What does terrorism mean to you?

Banner used by FBI. Image in public domain, from Wikimedia Commons..

Before proceeding, write your own definition of “terrorism.” Then you can compare it with other definitions from ordinary people from over 40 countries around the world who responded to the Group on International Perspectives on Governmental Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP) survey.

This study revealed that “terrorism,” like “war,” is defined in many different ways, but those definitions fall into several major thematic categories.

Some definitions focus on perceived causes or motivations for terrorism:

  • “People who fight for idealism
  • Last resort in getting global response: e.g. Palestine, N. Ireland”
  • An expression of senseless rage against innocent people to get a point across”

Another group of definitions focus on the methods or processes of terrorism:

  • “it is a kind of weapon used by anti-social elements”
  • “violently attack someone or something outside the bounds of normal warfare”

Some definitions focus on the outcomes of terrorism:

  • When innocent people die because of someone else’s beliefs, either political or religious”
  • Activities linked to physical, economic and psychological damage
  • “It is what destroys peace.”

A final prominent theme involves value judgments concerning the nature of terrorism:

  • Unacceptable way of reaching your goal, kind of illness”
  • “Barbarism”
  • “An insidious irrational cowardly style of murder”

What do you think of these definitions? Does your definition fall into one of these thematic categories? Would you change your definition in any way now that you have seen these definitions?

In our earlier post on definitions of war, we ended with several questions about gender differences in types of definitions. The answers to these questions varied by geographical and cultural context.

For example, women from English-speaking countries (the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and Australia) were more likely than men from those countries to make moral judgments concerning war, whereas men from those countries focused more on criteria for calling a conflict a war. Women from Latin America were significantly more likely than Latin American men to refer to concrete outcomes of war in their definitions.

Are any of these differences surprising to you?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

From the Nile to the Euphrates (Stories of engagement)

Today we are happy to share the story of our latest portrait in moral engagement: Dr. Dahlia Wasif. Over the next few months, we will provide excerpts from her dramatic and engaging book-in progress. Stay tuned.Dahlia Wasif

Dr. Dahlia Wasfi is an internationally known speaker and activist. Born in the United States to an American Jewish mother and an Iraqi Muslim father, she lived in Iraq as a child, returning to the U.S. at age 5.

After graduating from Swarthmore College with a B.A. in Biology in 1993, she earned her medical degree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1997.

Dr. Wasfi has made two trips to Iraq to visit her extended family since the 2003 “Shock and Awe” invasion, including a three month stay in Basrah in the spring of 2006.

She has brought her eyewitness account of life under occupation to 23 states  in the U.S.; Capitol Hill in D.C.; Toronto and Vancouver, Canada; Madrid, Spain in 2007; and the 3rd International Iraq Conference in Berlin, Germany, in March 2008.

Based on her experiences, Dr. Wasfi speaks out in support of immediate, unconditional withdrawal of American forces from Iraq and the need to end the occupation “from the Nile to the Euphrates.” She is currently working on a book.

Her website is www.liberatethis.com. Please also watch this short YouTube video of Dr. Wasif giving a presentation on Iraq to Congress:

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

Ordinary people: Thoughts about war and peace

Ever since 9/11, the Group on International Perspectives on Governmental Aggression and Peace (GIPGAP) has been studying the views of ordinary people concerning war and peace and related issues.

logo for GIPGAPWe started our work at Boston University but soon attracted psychologists and other social scientists from around the world to work with us on the project.

We have investigated, for example, the extent to which people from different countries, different continents, different religions, different ethnicities, and different genders define terms like “war” and “peace” in similar—or different—ways. We have also studied people’s justifications for invading other countries or torturing prisoners of war, and explored the extent to which such justifications vary among people from different countries, religions, etc.

We have findings from countries as diverse as the United States, Iceland, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Russia, Lebanon, Kuwait, Egypt, South Africa, India, Japan, Korea, Australia, Canada, Peru, and Nicaragua.

Consider what you know about government-sponsored aggression around the world. In what countries do you think the greatest support for government-sponsored aggression can be found? We’ll report some findings in our next post.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology