In the late 90’s I took (and later helped to teach) a course in Fort Huachuca, Arizona, called “Intelligence in Combating Terrorism.” The instructor was Bill Jordan, and to him, I owe a lot. He put me on the path that led to my writing a book called Antiterrorism and Threat Response: Planning and Implementation. That book has helped my career.
From Bill, I learned that “terrorism is an act of violence where the victim is not the intended target.” That remains the simplest and truest definition of terrorism that I’ve ever seen.
Things have changed. Terrorism is primarily about communication, and because the revolution in communications called the Internet appeared, terrorism has changed too. The change is best summed up in the simple statement by Lawrence M. Krause in a January 2016 article in The New Yorker titled: "Thinking Rationally About Terror" where he states " …terrorism is designed (to) drive a wedge between segments of a community which otherwise might have coexisted peacefully, both politically and socially."
Communication is a continuum. At one end is neutral language. At the other end is extreme radicalization. How does a society which reveres free speech protect its members from radical, extremist propaganda? Many people would argue that it can’t. Especially in a world where words show up on a smartphone, tablet, or desktop computer from anywhere in the world, and it takes specialized skills to figure out what country it came from.
People can seek to “drive a wedge between segments of a community which otherwise might have coexisted peacefully, both politically and socially” and be rewarded for it. Are they terrorists? Probably not until they break the law and someone gets hurt or something gets damaged.
Then there is ‘stochastic terrorism.’ The Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security, and Law defines it as: “the use of mass media to provoke random acts of ideologically motivated violence that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable”. What is the responsibility of the writer of words that ultimately lead to bloodshed? Especially that when cornered, they usually claim that they decry violence in all its forms, and argue that they are not responsible for the actions of someone they’ve never met, and don’t know.
I don’t have any answers here but one: if the aim of terrorists is to drive a wedge between segments of a community, then we should do everything in our power to promote peaceful coexistence across society. Reach out to people who look or think differently than you. Don’t listen or propagate language that demonizes or marginalizes anyone. Treat all people with the same respect and kindness that you would like them to show to you. Life is hard. Treating people well is not.