Question about the term "Terrorism" and "Terrorist" and How current applications of these terms effect Society

Question

The Oxford Dictionary defines Terrorism as,
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims

And the Oxford Dictionary defines Terrorist as,
a person who uses terrorism in pursuit of political aims

Terrorism is a tactic, not a group or organization. According to these definitions, the American Colonists fighting for independence would have been terrorists, the United States involvement in World War 2 would have been terrorism. My point here is that there is a lot of conflict "wars" occurring around the world and this is nothing new. So if oppression, deprivation of vital resources among many other ugly sociological conditions drive people to wage war, I have to ask two questions...

1. How can we discriminate between who is a terrorist and who is not a terrorist?

2. By giving people who feel oppressed/violated vague negative labels are we stopping or spreading violence?

Answer 1

1) You can't tell who is a terrorist and who isn't. There are a number of extremists who feel they are not being heard.

2) I think it depends on an individual. If an individual feels oppessed and/or violated to a point where he needs to fight back, then yes these negative labels do spread terrorism. If you are marked as terrorist just because of where you came from would you not be angry as well. When you are angry it is easy to hate.

Answer 2

I think you need a more expansive definition. I was given a whole page on this in a class and the important point is that a terrorist or group of terrorists are a small number of people who use isolated, small incidents of violence (or the threat of them) to create fear amongst the general public. Also, one person may call a group 'terrorists', while another might call them 'freedom fighters'. I don't think you will ever get 100% agreement on who is a terrorist and who isn't.

As for the effect of bestowing the label 'terrorists', I think you would have to be an expert to answer that.

Answer 3

It really depends upon how the term is used. If the kid hangs out with the goths in the cafeteria, then they are a goth. It is a label the kids have given themselves. Goth is not racial or gender biased. Children that hang with the goths all dress alike. So a middle school principal using the term is not really inapproprate. As for the not wears skulls to school, so long as the rule is applied fairly to all of the children at school then there should not be a problem. Parents should be able to ask for the reasoning behind the rule and have an adequate answer given. You might want to check the district's dress code first.

Answer 4

Please.

Put down the dictionary and allow for everyday usage and some common sense.

The people who blew up the Trade Centers are terrorists. American pioneers were not. They were rebels, sure.

I hate to break this to you, but in the age of communication, we label things. Black people, white people. Short people, tall people. Terrorists. It helps us define what we are talking about.

Do you think that the world would be better if we spent the extra 45 seconds giving a 9 word description of the bastards who drove the planes into the buildings? No.

They were terrorists. In their land, they were martyrs. Simple as that.

Answer 5

Watch their behaviors. Look at their motives..Labeling a terrorist does not make violence spread anymore than calling a rapist a rapist will make him assault women