Terrorism is not a euphemism for a non-white person with a grudge. (And this usage, even by inference, should definitely be avoided in the mass media and by government spokespeople.)
Instead it might be said to refer to any individual (or group) that initiates a mass casualty event for reasons decidedly beyond the personal. In this case the Police have insisted that the Liverpool suspect’s actions are ‘not being treated as terrorism’ and yet they have revealed that he gained access to the restricted area by following an emergency vehicle, which does suggest to me a more than basic level of planning and intelligence.
And let’s face it, if he turns out to be an enraged Everton fan, and did this for (albeit disturbed) tribalist reasons, that would still be a form of terrorism, wouldn’t it? The fundamental drive does not need to be a geopolitical obsession.
And we’d then have to confront a further breakdown in the social order, whereby just about any extreme take on identity can lead to this explosive, culturally-absorbed kind of violence, albeit in copycat format.
I think we should be wary now of attempts to put this one down wholly to mental illness. The enraged and deranged parts of this act need to be identified and understood apart.
This individual drove a large vehicle into a crowd, including children, intent on causing harm indiscriminately, stopping only because of people trapped beneath it, and if there were any motivations for this beyond any private peculiarities of psychology, then the UK authorities really ought to treat it as a watershed, ‘iconic’ moment in the public expression of hatefulness.
But if he really was just a random loon, there still need to be some significant learnings for all future mass gatherings, especially those which are inherently grounded in the expression of tribal identity. (See also Canada’s recent trauma at a Filipino food fair.)
3 comments:
We have our indiscriminate gun killings here, a few run over everyone possible loonies, the gun loonies seem to be the favorite run-amuck style here in the US. However we treat these miscreants, they should never see the outside of a cage again in their natural life. The label we pin on them is wordplay. Criminally insane or a bonafide terrorist, life in a cage is all we have as a deterrent. Life is not fare.
I could be wrong but I suspect that this case may not turn out to be a run of the mill amok, so to speak. The age profile is odd. The police are mentioning drugs a lot. Sadly car killing is becoming more common, especially in countries where guns are not so easy to find.
Events have somewhat overtaken elements of your post. Ultimately, he hasn’t even been charged with attempted murder. This is a strange case. I suspect he just got himself into an awkward and potentially hazardous situation and just panicked. Billy. Still, that doesn’t take anything from your main points…
I’m inclined to believe that we should set a high bar when determining if an event is of a terrorist nature. The Venn diagram displaying the deranged and the enraged will have quite some overlap. I’d go so far as to say that whilst not all loons are terrorists, all terrorists are loons…
The definition of terrorism isn’t set in stone. But I think when listing the main ones, the conjunction should be ‘and’ and not ‘or’. Mass fatalities/injuries. AND intentional to influence government. I also think it needs to be committed by a group. I’m not convinced that lone wolves deserve the credit…
Post a Comment