A Certain Distinction over Terms of Violence
Various!Posted by Terje Lea 2011-05-31 03:17:35 [CEST]
I just like to mention these three concepts:
Attempt (French: Attentat), mostly political
Coup (Coup d'etat), political revolution, armed revolt
Terrorism, the act of imposing general fear/terror on a certain population or on a scope of population
Now as these are listed, I just like to point out the excellent distinction of "attempt". As a part of the political "game", one can expect to be having the possibility of committing an attempt. An attempt is important in the sense that hard impact (mostly implying damage and killing) can be made to some justified extent. I'm not sure if RAF (Rote Arme Fraktion) has been admitted this term or if they were just some kind of terror group. What I find interesting is that violent behaviour to a dysfunctional aspect of society is warranted. You know, that you have a good and justified violence to turn to in case you make the case for it and I think this avenue should be used more rather than seeing people blowing themselves up in apparently aimless acts of "terrorism", that the fashionable words have gone too far, like the ecological movements call for nuclear free world while flaunting increased fossil fuel dependence and overpopulation issues or the Doha debates for cultural understanding when the reality is really about business obstacles and the domination game. But then again, I find these harder activities void of the good intellectual leadership. An extraordinary example in this relation is the separation between Sinn Fein and its armed political activism of the IRA (Irish Republican Army). So, all in all, the intellectuals are missing their chances of getting the good data and descriptions presented and the media only gets to present the base, factual occurrence of violence taking place. This is not very helpful and I think we who can should work to amend these explanatory deficits! Good?
http://blog.t-lea.net/#post201
No comments:
Post a Comment