this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
249 points (97.3% liked)

Asklemmy

44252 readers
1058 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
249
Why is there so little discussion on the history of anti-terrorism statutes in the USA as they're being brought against Luigi Mangione? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Everyone seems shocked at this. I personally felt a lot less shocked and more like I'd been waiting for this shoe to drop for 20 years. I've been waiting for people to notice the tools of the Iraq War being turned against American citizens for over a decade now.

I spent the better part of 2001 and on arguing against the PATRIOT Act and its codification of terrorism as a crime. Lots of people were against it (we were in the minority, obviously), pointing out how the PATRIOT Act would consider the Founding Fathers terrorists. They committed violence to achieve political ends.

Did everyone just forget that at one point there was actually a nascent conversation on why this was a bad idea, especially considering people warning that they would soon use these laws against their own citizens?

Why did these conversations stop? More importantly, now that Mangione is being charged with terrorism, why aren't the conversations beginning anew?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

State media (which are largely controlled by the capitalist class), corporate media (which are owned by the capitalist class), and most NGO media (which are funded by the capitalist class) aren’t going to talk about it. One should assume that corporate social media will algorithmically de-prioritize it.

We’ve talked about it here, though: Luigi Mangione charged with killing UnitedHealthcare CEO as an act of terrorism

That makes perfect sense.

  1. The murder of a CEO terrifies the bourgeoisie.
  2. The state serves the will of the bourgeoisie.
  3. The state charges the alleged murderer with terrorism.