There is a fundamental difference between killing people, placing bombs and gluing yourself to a road. If your definition of terrorism includes all of these, it's useless.
If the teamsters strike hospitals miss drug shipments and people die. Farming protests can lead to food supply chain disruptions. Transport strikes cause economic disruption which could theoretically lead to deaths.
That’s not what terrorism is.
Terrorism requires terrorising people through violence and intimidation. Not standing on a highway.
Terrorism is a broad term but it is rarely used for its lower end as its also a term used as a tool to scare people. The idea that it mandates violence is outdated. Violence was the means to terrorize but it no longer is.
This terrorises people. It causes mass fear and panic, and will cause pretty immediate loss of life. All people have good reason fear for the safety of them and their loved ones in the case of a catastrophic grid failure.
This is not true of blocking a highway. It’s an economic disruption. The response of those opposed to the action is one of anger and frustration. Society at large does not fear for their safety because people are occasionally blocking highways, unlike in a mass terrorist campaign.
Cyberterrorism as a term is applied too liberally, a direct result of governments wanting to expand their powers under the guise of combating terrorism. Software attacks that immediately threaten life and limb (eg attacks on health systems, major damage to critical infrastructure) can be argued to be cyberterrorism. Not every software attack is of that magnitude.
I think it's totally legitimate to argue over how effective an action like this is for the cause - but this is a quite reasonable form of protest.
Blocking a highway is a form of terrorism. If people blocked a highway with violent means would you consider that a protest too?
You are taking a double standard. They're all terrorism.
Another scenario you could come up with is a future climate catastrophe, where millions die and/or are displaced because of this global boiling era. Incidentally, which is the protest thought crime that is being prosecuted.
[1] Legally there's a world of difference between proximal causes and proximate causes. (Neighborhood vs causally related.)
If protests actually cause deaths, we can always prosecute the people causing said death as manslaughter or negligent homicide. Until then it’s just a protest, guaranteed in many countries as a civil right.
> cars
Maybe they should've take the subway then? Because "Klimakleber" usually only operate in the city