Individual terror: Difference between revisions
Lovok Sovok (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Lovok Sovok (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Individual terror vs. political assassination== |
==Individual terror vs. political assassination== |
||
While revolutionary individual terror and political assassination share the common goal, a major political change, they differ in |
While revolutionary individual terror and traditional political assassination share the common goal, a major political change, they differ in various aspects: tactics, methods, role, view on the society, and significance of an individual act. Most of the differences stem from the immediate purpose of an individual act. In traditional political assassination the target of the killing is a central political figure, such as the [[king]] or [[dictator]], whose removal would give way to political changes, and as such the choice of the target is of primary importance. Whereas in individual terror, the choice of the target, while important, is secondary to the primary goal, which is to bring the attention of the public to a political movement and to promote the political movement. This key distinction explains differences in tactics. While traditional political assassination may well be clandestine, the efficiency of revolutionary individual terror in a greater extent depends on the publicity of the act. <ref name=zi/> |
||
==History== |
==History== |
||
Revision as of 17:15, 18 November 2010
 | This article or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this article or section has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use.
This article was last edited by Lovok Sovok (talk | contribs) 13 years ago. (Update timer) |
In leftist terminology, individual terror, a form of revolutionary terror, is the murder of isolated individuals with the goal of promotion of a political movement, of provoking political changes, up to political revolution.[1][2] As such, it differs from other forms of targeted killing, in particular, the close type of individual murder, the ancient practice of political assassination. [2]
Individual terror vs. political assassination
While revolutionary individual terror and traditional political assassination share the common goal, a major political change, they differ in various aspects: tactics, methods, role, view on the society, and significance of an individual act. Most of the differences stem from the immediate purpose of an individual act. In traditional political assassination the target of the killing is a central political figure, such as the king or dictator, whose removal would give way to political changes, and as such the choice of the target is of primary importance. Whereas in individual terror, the choice of the target, while important, is secondary to the primary goal, which is to bring the attention of the public to a political movement and to promote the political movement. This key distinction explains differences in tactics. While traditional political assassination may well be clandestine, the efficiency of revolutionary individual terror in a greater extent depends on the publicity of the act. [2]
History
The roots of individual terror as revolutionary tactics lie in the second half of the 19th century in Europe.[2] Part of its theoretical base was "propaganda by deed" put forth by the ideologists of anarchism. Different revolutionary parties had different attitude to individual terror, for political, tectical, moral, and other reasons. [1]
See also
References
- ^ a b Lev Sedov "On the Moscow Trials", Ch. 10, "Marxism and Individual Terror"
- ^ a b c d Ze'ev Iviansky, "Individual Terror: Concept and Typology", doi:10.1177/002200947701200102 Journal of Contemporary History January 1977 vol. 12 no. 1 43-63