>>2290046I dont know enough about these celebrities but yes there are definitely ethical positions that would get you there. Its a little fuzzy to me but there is definitely a line where you have a big enough audience that you are no longer a "normal" civilian and have to have some responsibility for what you put out. But there are also moral justifications for terrorism against "normal" civilians. For example, hypothetically, if the US is a democracy one could say that 9/11 was justified, but of course we know its not a democracy.
>How do we determine who is a "Zionist"This borders on bait but assuming you are just naive it means anyone who thinks Israel as a settler colonial apartheid ethno-state should exist. It would really depend on what you mean by "coexistence between Palestinians and Israelis" but within that you maintain Israeli as one of the two identities, presumably meaning Israel exists. If this hypothetical coexistence means a two state solution then that is probably Zionism. If it exists as an ethno-state then the apartheid logically follows to maintain demographic supremacy, as does the ethnic cleansing. If you mean a secular Israel not based on Jewish ethnicity and just keeping two different state names for tradition or because everyone previously agreed to 1967 borders but essentially becoming the same state then it probably wouldn't.
Why do you think "simply having shitty political views is enough to justify being killed" is morally wrong? So that we can have a baseline for what you consider moral, as morality is a highly subjective topic.
Doesn't it depend on the severity of the "shitty political views"? If someone was going around your town saying that a group of people who have a common immutable characteristic should be murdered on that basis and there was a series of killing resulting from that could a violent pre-emptive strike against it by an individual with those characteristics who has not been personally harmed yet not be justified as self defense?
I think its quite different for someone to be targeted based on "political views" that necessarily and logically result in harm to innocents then targeting someone based on inherent qualities about a person that they cant change, like where they were born or their ancestry. Views can be changed, and political violence can be a mechanism for changing them, but you can't change the circumstance of your birth. Palestinians cant not be Palestinian, but being a Zionist is a choice, and it is choosing genocide.
Also you didn't answer my question, and instead just gave a vague statement with a bunch more implications.
What is Zionism to you? Why do you think it is morally bad to commit violence against propagandists? Do you just think violence should only done legally, by the state, which in this case is also complicit in the genocide? You keep flipping back and forth from average people and having bad views to celebrities endorsing genocide to millions of fans.