of the standard definitions of violence, and the one that I agree with, is using force to hurt a person or living being. In other words, you can't use violence against an empty car dealership in the middle of the night. So it's not violent.

The target is the company owned by Elon Musk, and he is a member of the government. In other words, the act of inflammation is a protest against the government, not against civilians.

It depends on the arsonist, but I don't see these acts as ones that are designed to make people fear anything. Rather, they are designed to help people band together and fight against Elon Musk and his evil Nazi ways.

And then you've misidentified the goal. I think one of the goals, other than helping people band together, is to hurt Elon Musk's company economically. Now you might argue that people want to inflict economic costs upon him because of related political goals, but now you're getting into indirect reasoning, which would allow you to argue that anything, any act at all, or not acting in the first place, counts as terrorism.

[–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 43 minutes ago (1 children)

Assume I somehow manage to blow up that obelisk in Washington DC. Would you consider this terrorism, even if no person got hurt?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 17 minutes ago

The relative risk of trying to do that is such that you are highly likely to injure someone. If no one got hurt in that type of attack, it's by sheer luck.

Also, not a soul thinks people attacking unpurchased vehicles is a threat to escalate to hurting people.

It's a crime, but not everything is 'terrorism'.

[–] SaltSong@startrek.website -3 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

In other words, you can’t use violence against an empty car dealership in the middle of the night. So it’s not violent.

Enough damage to that dealership costs someone money. That's harm.

Maybe not a lot of harm. But it's harm.

[–] ThomasCrappersGhost@feddit.uk 1 points 32 minutes ago* (last edited 32 minutes ago)

In the U.K. it’s criminal damage, not sure what the USA exact term will be, but it won’t be terrorism.

[–] LoveSausage@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] SaltSong@startrek.website 1 points 1 hour ago

It is if you're using the definition provided by the person I'm replying to.

[–] And009@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 8 hours ago

Depends on the motives and way it happens. That is a valuable perspective but reality could be grim.