@p2501 or you can stop bitching about a non-issue and stick with it... Unless the circled A makes you uncomfortable. But then again, if a symbol of freedom makes you uncomfortable, then maybe you should reconsider your priorities

@Antanicus
Are you suggesting that the CCC Switzerland should promote anarchism, even though not all members agree with the ideology? Because that's even worse.

@p2501 I see, you have a problem with Anarchism, not with vandalism. This is all I need to know.

@Antanicus
I don't. I have a problem with people spreading their opinion through violence (and vandalism is violence). I also have a problem with people disrespecting the freedom of opinion.

@p2501 @Antanicus

"(and vandalism is violence)"

I think concern trolling is a form of violence and by that metric, your parenthetical is the most violent thing I've seen in weeks.

Why have you come on to our peaceful fediverse with your violence?

@celesteh
So if I speak up against violence I'm hurting the feelings of those being violent and thus am violent myself.
Okay. Got it.

@celesteh @Antanicus
I actually misunderstood you the first time, so let's try that again:

Violence: The act of hurting someone.

Vandalism: The act of damaging or destroying someone's property.

Damaging someone's property hurts them financially. In a capitalist society, that can hurt more than direct physical violence.

Thus vandalism is violence.

Also, I'm genuinly disturbed that you consider the opinion "vandalism is violence" to be violent. Don't you realize on what path you are?

@p2501 @Antanicus

Concern trolling wastes people's time, which often has an economic aspect. The use of bad faith arguments frustrates people, which had physiological impacts and has a negative effect on their health.

You are being EXTREMELY violent in this thread. Because it's online, your violence have a much wider reach than a little graffiti and this your violence is far worse!

@celesteh @Antanicus
Are you really not realising where you're going?

I meant everything I said. Everything was honest criticism. From my point of view, you are declaring criticism to be violence.

And that's only one step away from banning criticism.

I checked your older posts and concluded that you likely didn't mean it that way. You probably honestly think that I'm just trolling. But different people have different opinions and values, you know?

@p2501 @Antanicus

If defacing extremely cheap plastic flags is violence, then what your argument does to the blood pressure of anyone who has ever, say, reported a hate crime, is also violence.

(In the extremely unlikely event that you're making this argument in earnest, consider that structural violence impacts things necessary to life, like food, shelter and water. Are un-defaced flags on this list? I don't believe you could possibly be sincere with this.)

@celesteh @Antanicus
So you're saying that vandalism is okay as long as the things damaged or destroyed are nothing essential? Sorry to say, but that's pretty appalling to me. I could understand you're anger if it was directed against a fascist organisation or some such, but against a club of computer nerds? No.

(Also nice try framing my criticism as essentially the same, but your bridge of logic is a tad to flimsy to carry the weight).

@p2501 @Antanicus

Are you saying anything 'not ok' (according to you) is violence? Is crossing the street against the light also violence? What about a cyclist going against traffic on a one way street? If I lie to my grandma to say I'd love to join her square dancing club but have an unavoidable conflict, is that also violent? What if a find a fiver on the floor of the library and don't turn it in at the front desk, is that violent? If I don't pay my TV license?

@celesteh
No

@p2501

I actually had a union jack stolen from me on Saturday, which I'd actually completely forgotten about, even though I was quite annoyed at the time. It cost £3. It was not a victimless crime!
However, calling it a violent crime would show either disingenuity or ignorance of the word's meaning.
One of those things is trolling and the other is ignorance. However, once the speaker has been disabused, if they carry on, they're trolling.

So, are you trolling?

@celesteh
First off, I'm genuinely happy we're just discussing semantics. I was really afraid you were advocating crime.
To be sure, I did check my dictionary, and it does, indeed list property damage as an example of violence. Also verbal abuse, to list another non-physical example (psychological violence).
Bringing in the law doesn't help. It's written in jargon, not english.

@celesteh
If you think that's watering down the term, remember that it is really broad by nature. Even if we limit ourselves to physical violence, this can mean anything from intentionally stepping on someone's toes to global genocide.

@celesteh
That said, I wouldn't really categorize theft as violence. I guess the difference is that a stolen good can theoretically be returned intact.

@p2501

If you can actually speak and understand English and are still claiming that some Sharpie on a £3 flag is violent, you're trolling. (Try contacting the police and see what they say about it.)

As I've stated earlier, I believe trolling is violence. Your violence all over this timeline is a disgrace. Think of the children who might be subject to your violence!

@celesteh
Okay. Up until now I assumed you where genuinely upset, but that last post was a bit too much. Hint: "Think of the children" is a red flag. In your credit, it's been a long while since someone managed to troll me for so many posts.

One last thing: That's a high quality textile 9 square foot flag, not some tiny plastic toy.

@p2501 @Antanicus

I've been assuming that you're fluent in English, but it occurs to me that you're perhaps unaware of the definition of the word violence? It refers to an action which harms another person in terms of their health or physical being. Punching someone is violent. Stealing their hat is not. There are a lot of online dictionaries you can visit which can explain the differs between violent and non-violent crimes further.

@p2501 @Antanicus

You have nearly the command of the language as does a native speaker, but if course, one shouldn't make assumptions.

@p2501 @Antanicus Do all your members agree with showing a national flag this big? Do all of you agree to the ideology of nationalism?

@p2501 @Antanicus why were they promoting nationalism then with a flag? Because that's even worse.

@o
A national flag, by itself, signifies a location. No context was given that suggests nationalism. You are projecting.

@p2501 u should be a bunch of confused ppl if you need to be reminded to be in Switzerland all the time.

in reality, a flag is always and everywhere political symbol that it doesn't exist in a vacuum: and it's not more or less legit of Ⓐ.

some enjoy nationalist symbols, and some really do not enjoy them deal with it.

@o
I do. But I draw the line where someone gets hurt. Even if it's just monetarily.

@p2501 lol.

that was a non-violent act, by all possible standards.

the flag owner will get wiser next time: he made a political statement, and he got a political answer.

to put it mildly: showing nationalist symbols in a space full of hackers and anarchist, perhaps wasn't the brightest of the ideas.

@o
1: The flag needs to be replaced. Thus the owner got hurt monetarily. Thus this is was indeed violence.

2: You ASSUME the owner made a political statement based on what YOU consider the flag to be a symbol of.

3: Hurting someone, whether physically, psychologically or monetarily, just because you assume they disagree with your worldview is seriously NOT OK.

@p2501

1. the flag needs to burn.

2. The flag has a nationalist meaning, that you like it or not.

2. Hurting someone propriety, is definitely not the same as hurting someone. And it's a very standard non-violent technique: https://www.aeinstein.org/nonviolentaction/198-methods-of-nonviolent-action/ (n. 26)

@o
So you are certain that the flag was put there with nationalist intent. Why? Did you TALK to the owner?

You didn't, did you.

Maybe you should try that next time. You might be surprised.

And no, vandalism is violence. If you really think that it isn't, get out of your bubble.

@p2501 @o
Diocane

@p2501 dude, a national flag is a pretty clear symbol: in a space full of hacker, anarchist and people critical toward the state, capitalism and industry - i am not surprised that somebody was rubbed the wrong way.

the owner (and you) should gets aware of the political meaning of their action; they should consider that not everybody has your mentality and appreciation of national symbols, and the ccc is not the rütli.

@o
I can assure you with absolute certainty that not everybody thinks that a national flag is a nationalist symbol. Some people do, some people don't. There is no general consensus. Thus it is plain wrong to just assume nationalism, and even more wrong to react with vandalism.

Or is someone allowed to destroy your IT equipment because they assume you to harbour dangerous thoughts? Of course not!

@p2501 I assure you with absolute certainty that a flag is a national symbol. https://mastodon.bida.im/@Antanicus/102661673672049169

@o
Okay. In the linked post, you do acknowledge that some people don't consider national flags as nationalist symbols. Thus you admit that there is no general consensus. Thus you have just proven me right. Thanks.

@p2501 facts don't care about your feelings

@o
Right back to you. I have given you quite some reasoning for my point of view. I've yet to see yours.

@p2501 to be fair, i don't see any reasoning on your side, and my point is already very clear, but since repetita iuvant:

a flag is a political symbol, that you like it or not. It represent a state. It's a national symbol.

you may interpret the swiss flag as a decoration, but for most of the people, it represent a political entity.

and in a context like the ccc, full of anarchist, somebody saw it as an oppressive symbol and they decided to react.

don't you like it? well, who cares.

@o
Okay, as concisely as possible:
The question whether thing A is a symbol of thing B is inherently subjective, unless there is a general consensus. As you accidentally admitted yourself, there is no general consensus on the question whether a flag is a nationalist symbol. You claiming this to be an objective fact is simply you projecting your opinion on the rest of the world.
And if you promote vandalism because of this, what does that make you?

@o
Oh, and by the way. You should properly study the document you linked. It doesn't say what you think it says.

@p2501 did you really just write that? I can give you a penny! Go get an icecream bigbboy
@Antanicus