ordinary use and highlighted by mainstream philosophical definitions such as those"d above: violence and intimidation. 1.1.3 The state as terrorist. MegaEssays, "The Reign Of Terror. Does only actual violence count, or do threats of violence also qualify? Insofar as the latter is judged to have done a wrong, he is thought of as a human. There is also one major difference: while Coady and Primoratz define terrorism as violence against non-combatants or innocent people, respectively, Bauhn's definition includes no such restriction. Yet another example is the definition proposed by Igor Primoratz: The deliberate use of violence, or threat of its use, against innocent people, with the aim of intimidating some other people into a course of action they otherwise would not take (Primoratz 2013: 24).
Reign of terror unjustifed essays
One can hold high government or military office and design or implement a terrorist campaign; terrorism is not the persuasive essay on why recycling is important preserve of insurgents. 1.1.4 Terrorists and freedom fighters, after the heyday of totalitarian terrorism in the 1930s and 1940s, internal state terrorism continued to be practiced by military dictatorships in many parts of the world, albeit in a less sustained and pervasive way. Alternatively, one might argue that the obvious, and obviously very weighty, considerations of rights (of the victims of terrorism) and justice (which demands respect for those rights) may sometimes be overridden by extremely weighty considerations of consequencesan extremely high price that would be paid for. Nevertheless, a residue of relativity remains. The definition does not rule out that in certain circumstances it might not be wrong, all things considered.