I never claimed it to be fine, to be clear, but again from a purely objective standpoint it seems like a pretty small cost to pay to contribute to the erosion of power a fascist, racist, hateful, and truly dangerous borderline hegemon wields. Perhaps I’m limited in perspective, but at first glance I see 2 main outcomes assuming you’re siding with the vandals: -The Tesla owner disagrees with Elon and was able to claim insurance on the car they’d likely otherwise take a bath on if they tried to sell (especially in Germany) and presumably wanted to get rid of: win-win. -The Tesla owner agrees with Elon and is an enemy of the vandal, which I’m sure they’d consider a win-win (damaging the market image of Tesla, harming an enemy)

To clarify once more, I am not saying I agree with or support the efforts of arsonists targeting regular people, but it seems like there’s asymmetric cost on the side of Tesla assuming properly insured/financially positioned owners so what they’re doing makes sense overall, and is likely effective. Let’s be real, Teslas are positioned as luxury vehicles; these aren’t people scraping buy that are being harmed.