The Student Room Group

Please help! Its urgent!

Hello,
I have an essay due tonight that has to be at undergraduate standard and needs to explore the title 'What is terrorism'... this is a rough copy and any help is appreciated. Thanks so much xo


What is in the label ‘Terrorism’?
Intro: Terrorism is the spread of terror in its simple form, but that raises the question, why? This then leads to other question and so forth. In this essay I am going to attempt to what many have done; explore and address the complexity of terrorism; how difficult it is to define it and why? Why it so hard to define? The uses of labelling and media manipulation are common reasons for the use of the label. Through my musings I also wish to develop what a terrorist attack must entail to be categorized as a terrorist attack, what are the basic elements that link all terrorist cases together? This topic of course will raise many questions that aren’t answerable and will lead to problematizing terrorism rather than answering the question itself of ‘What is Terrorism?’
The definitions: The definition of terrorism itself has been debated for decades but no universal definition has ever come to place because the term itself is so so politically and emotively charged that it becomes subject too circumstance. All acts of terrorism entails a form of political gain and is set to provoke an emotional response, an example includes one of the most well known acts of terrorism; 9/11. Described as a ‘global symbolic event’1 it was initiated by Islamic terrorist group “Al Quaeda” on the world trade centre in New York. Their apparent political aim was to cause horror so as to provoke a reaction from the US government, to demonstrate their displeasure of their presence in their countries. Evidently terrorist attacks are so subject to circumstance that even the interpreted aims are my own opinion or have been extracted from the influence of friend’s or media I have been exposed to. The attack caused the emotional response of horror, Islamaphobia, and disgust at these people and their countries. The political gain that Al Quaeda achieved was the recognition of their suffering worldwide; they wanted to ‘Wake the American people up’2 as said by Sheikh Mohammed, High ranking member of Al Quaeda, just as this major global event was to cause an emotive response leading to political gain, so were the more smaller events in history such as the failed gunpowder plot in 1605, their political gain? To assassinate King James thus ensuring a Catholic monarch would come to the throne. A recurring theme that seems to divide political motives I religion as can be seen in the Woolwhich attack.
Terrorism is an ongoing struggle, as long as politics, and suffering exist, terrorism will never cease. Today in England the most recent terrorist attack that’s being discussed to a wide length is the ‘Woolwich attack’ which is the killing of soldier Lee Rigby in the street by two Muslim men claiming that it was revenge for all the Muslims the British Military have killed. This inevitably led to Islamaphobia rising due to the attack as well as many other reasons such as 9/11 and 7/7 bombings in London. On the Telegraph website there is a section for Terrorism in the UK in which almost 90% of articles are based on Islam3. ‘The truth about the 'wave of attacks on Muslims’ after Woolwich murder’4 is the only article that talks interestingly enough of the effect of the Woolwich attack of hate crimes towards Muslims compared to the other articles that talk of the attack itself alongside the Muslim motives. This label of Michael Adelobajo as a terrorist Another point not view arguably is that any one saying this is too hastily accused of Islamaphobia. The article then goes on to say of the Tell mama company that monitors anti Muslim attacks being a façade and mentions how incidents are ‘at the lower levels or seriousness’. It also questions the definition of Islamaphobia saying that anyone who questions the faith has the word ‘Islamaphobic’ as a handy charger to be ‘thrown at anyone who questions Islamist Ideology’. Generally although the article is about Muslims as victims it still downsizes the violence and hate they suffer to a trivial level as well as blaming Muslims for too easily labelling people as having Islamaphobia. It’s clear that The Telegraph is happy to brand Muslims as the attackers rather than the ‘attackee’s’ resulting in the media promoting Islamaphobia as its portrayed in a negative light.
In addition to this I’d like to conclude that media’s definition of terrorism changes as it revolves around current issues so depending on the victim, it’s applied accordingly. The media has much power as it labels
The label it itself has many implications therefore giving it great power. It implicates, violence, killing of the innocent, political means, which provoking a reaction gives the person doing the labelling much power. Buy labelling a group as a terrorist
“The words and concepts we use to discuss terrorism and counterterrorism—including the word "terrorism" itself—can have profound implications for how countries, populations and individuals behave, psychological researchers maintain.”5
Terrorism has an infinite number of definitions because of the many factors that are involved in defining it such as the individual, the situation they’re in and the issues they’re facing. Whether the violence directly effects the also makes an impact; A victim, being subject to a great deal of violence is looking for someone to blame and so labels the person causing the violence a ‘Terrorist’ as opposed to someone who is on the other end of the stick violence who labels them as a ‘Rebel’ or a ‘Revolutionary’. The Label ‘terrorism’ seems to imply that it is ‘Extreme’ acts, but, what is extreme? Is that definable? Or is then again subject to the individual, the situation they’re in and the issues they’re facing. The majority’s opinion is affected because of the outcome of an influential opinion leader such as government, important political figures, anyone they have faith in. The government blamed Nelson Mandela for his supporting party’s actions even though he was in jail and the violent wing wasn’t under his direct control, they made a scapegoat of him and diverted the public’s attention towards the violent actions that he was responsible for rather than letting them see the justified reasoning behind them. The government exerts its control through the media this way, which can be seen easily in their ‘Hang Nelson Mandela poster’6, this form of propaganda influences the public’s view of Nelson Mandela ergo influencing them. The complexity of the word ‘Terrorism’ is further deepened when it is used differently e.g. the government uses the word ‘terrorism’ to stigmatize and de-legitimize their opponents. The opposite party rejects the use of the word terrorism, often calling themselves ‘Freedom fighters’ because that’s what they truly believe they are. Media generally uses the word ‘terrorist’ as a way to categorize the extremists, It is the journalists purpose to inform as simply as possible to the mass and so are supposed to use the word only when there are no other words able to describe those people being defined, although it is questionable that to what extent is the media, opinion and influence free when it is under control of the government?
Terrorism is so difficult to define because it means something different to everyone.
There is no universal definition except the scantily clad ‘terror involvement’ which barely covers the basics. The word has an individual meaning to us all. What a terrorist is to me may be a freedom fighter for you. I may look upon my British soldiers with respect but somewhere in the middle of the so called uncivilised Syria a widow may look in disgust. We’re all quick to label, that man in that video on YouTube that severed a soldiers head but do we really have the right to do so? Because from how I see it, that soldier could have severed the attacker’s mothers head too, just because our government says its legal, does not mean it is moral. I am not saying what Michael Abadalajo did is in any way justified but perhaps we should open our eyes and all question ‘What is terrorism?’ rather than swallowing the information the media spoon feeds us.

unquestioningly swallow the information fed to us by the media but do we ever stop to
Hey there. While you're waiting for a reply to your post, we thought we'd give your thread a timely bump.

But don't twiddle your thumbs in the meantime! Kick off your revision and study time by heading to our Learn Together section.

In Learn Together, you'll find interactive study tools to help make your revision quicker and easier. We've also got thousands of handpicked assignments analysed by great teachers, so you can learn from top-marked work. And there's tons more too: get started on Learn Together now!

Quick Reply

Latest