> Opposing a social media law “violently” is not an appropriate call to action.

Every single ounce of freedom you enjoy today was won with bloodshed. There is nothing extreme about reminding your local legalized mafia who is actually in charge: the People. Your compromised governments work hard to condition you to think otherwise.

Direct political violence should always an absolute last resort, when every other realistic option has been exhausted. However, every freedom is ultimately backed by threat of violence, even when it isn't said aloud.

> The laws are a response to a real issue

They use a real issue as a vehicle for tightening the authoritarian ratchet. All good antidemocratic legislation is wrapped in legitimate issues. But what authoritarian governments such as Australia fear is the power of unification which the internet offers new generations.

I wanted to clarify part of your point.

Violence is literally always a last resort. It is the last possible thing you can do to affect change.

People who would nitpick on the mode of protest always conveniently dismiss the thinking and talking that came before.