Why do people commit acts of terrorism?

Why do people commit acts of terrorism? There are no easy answers to this question, but we will use the next few lessons to explore some of the reasons why people commit acts of terrorism. We will also explore alternative non-violent and legitimate means of bringing about change.

Why do people commit acts of terrorism? In the past, people have committed terrorist acts: because they want to become independent from the rest of the nation because they want to change the government because they want religious freedom out of retaliation for attacks on their members/people because they don’t agree with specific laws as revenge for perceived/real injustice. The attack of 9/11 was harder to understand because there isn’t one specific aim behind it.

Bringing about change It can be argued that terrorism is wrong for at least two reasons: Terrorism rarely, if ever, works. Governments and citizens often harden their positions when faced with terrorists and refuse to negotiate. Most people would claim that terrorism is morally wrong.

7/7 attack on London

7/7 attack on London On 7 July 2005, four “home grown” British terrorist carried out suicide bombings in London. Three on the tube network and one on a bus. 52 people were killed and 700 injured.

7/7 attack on London Did it work? What do you think the aims were? Has it succeeded?

Ken Livingstone Ken Livingston was the Mayor of London at the time of the attacks on 7 July 2005. He made a speech about the events. The speech was made in Singapore, where, the previous day it had been announced that London would host the 2012 Olympic games.

Ken Livingstone speech (Part 1) “I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever. That isn’t an ideology, it isn’t even a perverted faith - it is just an indiscriminate attempt at mass murder and we know what the objective is. They seek to divide Londoners. They seek to turn Londoners against each other. I said yesterday to the International Olympic Committee, that the city of London is the greatest in the world, because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack. They will stand together in solidarity alongside those who have been injured and those who have been bereaved and that is why I’m proud to be the mayor of that city.

Ken Livingstone speech (Part 2) Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life. I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail. In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential. They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don’t want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail.”

Bringing about change Case A Someone joins a large and peaceful march to protest about the Government spending cuts for universities. Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case B Someone joins a large march to protest about the raising of tuition fees at universities and throws a brick at a police van. Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case C A local hospital is under threat of being closed down. A campaign is running to try to keep it open. One person from the campaign handcuffs themselves to a Government minister, to try to raise awareness about the hospital in the national media. Link to a similar story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1204719.stm Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case D A university has been raising the fees they charge to students. To protest about this a group of students all sit down in the main entrance to the university, making it almost impossible for anyone to get in or out (a “sit in”). They boo any student or teacher that tries to enter or leave. Link to a similar story in America: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nashville_sit-ins Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case E A group of extremist Christians object to an abortion clinic being set up. They stand outside the building with posters and shout “murderers” at any woman entering. They photograph people who enter and put the photos on a website accusing them of murder. Link to a similar story: www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2011/03/110303_wt_westboro_baptist_church.shtml Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case F A group of animal rights protesters kidnap one of the directors of a fur farm in North America. They demand the release of all the animals into the wild before they will release the director. Link to a similar story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3541234.stm Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Bringing about change Case G In one country, black people were segregated from white people and treated as inferior. They were given worse housing, education and medical services than white people and often prevented from taking better-paid jobs. A group of black protesters wanted to change this system. They started a campaign of bombing official government buildings such as courts. They try to avoid killing humans if possible. Morally OK Morally grey Morally wrong

Case study Nelson Mandela was one of the leading members of the ANC, which engaged in violent protests and organising the bombing of buildings. In 1963, he was arrested and found guilty of acts of terrorism (sabotage) against the state. He was in prison until his release in 1990. He later acknowledged that even though apartheid was unfair and a breach of human rights, the use of force also violated other people’s human rights. The eventual release of Nelson Mandela came about largely through international pressure and economic sanctions. In other words, through peaceful means. Up to 2008, Nelson Mandela was not allowed to enter the USA because he has previously been classed as a terrorist.

Gandhi and non-violence "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." In the last century, Gandhi was a key figure in enabling India to gain independence from Britain. He was a political leader of many Hindus. He preached non-violent means of protest such as non-cooperation with the British authorities and boycotting British goods. Tens of thousands of followers took part in the non-violent demonstrations, and tens of thousands were sent to prison. By using non-violence, Gandhi and his followers were always able to take the moral high ground over the often violent British authorities. The protests were one of the key factors in India gaining independence from Britain and were the first time that non-violent action had been used on such a large scale "There are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes that I am prepared to kill for."

Question If it is not effective, then why do people still commit acts of terrorism?