Why Is There "Terrorism" Domestic and International?

Dictionary definitions of “terrorism” are not helpful when they record that “terrorism” is the use of terrorizing methods!” A state of fear, panic, fright is produced. Terrorism doesn’t arise from a vacuum. There are reasons! Citizens and their leaders need to understand WHY, if problems are to be addressed effectively. The uses of fear, threats regarding personal dangers, are utilized to control individuals or groups. Such manipulation of feelings can be utilized even by one’s own nation to build and maintain military power. e.g. “Fear levels”, with colors, are announced. Continued support for production of weaponry serves corporations’ interests in maintaining profits. Remember President Eisenhower’s caution about the “military-industrial complex.” [We seem now to be in a state of perpetual warfare.]

Domestic settings—Terror tactics can appear within households and family life, between husbands and wives, men and women “friends”, and in parent-child relationships. In our own communities we often read/hear about husbands/men physically abusing their wives/partners, resulting in serious injury or death of a spouse. Women being “courted” are sometimes victims of male “friends” who hold the assumption that “If I can’t have her, neither can another.” Women often need to seek court orders to protect themselves in advance of such tragedies, being “terror stricken”, in relationships with abusive males who have the greater physical power.

Physical violence and aggressive behaviors are fostered in our culture, promoting male aggressiveness rather than “conflict resolution” techniques for resolving interpersonal difficulties. It is not easy in our society to rear boys to be really “gentle men.” Militarization is increasing within the schools and the wider society priorities. TV films with violence and computer “war games” are accepted as “entertainment.” Terror is also expressed in the lives of children in response to abusive parents/caretakers. [It is recognized that virtually all of us have our limits to exasperating behaviors in children. Some adults “cease to reason” and severely terrorize their children, even injuring them severely.] When parents lose employment, confront mortgages they can’t pay, don’t have sufficient $$ for food and other family needs, the strain can result in severe abuse of children. “Terrorism” isn’t restricted to “foreigners in other nations.” [See Part II for international aspects].

Community “gangs”— Each generation confronts its own problems, often with different responses than prior ones. “Street gangs” do not arise in a vacuum either. These “groups,” challenge each other physically, often with lethal weaponry. A few young women, but mostly young males, form close relationships and identities with others in their area, their claimed domain, a “territorial” claim. They are often, perhaps generally, unemployed, not attending school regularly (or not faithfully), and thus probably have distraught adults/parents who have lost control over their youth. Gang members create their own symbols, hand signals, colors specific to their clothing. They endeavor to retain control over “their segment” of a selected area of the community. Some social scientists recognize that in modern, urban disjointed communities these “gangs” serve as substitute “families” for individuals that support each other, adrift from general norms. The claims to area domination, as rivals to other nearby gangs, often result in “terrorism” in the streets endangering others besides themselves. They challenge their opponents using fear, threats of injuries or death.

During the New Deal of the 1930’s there were several national programs for youth. The NYA (“National Youth Act”) provided financial aid for pursuing education while the youth were employed in part-time jobs. WPA—The Work Progress Administration provided employment with diverse opportunities. The CCC, Civilian Conservation Corps employed young men, full-time with pay, to repair and construct trails in national forests and parks, work on construction tasks, and so on. These “Great Depression” aids provided youth who were not in school and were unemployed, with some constructive jobs, wages, and training, reducing the idleness that otherwise would likely foster gang behavior. [I personally benefited from the NYA student aid program, working for 30 cents an hour in the University of Colorado mail room. I graduated from college without owing a cent!]

Cultural domination—There are many instances in the world—past and present—whereby ethnic/cultural populations have been incorporated, without their full consent, even against their desires, to be under the rule of another and dominant population. They are coerced to remain ruled as a suppressed minority with little hope for change. They oppose the coercion over time, increasingly resistant to the impediments put upon them by the dominant power. Without perceptive ameliorative actions by the dominant power, the oppressed build means to force changes, often through violence. They rebel, but are viewed as “terrorists” by those holding official power. [E.g. Violence in a divided Ireland, Basques in Spain, Tamils in Sri Lanka, among others.]

Increasing pressure from the suppressed minority may result in severe reactions on the part of those in power. Those controlling the government usually resist making the changes necessary to satisfy the challenging minority. Power is not usually or readily altered until “greater pressures,” even force, are employed by the minority. Much tragedy could be avoided with greater wisdom. [The British could have given India its independence “more promptly” and France could have offered Algeria its freedom earlier, avoiding the tragic delays and sufferings; but they did not so act]. Limited space doesn’t permit elaboration of the many instances that continue “colonialism” [the USA relations with Puerto Rico, Guam, the Palaus, and other island “possessions.”]

The Kurds were separated after WWI by the colonial powers, and they have since lived separated in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. [They would have been satisfied with a Kurdistan!] The Armenians have been under strong Turkish control/influence, including a genocide of the former by the latter, now being admitted finally by the Turks, who are proceeding with some greater recognition of Armenian desires. The Tamils have suffered badly in the recently terminated war in Sri Lanka, but remain subordinated. The Chechnya of Russia have suffered severe casualties, but remain forcibly in Russia. East Timor, after much suffering from the Indonesian military, now struggle with independence. In our own nation, the Native Americans lost their centuries-old tribal lands to the expansion of the initial 13 colonies, being subjected ever since to less productive living areas and limited lives.[Our Native Americans did not receive US citizenship until 1924!]

In each of these instances, the dominating powers employed much force to gain and retain control over the weaker, suffering cultural entities. The powerful victors, with greater control of media and other platforms, tend to label the rebelling minorities as “terrorists,” whereas their own more powerful and damaging actions are “patriotic.”
[More about labeling theory in Part II]. Current examples are the often suicidal resistance of the oppressed using what they have—their “bodies”—lacking helicopters, cannon, bulldozers, white phosphorus, bombers, drone planes, electronic communications, and so on. Is a “suicidal terrorist” in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Gaza any less human and courageous than our military personnel, [or those of Israel, for example] who “push buttons” in some secluded place to destroy their weaker challengers? Are we content with double standards of the value of human life?