Political violence is the leading cause of wars today. Personal agendas have led to many of the political objectives that cause violence today this has caused many problems throughout the world and will continue to do so until a solution to this issue is found. Political objectives have been advanced involuntarily dependent upon the kind of government a nation exercises. For instance, in a democratic nation political groups must worry about convincing the majority in order to advance ethically. Those who try to influence the majority through acts of violence are considered today as “terror” organizations. Though perhaps if it were not because of the recent 9/11 terror attacks that maybe such warrants would not be seen as terror attacks, but instead the result of partisan advancement. Acts of terrorism have been around throughout the evolution of mankind. Terror attacks have even been traced back as far as the religious roots of an ancient middle east (Ross, Will Terrorism End?, 2006). However as man evolved, so did terrorism. Today’s extremism involves some of the main characteristics of ancient terrorism, but much more developed. Political advancement is no longer the root cause of terrorism acts. Instead influxes of “holy” wars have been appended the prior definition of terrorism. Mistakably modern terrorism has been confused for Political violence with political objectives, but research will establish that the nature of terrorism is fundamentally different from other forms of political violence.
Terrorism has many forms, and many definitions. “Elements from the American definitional model define terrorism as a premeditated and unlawful act in which groups or agents of some principal engage in a threatened or actual use o...
... middle of paper ...
...hem.
Works Cited
HRW. (2004, January 29). Retrieved 2009 2, December, from HRW: http://www.hrw.org/legacy/english/docs/2004/01/29/global7127.htm
Sikh extremism enters mainstream Canadian politics. (2007, June 28). Retrieved December 4, 2009, from Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/sikh-politics-canada/index.html
Coll, S. (2004). The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001. London: The Penguin Press.
Hamm, M. (1997). Apocalypse at Waco: Ruby Ridge andWaco Revenged. Boston: University Press.
Martin, G. (2009). Understanding Terrorism - Challengers, Perspectives, and Issues. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Ross, J. I. (2006). Political Terrorism: An interdisciplinary Approach. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Ross, J. I. (2006). Will Terrorism End? New York: Chelsea House.
Let's talk about absolutely ridiculous pronouncements people make that either ignore simple fact or border on insanity. How about this one: Violence is no way to settle anything! Evidence suggests that violence is a very effective way of settling things. How about a few examples? In 1776, violence settled whether the thirteen colonies would be independent or remain under King George's thumb. In 1865, violence settled whether there'd be a Confederacy and a Union or just a Union. Between 1941 and 1945, violence settled whether Japan would control the Far East and whether Germany would control Europe. Violence settled whether American Indians owned and controlled the land now call United States or whether it would be European settlers and their progeny. In fact, violence has settled the question of land use-rights virtually everywhere.
Terrorism is defined as the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments of societies in the pursuit of gals that are generally political, religious, or ideological by The United States Department of Defense("Terrorism research-what is," ). Terrorism can be classified in two different categories: International terrorism; not within the United States Jurisdiction and Domestic terrorism; within the United States Jurisdiction.
The threat of global terrorism continues to rise with the total number of deaths reaching 32,685 in 2015, which is an 80 percent increase from 2014 (Global Index). With this said, terrorism remains a growing, and violent phenomenon that has dominated global debates. However, ‘terrorism’ remains a highly contested term; there is no global agreement on exactly what constitutes a terror act. An even more contested concept is whether to broaden the scope of terrorism to include non-state and state actors.
Defining terrorism has remained a highly contentious terrain with even International organisations like the League of Nations and the United Nations finding it extremely difficult to build and develop a consensus upon .But different scholars have attempted to define this concept:
In Chapter 1 of “Inside Terrorism” political analyst Bruce Hoffman, explains that the term “terrorism” has undergone numerous definitions over the course of history, starting with the French Revolution of 1789-94. Hoffman explains that according to the Oxford English Dictionary, terrorism can be defined basically as an act or policy enacted by a government to strike fear into those against whom the act is against, to coerce them into submission to the policies of the government. He also explains that a more helpful definition, that of a terrorist, rather than the act of terrorism, provides a better way of defining terrorism. He also explains that the term terrorist is more of a political term than a specific action. (Hoffman 2006) Sociologist Charles Tilly also mentions the French Revolution as the earliest reference to the term of terrorism. They also agree that these early references to terrorism was primarily carried out by governments as a means of oppressing those who would revolt against them. (Tilly 2004) Both authors also agree that although the roots of the term terrorist began during the late 1789s. The concept as well as the definition of terrorism has changed over time, particularly in recent years since Sept. 11, 2001. As the definition of terrorism has changed over the years, so have the methods of dealing with
The definition of political violence is ‘violence [that is] outside of state control that is political motivated’ (O’Neil 2011, par. 1). One way to study political violence is to interpret the way a group participates in collective action to solve political dilemmas, and why groups choose violence as a means to achieve their political goals. As P. Schmid Alex wrote, “conflict itself is not illegitimate but part of the human existence and can be a positive mechanism of social and political change” (Schmid 2004, 199). Another aspect of violence that is commonly debated and discussed within the political arena is terrorism. Specifically, how state actors and policy-makers distinguish terrorism from other forms of political violence.
The quest to establish a universal definition of terrorism is entangled in questions of law, history, philosophy, morality, and religion by nature, a subjective one that eludes large-scale consensus. Terrorism is defined differently by different countries, nations and even department’s federal or state law enforcement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives (NIJ).
The concept of terrorism is exceedingly difficult to define. Author Gerald Seymour first said in his book Harry’s Game that, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Each individual may view terrorism in a different light. Because of this, there is currently no universal definition of terrorism. However in recent years, it has become increasingly more important to form a definition of terrorism, especially while working in the media.
Terrorism is a vast and complex topic and has been occurring throughout history, there are many definitions and types of terrorism that are often described by society; one that has gained the most momentum within society and the media today is religious terrorism. Although religious terrorism has its own specific definition along with other forms of terrorism, it seems that this type of terrorism has been assigned as a definite explanation behind most cases of terrorist violence; despite they’re being other factors contributing. Although this can be agreed to on some extent - that religion
Terrorism is an ongoing phenomenon that has been occurring for centuries (Alvarez & Bachman, 2014). It involves several different types of behaviors that are committed for many different reasons. Those forms include assassinations, bombings, theft, hijackings, kidnappings, and a host of other violent acts. The type of terrorism that will be discussed is right-wing terrorism. Right-wing terrorism is one type of the many that is related Substates terrorism, which is perpetrated by nongovernmental groups. Right-wing terrorism is described as the acts of conservative organizations who seek to return society to some mythic or past time, or acts of conservative organizations that seek to preserve a political system (Alvarez & Bachman, 2014).
Terrorism has been around for centuries and religion-based violence has been around just as long. (Hoffman, 2). The violence was never referred to as terrorism though. Only up to the nineteenth century has religion been able to justify terrorism (Hoffman, 2). Since then, religious terrorism became motivated and inspired by the ideological view (Hoffman, 3). Therefore, it has turned against the main focus of religion and more towards the views of the extremist and what is happening politically (Winchester, 4).
Terrorism is difficult to define because it can take on many different forms and can involve many different types of people. However, numerous
Terrorism is one of the most extensively discussed issues of our time and at the same time it is also one of the least understood. The term itself “terrorism” means many different things to different people, cultures, and races. As a result, trying to define or classify terrorism with one universal definition is nearly impossible. The definition of terrorism used in this research is a reflection of much of the Western and American way of defining it. The definition of terrorism is,
Discussion of Terrorism Terrorism, as defined by Title 22 of the United States code, section
What is terrorism, and what constitutes an act of terror? Certainly, the history of terrorism is as old as war itself. Some might say that the strategy of causing fear in the enemy, to make him overestimate your forces while simultaneously doubting his own, make up the very essence of warfare. But mention the word “terrorism” to somebody, and chances are that the first thing that comes to mind is a mental image: The Oklahoma City bombing, dead Marines in Beirut, the Unabomber, or Lockerbie. The events of September 11, which have become synonymous with the idea of terrorism in America, would certainly be at the top of that list. But even these events, which best illustrate the phenomenon for us, fail to define it. This is because of the different circumstances behind each occurrence. The sum cannot simply be broken down into its antecedents. So how do we define a term as broad as terrorism? Before you can destroy your enemy, you must understand your enemy. Keeping this in mind, we’ll look at the many different classifications that terrorism can be separated into, before moving into tactics and mentality.