Abstract
There is a strong tendency in the scholarly and sub-scholarly literature on terrorism to treat it as something like an ideology. There is an equally strong tendency to treat it as always immoral. Both tendencies go hand in hand with a considerable degree of unclarity about the meaning of the term ‘terrorism’. I shall try to dispel this unclarity and I shall argue that the first tendency is the product of confusion and that once this is understood, we can see, in the light of a more definite analysis of terrorism, that the second tendency raises issues of inconsistency, and even hypocrisy. Finally, I shall make some tentative suggestions about what categories of target may be morally legitimate objects of revolutionary violence, and I shall discuss some lines of objection to my overall approach.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Cited by
36 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Terrorism;Social Contract Theory and International Relations;2024
2. Moralities of Drone Violence;2023-03-13
3. On the responsible use of armed drones: the prospective moral responsibilities of states;The International Journal of Human Rights;2019-11-12
4. Ransom;The International Encyclopedia of Ethics;2019-06-29
5. ‘Monkeywrenching’ and the Processes of Democracy;Ecology and Democracy;2017-06-28