Three Prejudices Against Terrorism
Critical Studies on Terrorism 2 (2):181-199 (2009)
AbstractThis paper criticizes three assumptions regarding terrorism and the agents who carry it out: 1) terrorists are always indiscriminate in their targeting, 2) terrorism is never effective in combating oppression, and 3) terrorists never participate in fair negotiations as they merely wish to switch places with their oppressors. By criticizing these three prejudices against terrorism, the paper does not attempt to justify or excuse terrorism generally nor in the specific case of Sri Lanka which is examined. Instead, it creates the necessary room for such justifications or excuses to be critically appraised by dismantling the popular myths surrounding terrorism.
Similar books and articles
Unraveling Emergency Justifications and Excuses for Terrorism.Shawn Kaplan - 2011 - Journal of Social Philosophy 42 (2):219-238.
Defining Terrorism.Scott C. Lowe - 2006 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 2:253-256.
The Disastrous War Against Terrorism: Violence Versus Enlightenment.Nicholas Maxwell - 2007 - In Albert W. Merkidze (ed.), Terrorism Issues: Threat Assessment , Consequences and Prevention.
Philosophy 9/11: Thinking About the War on Terrorism.Timothy Shanahan (ed.) - 2005 - Open Court.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads