this post was submitted on 06 May 2025
619 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
69804 readers
3656 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- 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
view the rest of the comments
Terrorism is scaring/harming people to manipulate government.
Tesla is neither government nor their property damage is scaring people.
More trumped-up charges.
(It is hilariously fitting Trump the man and Trump the word fit so gand-in-hand)
this is meant to be read without the emotional loading to the words that we’ve been conditioned with: ie X is implicitly bad… these are just words, whose meaning has more depth than what they actually define
terrorism is
violence is
arson is violence
and this particular act of violence is intended to achieve political or ideological aims (musk is a political figure albeit not an official government employee, and this is in response to his public political acts)
now, i’d argue it’s not “against non-combatants”, but perhaps it is? is destruction of a persons property constitute violence against them? it’s at least psychological - trying to scare/influence for sure
let’s not kid ourselves though: it is what it is… it’s just ridiculous that this is what they pursue while pardoning jan 6 offenders… the issue isn’t that they’re labelling this domestic terrorism. the issue is that it’s singled out because fElon asked daddy dictator
Arson, its just arson.
So are we suddenly pretending Musk isn't a de facto government leader who might be manipulated by this? (Terrible wording, but y'all get my gist. I'm going hiking now.)
I mean, it depends on who in the admin you ask.
If you want to abstract it enough, hurting Tesla hurts musk, who unfortunately is the government.
Not legally he's not.
I don't see how that's relevant.
That only matters if it's enforced.