Literally every rebellion is fueled by terrorism. I’m just going to assume you’re from the US, because the odds are high. Look into our rebellion. It’s not particularly pretty. The difference between something being called a rebellion or terrorism is which side you’re on, and in the future which side won.
Edit: Usually media doesn’t go into this, but some does. I appreciate how Star Trek Deep Space 9 analyzes terrorism and discusses how it’s sometimes necessary and sometimes it’s evil, and sometimes it’s a necessary evil. I also appreciate how Andor has done this for Star Wars. The rebellion there has always been this pristine thing to the viewers, but Andor dives into how it has to behave behind the scenes. It’s not just the epic battles of our main heroes, it’s a fight between life and death for everyday people who are severely under-armed.
I strongly disagree, but I suspect this will quickly devolve into an argument about the semantics of “terrorism.” So I’ll focus on this part: “intentionally murder innocent civilians.” I do not agree that all successful rebellions required the intentional murder of innocent civilians.
That part is debatable, and it also depends on the semantics of innocent. If you announce you want to irradicate the other people, are you innocent? If you vote for that, are you innocent? Guilt doesn’t just require carrying a gun or Hitler would be innocent.
The problem with the word terrorism is its all semantics. Every government (or sudo-government entity) is a terrorist if you want them to be. It’s a useless word. If you use fear or force to try to enforce something, you’re a terrorist. The IDF walks around with guns to keep things in check. That’s terrorism by almost any definition, but it depends on who’s talking.
Literally every rebellion is fueled by terrorism. I’m just going to assume you’re from the US, because the odds are high. Look into our rebellion. It’s not particularly pretty. The difference between something being called a rebellion or terrorism is which side you’re on, and in the future which side won.
Edit: Usually media doesn’t go into this, but some does. I appreciate how Star Trek Deep Space 9 analyzes terrorism and discusses how it’s sometimes necessary and sometimes it’s evil, and sometimes it’s a necessary evil. I also appreciate how Andor has done this for Star Wars. The rebellion there has always been this pristine thing to the viewers, but Andor dives into how it has to behave behind the scenes. It’s not just the epic battles of our main heroes, it’s a fight between life and death for everyday people who are severely under-armed.
I strongly disagree, but I suspect this will quickly devolve into an argument about the semantics of “terrorism.” So I’ll focus on this part: “intentionally murder innocent civilians.” I do not agree that all successful rebellions required the intentional murder of innocent civilians.
That part is debatable, and it also depends on the semantics of innocent. If you announce you want to irradicate the other people, are you innocent? If you vote for that, are you innocent? Guilt doesn’t just require carrying a gun or Hitler would be innocent.
The problem with the word terrorism is its all semantics. Every government (or sudo-government entity) is a terrorist if you want them to be. It’s a useless word. If you use fear or force to try to enforce something, you’re a terrorist. The IDF walks around with guns to keep things in check. That’s terrorism by almost any definition, but it depends on who’s talking.