Terrorism and the uses of terror

Journal of Ethics 8 (1):5-35 (2004)
Abstract
“Terrorism”' is sometimes defined as a “form ofcoercion.” But there are important differences between ordinary coercion and terrorist intimidation. This paper explores some of those differences, particularly the relation between coercion, on the one hand, and terror and terrorization, on the other hand. The paper argues that while terrorism is not necessarily associated with terror in the literal sense, it does often seek to instill a mental state like terror in the populations that it targets. However, the point of instilling this mental state is not necessarily coercive or intimidatory: one can try to instill terror as an act of punishment, or as an expressive or therapeutic act, or because one values the political consequences that might follow, or because one thinks terror is preferable, from an ethical point of view, to the inauthentic complacency that characterizes the targeted population at present. Though this paper asks questions about the definition of “terrorism,” these questions are not asked for their own sake. The quest for a canonical definition of “terrorism” is probably a waste of time. But asking questions which sound like questions of definition is sometimes a fruitful way of focusing our reflections on terrorism and organizing our response.
Keywords Hannah Arendt  coercion  definition  fear  Thomas Hobbes  intimidation  liberty  means/end distinction  rational choice  state  terror  terrorism  terrorize  threat
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,412
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA
Clive Barnett (2009). Violence and Publicity: Constructions of Political Responsibility After 9/11. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (3):353-375.
Verena Erlenbusch (2013). How (Not) to Study Terrorism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (4):1-22.
Tamar Meisels (2009). Defining Terrorism – a Typology. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (3):331-351.
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

87 ( #14,748 of 1,103,045 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

9 ( #24,631 of 1,103,045 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.