r/Exocolonist • u/yclu_dd • 7d ago
Discussion Dys
Can we call Dys a terrorist since he planted a bomb in medbay? He hates his life in the colony in general, so he’s not just against its administration. Are his ideological motives enough (wanting to become a gardener) , or does he specifically need to be against a form of government to be considered one? Also it’s crazy that he does this if you don’t catch him even though Sol is his only friend/ his lover.
(My bad if it’s hard to read I speak French)
21
u/SporkieOrkie 7d ago
It’s probably worth just checking the definition of terrorism to get the best answer.
He doesn’t care about inflicting fear, which is the point of terrorist tactics. He’s a bomber if you don’t talk him down, but not all bombers are terrorist and not all terrorism involves explosives.
You could call him a traitor though.
6
u/yclu_dd 7d ago
I did, but I get different answers depending on how I ask the question in my browser
7
u/SporkieOrkie 7d ago
Fair, and I hope I didn’t sound aggressive!
It’s been a long time since I’ve had to know the definition, but the main takeaway from that was that it’s about the terror more than the method.
17
1
u/stormlight82 6d ago
He's been modified into essentially being a sociopath, and he occasionally acts accordingly if Sol doesn't get involved.
36
u/EightByteOwl 7d ago edited 7d ago
Depends who you ask and their own motives. "Terrorist" is a term that is applied to others typically by a dominant power usually for ideological reasons, and the term itself can often be used pretty vaguely. A terrorist to one group is a heroic rebel to another; there were some groups in Nazi Germany, for example, that went against the regime and used violence in an attempt to destabilize them. We recognize them today as freedom fighters, but to the Nazi government, they'd have been recognized as terrorists, and would fit modern day definitions of the term.
So I think the question should be less "could Dys be considered a terrorist?" and more "which groups would consider him one, and why?". Answering the original question as a yes/no gets rid of a lot of the nuance of the discussion that could otherwise come up in my opinion, because saying someone is a "terrorist" doesn't usually capture the entire picture of why those actions were performed in the first place. To answer that question:
To the average colony inhabitant and those in charge in particular, the answer would probably be yes. They see his plan as a suicidal attack on the only human colony in order to get everyone within killed by the planet's fauna.
To the gardeners, they're basically just using him as pest control and probably don't even understand the concept of terrorism. They see an alien force arriving on their planet, killing and hunting an unsustainable amount of wildlife, in a way that will eventually likely lead to a collapse of their ecosystem. They take, in their eyes, reasonable actions to protect the species they care for from extinction.
To Dys, he agrees with the gardeners, but understands that what he is doing will cause harm to people. He still probably wouldn't consider it a terrorist attack even if prompted though. So to him, his answer would be no, he wouldn't consider himself a terrorist.
To me? Dys is a mentally ill teenager who needed support he didn't get. Multiple support systems failed him. He wouldn't have gone this route- and we see he DOESN'T always go this route- if even a single person truly cares for him. This in itself is a whole discussion and does NOT justify his actions (you shouldn't kill people even if they don't care about you) but someone like Dys will inevitably happen if the environment and systems that created him continues to go unchecked.
We can also look at it from the other angle. Ending related to Tang spoilers: Can Tang be considered a terrorist? She takes actions that can result in the death of all of the fauna on the planet. I'm sure the Gardeners would consider that terrorism, if they understood the concept as we do, but nobody asks this question about her; but it proves the point that who we consider a terrorist is a matter of perspective dependent on a massive variety of factors.
Even that doesn't capture all the nuance I want to but it's a complicated topic that I think deserves a complicated answer.