Revolution, Terrorism & War

Terrorists or Freedom Fighters

The word terrorist cannot be matched to a single worldwide definition. However, many refer to terrorists as the people who use violence to attain a political end. Others consider people who fight oppressive governments as terrorists. Governments are, however, seen to fight some forms of terrorism while they fund others (Herman, 2015). The controversy of terrorism is thus deepened when governments share common interests with the terrorizing group. The words ‘terrorist’ and ‘freedom fighters’ are thus differentiated on the argument on whether the actions of the focus group has the same legal protection given to sanctioned soldiers.

The IRA, Hamas, and the Arab world fought the British, French and German colonists, out of their countries. In this fights, many were killed, several bombings occurred, kidnappings were witnessed, extortions, smuggling and robberies occurred, and others were punished through beatings. However, these actions no matter how aggressive achieved the main purpose of the violence, which is freedom from colonialists.

The soldiers were given government support in forms of weapons and finances, which enabled them to fight for their people. Governments do not support terrorism against their people (Herman, 2015). The provision of support thus meant that the mission of the war was for a good course. The fighters can thus be referred to as freedom fighters, more than they are terrorists. The governments had their main focus on the ultimate goal of the wars, despite the consequences of it along the way.

Also, the international community provided economic support to the soldiers as they fought their way towards freedom. The international community was thus at war with the colonizers, who denied the people of these countries the freedom they deserve to enjoy in their soil (Herman, 2015). The soldiers can thus not be termed as terrorists since the international community cannot support terrorists.

Lastly, the soldiers from the different countries were able to re-unify their people so as to fight the British, Germans and France out of their countries. Terrorists do not unify people; rather, they divide them so as to enable their attack. The acts by the Arab, Hamas, and IRA soldiers were unifying and directed towards a common goal. They can thus not be classified as terrorists, rather, as freedom fighters of their people.

Legitimate and Illegitimate Political Contest

Politics create different ideas and mindsets in different people. Whenever we see a politician standing on a stand, speaking about a specific aspect, it does not fail to click our minds that the politician has a certain agenda. Politicians thus engage in various campaigns with various individuals to push through, their agenda. Political contests can, however, be classified into either legitimate or illegitimate.

Legitimate politics are those that fall under the appropriate or acceptable level of the business society. Even though legitimate politics do not have to be right at all times, their intention is fully in the protection of the society, and not of any harm (Post, 2014). For instance, in matters of development, a province may ask to be allocated more developmental finances to enhance their development if they feel left out about others of its kind. It thus demands the money at the expense of another, but this is not intended to hurt their competitors.

Illegitimate politics, on the other hand, consider the kind of politics that have to get their way, no matter who gets hurt. Here, people, organizations or governments do whatever they have to do to acquire their needs. They go against both spoken and unspoken rules of the game since the abstract is in the eyes of the beholder (Post, 2014). The main reason behind this type of politics is the scarcity of resources. As scarcity increases, the demand for the particular aspect increases, leading people to use any means possible to achieve it.

Illegitimate politics can also be explained in a level to which governments or organizations sabotage governmental plans and policies for their personal gain. Governments can allocate money for development or other important aspects in various regions (Post, 2014). If the money or resources are destroyed or abstracted from attaining the right purpose, the activity falls under illegitimate politics.

Lastly, whistle-blowing is considered a form of illegitimate politics, especially when it is done to hurt organizations or governments. When whistle-blowers destroy developmental projects that would have done more good than harm, it is considered illegitimate politics. In the political world, there is hardly any activity with no negative consequences (Post, 2014). However, if the benefits outweigh the losses, it is worth doing, for the sake of the future generations.

Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100
Use the following coupon code :