132342_B

Recitation paper (14 March 2015)

Recent attacks on France include the Charlie Hebdo shooting and the stabbing of
three military men at a grocery store, both of which shocked local and international
audiences. As I read articles and watch debates about the subject, I recall the Mamasapano
incident, better known as Maguindanao Massacre, which occurred just last January 25. After
delving into the Internet and doing further research, I happened upon long lists of terrorist
attacks that ensued over the course of French and Philippine history. From the Philippines
1971 Plaza Miranda bombing and Frances 1800 Paris Bombing, both countries have had
their share of terrorist attacks, successful or otherwise, repeat or singular events.
Terrorism is a curious thing. Common knowledge would suggest that terrorism is
believed to be single, particular attacks; separate incidents that were caused by various groups
of people. Merriam-Websters online database defined terrorism as the use of violent acts to
frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal. To add, in the US
Code, the term terrorism means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated
against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended
to influence an audience. (y) The term international terrorism means terrorism involving
citizens or the territory of more than one country. (y) The term terrorist group means any
group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism (US
Code, Title 22, y 2656f(d)). For the purpose of this paper, we would be transcending beyond
this limited and sort of short-cutted definition and try theorizing upon the words terror
and terrorism.
As previously mentioned, the worlds history has been blotted by differing incidents
of terrorism. According to Rapoport (1984), while its own type of terrorism no doubt
characterizes each era, there seems to be a tendency to regard the present as wholly unique
and as a new era, even as one in which terrorism for the first time becomes a really
pertinent political reality. Like terrorism, characterizations of political times as uniquely
dominated by terrorism come and go, yet somehow, it is always inextricably bound to the
reaction to terrorism. It is a paradox. Now, going back to the definitions mentioned, a
consistent element is the use of violence in the perpetration of an intentional and criminal act,
putting emphasis on the word violence. What differentiates terrorism from other forms of
violence according to these definitions is, in the final instance, a specific form of
intentionality. Terrorism is thus usually defined, in the end, in terms solely of intentions of
terrorists. In a normal, everyday setting, non-terrorist but violent acts against members of the
public can easily create unease and panic among bystanders and even those who arent even
remotely related to the incident in question. Use of physical force is an effective way to scare
and terrorize people.
In many news centers, when there are reports regarding a convicted serial killer on the
loose, those are enough to send most families cramming to purchase and install the newest
and best security systems they could afford, even if their chances of encountering the fugitive
are very, very slim. Terror is a powerful emotion. It is a variation of fear, one of the most
contagious feelings. In this example, one can say that terrorism is actively happening in this
area, within the families who became concerned with the serial killer. So, terrorism isnt just
single incidents. It is a recurring theme that constantly pulls affected persons under the
blanket of fear. Fear of death, fear of pain, fear of involvement, fear of accountability, etc.

Willem Schinkel introduces and explains the concept of indirect instrumentalism.

What can be first of all distilled from current conceptualizations is that terrorism works by
way of an indirect instrumentalism. That is to say that terrorists lack the power to directly
influence the actors (states mostly) whose behaviour they wish to change, and therefore target
third parties. Thus, Stern defines terrorism as an act or threat of violence against noncombatants, with the objective of intimidating or otherwise influencing an audience or
audiences (Stern, 1999, p. 30, 2003). By targeting a few non-combatants On the concept of
terrorism r 2009 Palgrave Macmillan 1470-8914 Contemporary Political Theory Vol. 8, 2,
176198 181 directly, terrorism targets an entire audience indirectly (compare Wardlaw,
1982; Gibbs, 1989; Crenshaw, 2001; Enders and Sandler, 2002; Primoratz, 2004).
With that said, my independent variable would be the emotions elicited by acts of
terrorism, and the dependent variable would be the awareness and acknowledgement of such
emotions. Terror and insecurity will always be present in a world that continues to use violent
acts of war to negotiate for peace. They need not even be in the form of radical and recorded
events that involve numerous entities. Terror can exist in even the smallest unit of society
the family. Most mothers would want their children to perform well academically, and there
is a lot of pressure on those who showed promise or intellectual capabilities more advanced
that his or her peers. As in PSY101, too much negative reinforcement (such as taking away
video games in the hopes that the victim would study more, has been proven to backfire.
Children who constantly feel oppressed are experiencing a type of terror, albeit smaller, and
less dangerous. This emotion is carried throughout most of the kids life. Manifesting only
when the memory of his or her childhood has been raised and drew upon. Its not just in a
kindergarten setting.
The presence of terror can exist on any plane on this earth, as long as emotions can
exist in a particular environment, then so can terror. The catch is, acts of terrorism wont
always be seen as such. As mentioned earlier, people see terrorism as this radical activity
done out of desperation and extremity. But terrorism can exist in planes wherever terror is
present, or even not. So, while acknowledgement of the incident terrorism isnt always
conscious, terror, or fear is always constant, and may or not always be apparent. People are
always afraid of something, be it themselves, their grades, or their affairs. In this constant
state of fearing and panicking, we gradually became used to this feeling, thereby effectively
diminishing the effects of terror. If terror is not experienced, it does not mean terrorism
doesnt exist. Rather, there is just an inability to accurately sense the presence of the emotion.
We live in a constantly terrifying world. From deadly epidemics to freak accidents to
self-induced harm. Even just one of them could be enough to scare us for the rest of our lives,
but that doesnt happen. Instead, we only feel terrorized when specific events are brought to
our attention. For example, in the 9/11 crash, most of America did not feel safe inside their
homes. At the time, every existing news provider and social networking site was pushing the
same story. The consumers or audience, on their part, actively sought out these stories by
reading newspapers, watching the TV, and checking their inboxes. There were far more
deadlier and worse things that could harm us, but were never brought up. The knowledge sat
comfortably in the back of ones mind, existing, but never doing enough to warrant action
and emotion on the part of the user. This passive kind of action is scary. We wait for
information to be handed to us on a silver platter, and do away with those that are not. Its
like a there exists a filter for events that are big enough to be one the news and those that
are not.

Bibliography:
FAST FACTS: Mamasapano, Maguindanao. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2015, from
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/82507-fast-facts-mamasapano-maguindanao
France - France debates tough new anti-terror bill: What do the experts think? (n.d.).
Retrieved March 7, 2015, from http://www.france24.com/en/20140916-france-debates-toughnew-anti-terror-bill-what-do-experts-think/
List of terrorist incidents in France. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_France
Schinkel, W. (n.d.). On the concept of terrorism. Theory and Practice. Retrieved March 7,
2015, from http://www.palgrave-journals.com/cpt/journal/v8/n2/pdf/cpt200837a.pdf
Terrorism in the Philippines. (n.d.). Retrieved March 7, 2015, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_Philippines
Vignettes: More about the 17 killed in French terror attacks - CNN.com. (n.d.). Retrieved
March 13, 2015, from http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/10/world/france-paris-who-were-terrorvictims/