Typologies of Terrorism



Typologies of Terrorism

A Tactical Typology of Terrorism

TYPOLOGIES OF TERRORISM

A typology is a classification system, and there are as many typologies of terrorism as there are definitions. Models, classification systems, and typologies, however, offer an alternative to definitions, and they have several advantages. First, the broad scope of the problem can be presented. Terrorism is composed of a variety of activities, not a singly defined action. A typology captures the range of terrorist activities better than most definitions. Second, the scope of the problem allows the level of the problem to be introduced. Terrorism can be local, national, or international in occurrence. A typology helps identify what kind of terrorism is to be examined. Third, when the level of terrorism is identified, the level of response can be determined. Finally, by focusing on types of violence and the social meanings of tactics, typologies avoid the heated debates about the meaning of terrorism.

Typologies are not a panacea, and they do not solve all the definitional dilemmas. First, the process of terrorism is in a constant state of change. Models, taxonomies, and typologies only describe patterns among events.

They are generalizations that describe extremely unstable environments. Typologies may increase our understanding of terrorism, but each terrorist incident must be understood in its specific social, historical, and political circumstances.

Another weakness of typologies involves the distortion of reality. After developing a model, some people, including scholars, try to fit particular forms of terrorism into it. They alter what they see so that it will blend with their typology. This has been especially true regarding Latin America. Governments, journalists, teachers, and revolutionaries have developed ideological typologies for Latin America and then bent reality to fit their political views. Changing events to fit a pattern can completely distort reality. When this happens, researchers only see what they want to see. In addition, typologies hide details. They produce patterns, not specifics, even when they are correctly applied.

If you assume that Fleming, Stohl, and Schmid are correct, you may reject the use of typologies; however, they can have limited benefit. Although they do not solve the definitional problems or provide a method for examining deep-seated political and social issues, they can be useful in the more limited role of tactically identifying a security problem. Some noted authorities have approached terrorism in this manner

Toward A Tactical Typology _Of Terrorism

Although this is not an optimistic thought, a simple assumption will help you understand terrorism. Humans live in a constant state of conflict. Indeed, it is impossible to have a human social organization without conflict. Even in the most peaceful community, social organization is maintained because the controlling group can force people to join the organization and force members to obey the organization's rules. The amount of force is subject to limitation, but the ability to coerce is real. Therefore, social organizations are never truly “at peace”; they are always “at war.” The amount and level of conflict varies, but conflict is normative.If you accept this assumption, you will be able ...