this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
972 points (98.6% liked)

memes

10677 readers
2674 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 3 days ago

they also charged martin luther king jr, nelson mandela, and gandhi with terrorism too so he's in good company.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 89 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Terrorist is often a boogeyman label for freedom fighter.

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 52 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Yep.

This and virtually all countries were founded by people who would fit the definition of terrorist.

How history remembers you is solely on the basis of how successful your "terrorism" was.

George Washington is a very well regarded terrorist in modernity.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 22 points 4 days ago

History is written by victors, not terrorists

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I've had this issue in a story I'm writing, because one faction in this story is fighting for a cause that's essentially good, but they've become extremely jaded by lack of change and have resorted to extremely violent measures. So it's obvious the government they're fighting would call them terrorists, but a hundred years later, history should view them with reserved optimism. It's hard to categorize how the narrator and heroes should view them though, since the heroes don't necessarily directly cooperate.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 66 points 4 days ago

It amuses me that the media has no idea how to spin Luigi into the villain of this story.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 39 points 4 days ago (4 children)

It means Italians aren't white.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 22 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Italians, like the people that populate Italy, don't think of themselves as white. They see themselves as Italian.

Americans of Italian descent have a complicated relationship with "whiteness". White is not a biology. It is a malleable group designed to keep people labeled black underfoot.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 14 points 4 days ago

Finally we have an answer

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

the funny thing about Sicilians...

Screenshot_20241218-233958_Firefox

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I don't consider him a terrorist because I don't consider what he did as a political action.

[–] Burninator05@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago

I agree and also see lots of other acts that are political not get tagged as terrorism.

[–] synae@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 4 days ago (4 children)

How's that? It seems very political to me

Unless we're doing a "I didn't see nothin" bit, that's cool too

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Luigi didn't make any political demands. He just said this CEO was a bad man and so he killed them.

[–] synae@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

No specific demands, but this was absolutely not only about the man Brian Thompson, and very much about larger political and economic issues in the country.

...If the manifesto is to be believed, anyway. I understand not everyone trusts the veracity/provenance of it, and that's a reasonable doubt to have.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I saw the Manifesto and I didn't see any socioeconomic political theories, just an apology to the police but "it had to be done."

If it said "The system of privatized health insurance is evil as a result of failure of legislation to restrain the actions of an industry" THEN that would be political, but it didn't say that at all.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 8 points 4 days ago

My understanding is that Luigi did not publish the manifesto, and that it was discovered by others later. If that's true, then the manifesto itself is not particularly relevant to anything criminal. The message on the bullets could be considered relevant, but I don't see how that alone would be proof of intent to terrorize.

[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The reason for "it had to be done" is political.

Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.

He explicitly states that he does not have the "space" nor the qualification to lay out what you want him to lay out, but he pretty much says what you said he should've said for it to be political: "Privatized health insurance is corrupt and greedy, we've known it for a long time and nothing has been done to prevent or stop it, thus I took a more violent approach to do something about the corruption and greed."

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (13 children)

There are a lot of murders and I'm sure every single non-negligience murderer thinks theirs had to be done, mate.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 38 points 4 days ago (5 children)

I mean, it was inarguably violence, and that violence seems to have a political motive (since changing or reforming the healthcare system is considered a political issue), and there is an element of using fear to further that end (since he would obviously have known that he cannot realistically change everything by himself or even just shoot every health insurance CEO, but shooting one while featuring a catchy phrase to make it clear the motive was being fed up with the health system, potentially makes all the other such CEOs and people in similar positions afraid that the next guy to try this might go after them next, and that more might be inspired seeing the shooting). Id argue that it does technically fit the term. People are just so used to that term being used alongside causes that they have no agreement with that they think it can never apply to a good one, or consider if it can ever be justified.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 49 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

I'd argue the US for-profit health insurance system is state sanctioned terrorism of the civilian population, for profit.

What greater way to terrorize a population than to deny them and their families healthcare, under the threat of bankruptcy? How about the threat of bankruptcy either way, whether they're insured or not?

The industry kills 30x 9/11 every year, bankrupts 500k, while stealing 500-700 billion from the population (compared to the public systems of the developed world). At the very least, it's financial terrorism and extortion.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 4 days ago

The point is that terrorism is only applied when it’s convenient for the ruling class. Hate crime murders are similarly politically motivated but don’t get the terrorism label.

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Isn't this a straight "eye-for-an-eye" revenge killing?

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

He was wealthy enough to have no problems paying for all of his surgeries without insurance, tbh. His dad is head of Mangione Enterprise which owns and operates a lot of real estate including large resorts.

He had a Bachelors in Engineering and a Masters in Computer Science.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 28 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I never noticed that Spongebob's shoulders change position on his body when he raises his arms.

[–] Mr_Fish@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago (2 children)

So does that mean his shoulders are actually inside his torso, and he just has really long upper arms?

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 8 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I was unable to find any images from the show where he didn't have sleeves, so they must be part of his body. Maybe they just slide around on the sides of him.

[–] Infynis@midwest.social 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

He doesn't have bones (except for in gags), so he doesn't actually have shoulders anyway. He's just squishy

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 3 points 4 days ago

no his arms have TWO ELBOWS EACH and his finger bones are doubled with claws inside the flesh of his hands so he can quickly regenerate in case of traumatic injury he's a monster

[–] stinky@redlemmy.com 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

jesus christ imagine his skeleton

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

He is a sponge. He has either no skeleton, or that weird soft one where no piece links to each other.

Spongebob canonically has a skeleton, we see it multiple times. Maybe its cartilage like a shark.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

is accused of saying "Delay, deny, depose, you people are next

Which is.... illegal now?

Free speech for me but not for thee, huh?

The real terrorists are the CEOs and the US government

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago

Technically, he is a terrorist, since he targeted a civilian for political or ideological reasons. Doesn't change the fact that his victim was absolute scum.

load more comments
view more: next ›