1 / 14

Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 477 Terrorism Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem

Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 477 Terrorism Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem Ali The Nature of the Beast. Hate Crimes: Acts of Terrorism? Hate crimes defined? Law enforcement issue rather than a national security one

parry
Télécharger la présentation

Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 477 Terrorism Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Department of Criminal Justice California State University - Bakersfield CRJU 477 Terrorism Dr. Abu-Lughod, Reem Ali The Nature of the Beast

  2. Hate Crimes: Acts of Terrorism? • Hate crimes defined? • Law enforcement issue rather than a national security one • Separation of hate crimes from terrorism • The relativity of Crime? • Political violence: against a particular race, religion, etc… may fit both hate crimes and T

  3. Reactionaries Vs. Radicals • Finding the distinction between right wing and left wing • Reactionary: far and fringe rightist ideologies. The NOSTALGIC perception • Radical: far and fringe leftist ideologies. The idealistic • Example of National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) guerilla movement 1970s. Leftist fighting alongside Marxist Movement for the Liberation of Angola against Portuguese colonialists

  4. LEFT TO RIGHT • Fringe Left: Marxist ideology: the justification of political violence for liberation from oppression…it’s a just fight • Liberalism: defined depending on societies within which they exist and function. People’s rights movement, gay rights, etc… • The Moderate Center. The balancing rod between the liberals and conservative. Finding consensus • Conservatism: also depending on the society within which it exists and function. Edmund Burke considered the father of modern conservatism. Questioning radical change • Far Right: lack of engagement in political violence and more participation in democratic processes . Adherence to social order and traditional values • Fringe Right: ethno-national and religious superiority. Justification of terrorist violence

  5. Defining Terrorism and sources of T • Extremism as a precursor to T…justification of behavior • Please read examples on page 42 Characteristics of Violent Extremists • Intolerance • Moral Absolutes • Broad Conclusions • New Language and Conspiratorial Beliefs

  6. The World of Extremists and the Conspiracy Theory Sep 11th 2001 and who was behind the attack Please read example on page 44. Blaming the Jews Some consensus but no unanimity Guerilla Warfare Vs. T Other definitions of T on page 46-47 (please read) Illegal force, political motives, attacks against “soft” civilians, etc…

  7. The American Definition • U.S. DOD: “the unlawful use of, or threatened use, of force or violence against individuals or property to coerce and intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives” • FBI: “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”

  8. Types of T: • State T • Dissident T • Religious T • Criminal T • International T Perspectives on T: • Participants in a terrorist environment • The terrorist • The supporter • The victim • The target • The onlooker • Modern mass media • The analyst

  9. T or freedom fighting? • Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) in Israel • Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka • Extremism or “mainstreamism”? • Opposition v. acceptance • Rationalization and justifiable behavior

  10. Ideologies and Ideals • Evaluating and analyzing behavior • Belief systems • Future predictions and policy implications Anarchism, Marxism & Fascism • A: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon “property is theft” • Mikhail Bakunin, Sergei Nechayev and Petr Kropotkin

  11. M: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels • Lenin (Russia), Mao Zedong (China), Monh (Vietnam) and Castro (Cuba) and their revolutionaries doctrines • F: rightists ideological counterpoint to Marxism and anarchism peaked prior to WWII • Italian F (Benito Mussolini), German F (Adolf Hitler), Spanish F (Francisco Franco)

  12. The Just War Doctrine • The Hague Conventions • Jus in bello, and jus ad bellum The Political Violence Matrix The dilemma of defining Combatants, Non-combatants, and the Use of Force • Combatants: conventional and non-conventional adversaries engaging in armed conflict and irregular guerilla fighting • Non-Combatants: civilians who have no connection to military or other security forces

  13. Indiscriminate and Discriminate Forces • I.F.: application of force without attempting to limit the level of force or the degree of destruction of the target. More acceptable when used in a warfare environment • D.F.: more surgical use of limited force. Morally acceptable when applied against specific targets with the intention to limit so-called collateral damage

  14. Conclusion • The nature of the Beast • Definitional T • Fascism (dictator), Marxism (socialist, classless), and Anarchism (against state) • Cause of T

More Related