Two-part question:
First, we all come to the idea of terrorism with preconceptions, conscious and unconscious. Do the lineages presented by Laqueur (1977) and Kumamoto (2014) confirm or challenge how you think about “terrorism” and what it is?
Second, Laqueur (1977) reserves the moniker “terrorism” for those that use “terror” systematically. Is this useful? Does he provide a clue as to why a group would resort to terror more systematically than another? What kinds of groups might this definition privilege, that is, which are less likely to be marked as terrorist by this approach?
-You do not have to use and excessive vocabulary
– PLEASE make sure to Cite
– Please be to the point in 300-350 words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.