Summary
Elon Musk blamed trans people for recent Tesla attacks after his daughter, Vivian Jenna Wilson, called him a “pathetic man-child.”
Musk shared false data on trans violence and claimed hormone therapy causes volatility. He linked trans identity to attacks on Tesla cars and dealerships, citing unverified reports of trans suspects.
Musk’s comments followed Wilson’s interview where she condemned his far-right shift and disavowed responsibility for his views.
Critics accused Musk of scapegoating trans people amid Tesla’s financial decline and political controversies.
I’m all for tesla dealership vandalism, but doesn’t it pretty much fit the bill as terrorism? It’s violence against noncombatants to achieve political aims. Whether we agree with it or not doesn’t really change that definition.
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.
I’m sorry, perhaps I’m misunderstanding; are you defining inanimate objects as “non-combatants?”
Did you have issues with that definition when a couple of hicks shot up a bunch of electrical equipment?
No one has to be directly or physically injured for the act to be an attack.
False equivalence. Destroying cars is not the same as destroying infrastructure.
The intent of shooting up a power station was to deprive a very large number of people of electricity, which will directly harm some and could potentially kill a few. That’s not quite the same as vandalizing a large retailer’s inventory. Who’s going to be injured or died if a few cars get written off?
The definition doesn’t set a limit on the number of people injured by an individual act.
Setting a bunch of lithium batters on fire is absolutely dangerous to people nearby. The fact that none have been killed yet is simply a sample size problem.
Arson is inherently a violent and lethal act. And honestly I’m very doubtful about your assertion that power loss is somehow more lethal than a fire. Almost 4k people died from fires in 2022. I can’t find the corresponding stat for power loss, so feel free to do some research.