Were the basic philosophical positions, and tactical choices, of the “urban guerrilla” movements significantly different from those of classical terrorism? – Essay Proposal
Biljana Madzevska
17202788
LaTrobe University
Erica Millar
21/08/2014
Were the basic philosophical positions, and tactical choices, of the “urban guerrilla” movements significantly different from those of classical terrorism?
Classical terrorism and Urban guerrilla were used variedly throughout history following specific objectives and under different conditions. Although they both involve violence, there were significant differences in terms of tactical choices and philosophical positions. The main focus of the essay will fall on classical terrorism and the urban guerrilla movements in terms of philosophical positions and tactical choices. The urban guerrilla movements were more unselective …show more content…
It will look at the views of Boaz Ganor on classical terrorism as well as those of Carlos Marighella on the urban guerrilla movements. Secondly, it will look at the motivations and goals of both classical terrorists and urban guerrilla fighters and how they differ as well as how they are both alike. The essay will draw on Boaz Ganor’s view that terrorist operations are driven by the fact that they encourage the welfares of a specific population other than the terrorist organisation itself. While the terrorist actions were intended to boost morale and empower the terrorist group, the opposite is the message to the attacked. The essay will then draw on Michel Wieviorka’s belief that classical terrorism had the intention to inflict fear and anxiety, as well as undermine assurance and morale of the attacked population. Messages such as these were meant to force the attacked into concessions of the terrorist organisation’s
Biljana Madzevska
17202788
LaTrobe University
Erica Millar
21/08/2014
Were the basic philosophical positions, and tactical choices, of the “urban guerrilla” movements significantly different from those of classical terrorism?
Classical terrorism and Urban guerrilla were used variedly throughout history following specific objectives and under different conditions. Although they both involve violence, there were significant differences in terms of tactical choices and philosophical positions. The main focus of the essay will fall on classical terrorism and the urban guerrilla movements in terms of philosophical positions and tactical choices. The urban guerrilla movements were more unselective …show more content…
It will look at the views of Boaz Ganor on classical terrorism as well as those of Carlos Marighella on the urban guerrilla movements. Secondly, it will look at the motivations and goals of both classical terrorists and urban guerrilla fighters and how they differ as well as how they are both alike. The essay will draw on Boaz Ganor’s view that terrorist operations are driven by the fact that they encourage the welfares of a specific population other than the terrorist organisation itself. While the terrorist actions were intended to boost morale and empower the terrorist group, the opposite is the message to the attacked. The essay will then draw on Michel Wieviorka’s belief that classical terrorism had the intention to inflict fear and anxiety, as well as undermine assurance and morale of the attacked population. Messages such as these were meant to force the attacked into concessions of the terrorist organisation’s