You said "you could wind up on a terrorist watch list for posting apolitical cartoon frog memes," but you're linking to an article about violent extremists.
Which is it? Is the problem that Biden was putting people on a watchlist for completely innocuous and arbitrary memes or is the problem that he was putting violent extremists on a watchlist who happened to sometimes employ memes?
> My entire point is that the Biden administration was labeling innocuous content as "violent extremism.
No they weren't.
First, white supremacists do use the pepe meme, they intentionally adopted it as a symbol, so there is a correlation between that meme and violent extremism, albeit a weak one. You're pretending not to be perfectly aware of this, so I think you're the one not acting in good faith here.
I read the slides. Nowhere is it stated that using a frog meme makes one a violent extremist, and no one has been put onto a terrorist watch list simply for using that meme.
"no one has been put onto a terrorist watch list simply for using that meme"
Agreed that pepe is not apolitical and comes out of a dark corner
But the linked article says "Flags from the left-wing Antifa movement. Depictions of Pepe the Frog," ... "They are all signs that extremists could be infiltrating the military, according to internal training materials "
So according to that source ... maybe yes, potentially there was one put on a watch list, because he used that frog. But I kind of agree that it is warranted. A watch list. Not a list that gives you automatically problems. But a indicator to take a closer look before trusting that person with critical things. But chances are there is not just the frog. I have never seen a person using that frog who did not also used worse language and behavior.
"Anticapitalists" on the other hand are usually people with a big mouth. The step from not liking the current system towards terrorism is a pretty big one. Also because anticapitalism is super vague. So I don't think it is quite the same thing.
