How Far Would You Go For Your Cause?

Political and social statements motivate acts of terror. While instilling terror in people is the method of these acts of intimidation, state-sanctioned terror, endorsed by the government, often falls under the rubric of “maintaining public safety,” while all other acts are deemed “terrorist.” The FBI defines terrorism as:

“the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

Whether enacted by the government or by insurgent groups/individuals, acts of terror are thus categorized as “good” or “bad” by the law; the government controls what type of violence is allowed, and who can commit those acts. “Lawful” terror, then, often promotes the political or social position of the state, while any resistance to that stance becomes “unlawful” terror.

In 2003, millions of protesters held peaceful rallies, sit-ins, marches, etc. to protest the war in Iraq. Meanwhile, President George W. Bush approved the U.S. Patriot Act, allowing protesters to be held and prosecuted as “domestic terrorists,” thus linking political dissent with criminality. The global anti-war protests garnered minimal media coverage, and governments proceeded to send their military forces into Iraq. The few stories that did make it into the media portrayed mainly violent incidents that arose at the protests. Meanwhile, stories on terrorism and violent acts such as car bombings, hijackings, suicide bombers, etc., continue to attract extensive media coverage. If media and technology act as the primary means of attracting widespread attention and disseminating information—thus acting as a possible avenue for propagating terror—then are terrorist acts the new and chilling voice of effective protest? Where does one draw the line between resistance to hegemonic ideology and terrorism? Is violence, as Franz Fanon suggested, the only means to revolution? How can individuals effectively resist terror or being terrorized? And when do acts countering terrorism become terrorist themselves?

Bush's War on Terror :The USA Patriot Act counters terrorism with tactics that violate civil rights

War in Chechnya : An essay questioning the line between terrorism and resistance

Las Madres de Plaza de Mayo : In 1978, the Argentinian government labelled this group of mothers of "disappeared" childen as subversives and dissidents

Anti-War Demonstrations : Organized resistance to the war on Iraq

9/11 Commision An independent, bipartisan commission chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Peaceful Tomorrows: An advocacy organization founded by family members of September 11th victims who have united to turn our grief into action for peace.

The Scholar and Feminist Online: A triannual, multimedia, online-only journal of feminist theories and women's movements, provides public access to the Barnard Center for Research on Women.

Not in Our Name : A national network of individuals and organizations committed to building, strengthening and expanding resistance to stop the U.S. government's entire course of war and repression being waged in the name of "fighting terrorism."

Surveillance Camera Players : A group of socially conscious theatrical workers protesting the use of surveillance cameras as violations of your right to privacy.

Memora activa (Active memory): Argentinian protest group against state impunity. Que nunca mas!