3 ms·

> Terrorism is unlawfully using violence, especially against civilians, to achieve a political aim. Important to note that there is not one single definition o

> Terrorism is unlawfully using violence, especially against civilians, to achieve a political aim. Important to note that there is not one single definition of "terrorism" that everyone agrees on. For some, "terrorism" is a label assigned to your opposing groups, for others it's about violence for political or religious purposes. If it's from another nation-state, it's usually not labeled terrorism, even if it's against civilians for political/religious purposes. Some groups are labeled "terrorists" even without any recorded history of violence, and so on. I'm not disagreeing with you, just adding that what "terrorism" is, is not as black-and-white as you put it.

mytailorisrich 6y ago
There is a general definition that you will find in dictionaries and that is generally accepted. So I think there is a definition that everyone agrees on when there are not pushing an agenda. Then there is the use of the term for rhetorical and political purposes... This is what obviously varies according to the interests of those using the term. Obviously the terrorists are always the 'other guys'. Note that the definition I gave, which is nothing more than the Oxford dictionary one, includes a crucial word, "unlawful". This is very important to differentiate between warfare and terrorism. A sovereign state uses violence for political aims, this is warfare and it is 'lawful' (it may be unlawful under international law, though). This is why action by nation-states are usually not labelled 'terrorism'.
- capableweb 6y ago
  I agree fully with you, again! Just adding a bit more context as your previous comment seemed "sure" in that you're proclaiming "X is Y" while reality is not that black-and-white. Again, I agree with this and your previous comment.
- fjdjsmsm 6y ago
  Arguing what things are based on their dictionary definition is often a mistake. The people that compile the dictionary are not experts in every field. They optimize for brevity, and their sources are not exhaustive. They are not trying to be encyclopedic and all encompassing. Note, have have worked with people assembling a major dictionary. They are just regualr people with regular foibles.
eternalban 6y ago
Terrorism: Non-state and/or extra-judicial use of means to induce perception of collective insecurity ("terror") in order to achieve specific goals. Basic categorization of terrorism then would be concerned with: a: tuple (agency, means) must resolve to be "illegal" within the applicable legal scope. For example, a state dropping bombs on a civilian population (nation-state, war-crime) satisfies the above requirement but doing the same to enemy soldiers (nation-state, warfare) does not. Same with a private group blowing up a bank (ngo, crime). b: tuple (target, reacting-agency) Goal is to use terror in the target to induce the reacting-agency in responding in a desired manner. If there is no reacting-agency (and thus no goal) it is not terrorism; it is merely pathological.

mytailorisrich 6y ago

There is a general definition that you will find in dictionaries and that is generally accepted. So I think there is a definition that everyone agrees on when there are not pushing an agenda. Then there is the use of the term for rhetorical and political purposes... This is what obviously varies according to the interests of those using the term. Obviously the terrorists are always the 'other guys'. Note that the definition I gave, which is nothing more than the Oxford dictionary one, includes a crucial word, "unlawful". This is very important to differentiate between warfare and terrorism. A sovereign state uses violence for political aims, this is warfare and it is 'lawful' (it may be unlawful under international law, though). This is why action by nation-states are usually not labelled 'terrorism'.

capableweb 6y ago
I agree fully with you, again! Just adding a bit more context as your previous comment seemed "sure" in that you're proclaiming "X is Y" while reality is not that black-and-white. Again, I agree with this and your previous comment.
fjdjsmsm 6y ago
Arguing what things are based on their dictionary definition is often a mistake. The people that compile the dictionary are not experts in every field. They optimize for brevity, and their sources are not exhaustive. They are not trying to be encyclopedic and all encompassing. Note, have have worked with people assembling a major dictionary. They are just regualr people with regular foibles.

eternalban 6y ago

Terrorism: Non-state and/or extra-judicial use of means to induce perception of collective insecurity ("terror") in order to achieve specific goals. Basic categorization of terrorism then would be concerned with: a: tuple (agency, means) must resolve to be "illegal" within the applicable legal scope. For example, a state dropping bombs on a civilian population (nation-state, war-crime) satisfies the above requirement but doing the same to enemy soldiers (nation-state, warfare) does not. Same with a private group blowing up a bank (ngo, crime). b: tuple (target, reacting-agency) Goal is to use terror in the target to induce the reacting-agency in responding in a desired manner. If there is no reacting-agency (and thus no goal) it is not terrorism; it is merely pathological.