• sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    To me its important to use words that convey specific meaning. If the meaning of terrorist has changed to something I’m not familiar with, I’d like to know.

    I believe you that Garak engaged in non-state-sponsored acts of terrorism. And perhaps the definition of terrorism should include some state sponsored acts, like perhaps KGB-agents roughing up people, or the FBI targeting civil rights groups. Or fucking ICE doing everything they’ve got going on. Dang language is hard. I think I’m changing my mind.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      My definition of terrorism would very clearly and unequivocally say that planting a bomb on a diplomat’s ship is an act of terrorism. That’s a very standard definition and straightforward case. The meaning has not “changed,” such an act would always have been considered terrorism.

      This whole question of whether it’s still considered terrorism when a state does it or whether we should call that something else, is just because you disputed that definition, saying that terrorism is when you harm the populace. I just pointed out that Garak also harmed the populace, and that Kira, who you do consider a terrorist, did not. Include acts conducted by states, don’t include them, either way, Garak did both.