752
Elon Musk says it’s trans people’s fault that cis people are burning Tesla cars
(www.lgbtqnation.com)
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
752 points (97.6% liked)
News
27971 readers
5425 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
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
no?
If i burnt down your house, with malicious intent, would that count as terrorism?
It's arson, plain and simple.
You could argue it was "done for political reasons" but if i did the same thing, because i disagree with your political views, and think you're a bad person, it's still not terrorism.
If i were to let's say, go bomb a planned parenthood, that might count as domestic terrorism. If it were a government building, that would most certainly be domestic terrorism.
Terrorism is the act of using violence or intimidation for political gain/control.
Hasn't the Trump administration repeatedly said that Musk has no official political role? Then how could an attack on Musk's property be violence or intimidation for political gain?
it isn't and can't be, tesla isn't a government agency. Even if musk was this is still equating tesla to be a government agency, or at least under the purview of it, in terms of security for some reason.
That's exactly what their motivation is.
a lot of people kill people for political reasons, doesn't make that terrorism. There's a specific branch of intentionally inciting terror with the use of violence FOR political means, that's actually defined as terrorism.
Burning teslas at dealerships probably doesn't count. Extorting people and threatening to kill them, might count.
The violence wasn't simply for political reasons, as you suggest. It is to accomplish political goals by causing fear and terror in people associated with that brand. That seems like terrorism to me.
what's the political goal? Making tesla less popular? That doesn't sound very political to me.
If I have to explain that to you then we've got bigger problems than I thought.
wdym? The only reason people would do that is because they're unhappy with tesla, and how it's operating as a company. Given that musk is a figurehead in company, he's the only reason it's political.
Musk is just a shitty person, people don't like that, and are retaliating as they see fit.
sigh
Musk is a government employee and spends much of his time with the most powerful political figure in this hemisphere.
Attacking him and his property is an inherently political act.
and tesla is a private company that he owns? Elon in the government, and elon that runs tesla are two unrelated things.
Sure people are motivated against elon due to his political advancements, specifically those made INTO government.
But tesla is STILL a private company, that isn't even under the ownership of musk, it's a board of directors. At best this is property destruction and arson.
Otherwise you're arguing very quickly that ANY private entity is immediately therefore a protected subspecies of the US federal government, and any action taken against it, is by definition, terrorism.
Elon has been publicly shitty for years. The widespread arson didn't start until he was in the government. You're disproving your own position. It's clear that his role in the government was a trigger.
And sweet jesus dude... tesla is not a private company. It's public. How are you not aware of that. Elon just happens to own 90 billion dollars worth of it. His stake is essentially private property. Maybe that's what you were hinting at, but the distinction is important for other reasons.
Terrorism is simply violence to achieve political aims. It doesn't matter whether the entities are public or private. If someone bombed a house full of a politicians family members to make a political point, that would obviously be terrorism, regardless of the fact that only private property and non government employees were harmed, because the goal of the act was clearly political.