What is the meaning of terrorism?
Definition of terrorism : the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion : the use of violence as a means of achieving a goal
What are the implications of the absence of a definition of terrorism?
The implications of the absence of a universal definition of terrorism for legal purposes are wide-ranging. One is that the lack of a definition may faciliate the politicization and misuse of the term “terrorism” to curb non-terrorist (or sometimes even non-criminal) activities.
Do all anti-terrorism instruments contain a definition of terrorism?
More generally, as is examined in some detail below, most universal anti-terrorism instruments do not contain a definition of terrorism due to its accompanying political sensitivities. One notable exception though is the example discussed here of article 2 of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism of 1999.
Is the concept of Terror a new one?
As was discussed in Module 1, the concept of “terror” is not a new one, having existed in different forms for centuries. The reasons for this are many. There are a number of possible explanations for this, some of which are explored below in relation to ongoing efforts to agree on a Comprehensive Convention.
Is there a philosophy journal on Terrorism?
Articles on the subject in philosophy journals were few and far between; neither of the two major philosophy encyclopedias had an entry. The attacks of September 11 and their aftermath put terrorism on the philosophical agenda: it is now the topic of numerous books, journal articles, special journal issues, and conferences.
Why do historians of terrorism use such a wide definition?
Thus it leaves out most of 19th century “propaganda by the deed” and political violence perpetrated by Russian revolutionaries which they themselves and the public called terrorist. For these reasons, historians of terrorism normally work with a wide definition, and social scientists do so much of the time.
What is the moral standing of terrorism?
With regard to the moral standing of terrorism, philosophers differ both on how that is to be determined and what the determination is. Consequentialists propose to judge terrorism, like everything else, in light of its consequences.