Saying that blocking traffic can rise to the level of terrorism, as Smapti has done, doesn’t mean that all traffic blocking is terrorism. You really, really suck at either logic or reading comprehension. Or quite possibly both.
And no, the holocaust wasn’t terrorism, and neither were the nuclear bombings of Japan. More pertinently, neither was the firebombing of Tokyo, despite being intended to demoralise and cause fear.
Can governments or their agents ever terrorise? Sure, if they break their own laws to do so. Governments can, and have, also enslaved, killed and oppressed millions legally without it being terrorism.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” - attributed to Edmund Burke. Whoever said it, it’s apt. Those who stand up against unjust laws are the heros. Not terrorists. And Smapti can go fornicate with a cactus.
Or else I think that one can violate a law without hurting innocents, even if it “inconveniences” others. Like “trespassing and disrupting business”. Or “blocking traffic”. :rolleyes: (If that’s the case, then PennDOT has to be the biggest fucking terrorist organization alive)
That and I’m not such a weaselly coward that I wouldn’t risk my own hide enough to unlock a fucking gate to let loose a group of slaves.
Calling any traffic-blocking “terrorism” is diluting the term anyway, is it not? Getting stuck in a massive jam is among the most frustrating common experiences, perhaps infuriating for some when deliberately induced,* but who feels terror?
Though I noticed some New York drivers stopped by “I Can’t Breathe” demonstrations opened windows or got out to express support for the cause.
The laws prohibiting them from stockpiling weapons and having sex with preteens, and the general authority of the federal government, respectively. Why is their decision to stand up against what they believed to be immoral less heroic than that of the lawbreakers you do admire?
You said that all Civil Rights protesters who disrupted traffic were terrorists. You said nothing about any intent to coerce government into acceding to demands.
You’re an alien species – most people intrinsically understand that most humans have a moral system and a sense of justice that extends beyond the law.
And McVeigh was just protesting the laws against blowing up a building full of people? Fucking moron.
First, this question reveals your fundamental lack of a functioning adult capacity for sociomoral reasoning. Secondly, you can’t just assert that all people breaking laws are protesting. Finally (and your immature sociomoral development will prevent you from understanding this), where your behaviors restrict the fundamental human rights of others (e.g., life and liberty), they are not heroic. You don’t get to just kill people or have sex with children.
Since you won’t understand quite why that is so, just take it on authority.
So you see no moral or ethical difference between peacefully protesting against civil rights violations and driving a truck filled with explosives into a federal building, housing a daycare center, to mark the anniversary of a federal raid you disagree with?
There is no common ground I can have with someone who cannot perceive those differences.
I agree. But not everyone does. You can’t assert that people have the right to ignore laws they think are immoral unless that right applies to everyone.