Look at the way the feds responded to Stop Cop City and ask us that again

Further, “terrorist” is little more than the 21st century “savage”, in that the crackers will use “terrorist” the exact same way they used to use “savage”.

Just look at how much shit Food Not Bombs gets from local law enforcement and courts for giving people food. Fuckers will make laws just to spite them.

Imagine arresting people for feeding the hungry. Absolute fucking ghoul shit.

Only if we actually do anything

Terrorism = thing the speaker doesn’t like

Anything that is a threat to the status quo and the perpetuation of capitalism and colonialism is labeled a terrorist by the powers that be. If you’re being effective you are a “terrorist.” This includes a vast array from anti-colonial fighters to environmental protesters.

I think the most accurate way of comprehending this is, all leftists are terrorist in potential, because when there isn’t a need for stiring things up, calling anyone terrorist draw attention to them and gets them more notoriety, which is not necessarily positive to the bourgeois. So usually is when a leftist group gets popular support and starts to get notoriety by itself they call them terrorist in order to undermine their image.

Who’s doing the considering? How do they define “terrorist”? Who are they considering to be “leftists”? And for that matter, who are we considering to be “leftists”? This is a pretty unspecific question that’s crammed with floating signifiers.

deleted by creator