Navalny has been charged with running an "extremist group." The designation is part of the Kremlin's complex scheme to ensure there will never be a free and fair election in Russia.
After September 11th, I had a growing discomfort with the scope creep that "terrorist" began to take on. It started with some idiot shining a laser pointer at a passenger liner, then started to be used to describe drug dealers. Sadly, it took China and Russia calling people "terrorists" before I realized the implication of treating a label as a special case that overrides due process.
It's good that you point out that this sort of practice is nothing new to Russia. It's important for us to see it and recognize it, before it shows up in our halls again.
Alas, it's going on in America right now. Just the other day the National School Boards Association asked the Biden Administration to look into the possibility that parents who are protesting against their local school boards over CRT, mask mandates and so on pose “an immediate threat” including “threats of violence and acts of intimidation,” and that “the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” That was bad enough; worse was the Administration's response. Instead of sending these idiots away with a flea in the ear, it agreed that there might be a problem with parental terrorists.
This is definitely a weakness in public discourse that I don't see getting resolved any time soon. Is someone who's mentally ill capable of being a terrorist? Certainly they can perform the same acts and provide the same rationale, but anyone who's not competent to stand trial probably shouldn't be included in the same policy calculus.
I can see a lone nut walking in to a Board of Ed building some place and waving a gun around (eg Pizzagate). I don't imagine that there's a collection of people who would conspire to do the same. Our society isn't doing a very good job of creating space between those two threats in our discussion.
Hate crimes, on the other hand, shouldn't even be on the table for this discussion. Actual domestic terrorism discussion? Yes, there are a lot of very serious racists out there. The possibility of some loon firing a rifle in a school where they're providing vaccines? No, not a hate crime, so don't muddy the water NSBA.
After September 11th, I had a growing discomfort with the scope creep that "terrorist" began to take on. It started with some idiot shining a laser pointer at a passenger liner, then started to be used to describe drug dealers. Sadly, it took China and Russia calling people "terrorists" before I realized the implication of treating a label as a special case that overrides due process.
It's good that you point out that this sort of practice is nothing new to Russia. It's important for us to see it and recognize it, before it shows up in our halls again.
Alas, it's going on in America right now. Just the other day the National School Boards Association asked the Biden Administration to look into the possibility that parents who are protesting against their local school boards over CRT, mask mandates and so on pose “an immediate threat” including “threats of violence and acts of intimidation,” and that “the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” That was bad enough; worse was the Administration's response. Instead of sending these idiots away with a flea in the ear, it agreed that there might be a problem with parental terrorists.
This is definitely a weakness in public discourse that I don't see getting resolved any time soon. Is someone who's mentally ill capable of being a terrorist? Certainly they can perform the same acts and provide the same rationale, but anyone who's not competent to stand trial probably shouldn't be included in the same policy calculus.
I can see a lone nut walking in to a Board of Ed building some place and waving a gun around (eg Pizzagate). I don't imagine that there's a collection of people who would conspire to do the same. Our society isn't doing a very good job of creating space between those two threats in our discussion.
Hate crimes, on the other hand, shouldn't even be on the table for this discussion. Actual domestic terrorism discussion? Yes, there are a lot of very serious racists out there. The possibility of some loon firing a rifle in a school where they're providing vaccines? No, not a hate crime, so don't muddy the water NSBA.