Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 33
Terror and Terrorism: A History of Ideas and Philosophical-
Ethical Reflections
Brig. Gen. Edwin R. Micewski, Ph.D.
Director of the Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences
National Defense Academy, Vienna
Abstract
The essay addresses the question of the moral legitimacy of terrorism within
the framework of a brief history of ideas and a moral philosophical
evaluation. The article offers a terminological and epistemological grounding
to the notions of terror and terrorism and provides an historical account of
the phenomenon as it has evolved throughout the ages up to our present
day. It highlights the significance of publicity and other socially relevant
factors to terrorism and outlines both the mental and psychological
characteristics of terrorist activity. The major part of the article is dedicated
to delineating the nature of terrorist violence and its moral and legal
implications. By way of a phenomenology of violence in the context of a
concept of political justice, the fundamental ethical illegitimacy of terrorist
violence is deduced. The article concludes with deliberations on the question
of a universal set of ethics in both world religions and international law. It
sheds light on the demanding dimension of combating terrorism for security
affairs in this new century and particularly underscores the challenge to the
democratic statutory state to fight the potentially inhumane without
disclaiming the principles of humanity embodied in its own social order. The
essay takes into account the current social as well as political debate around
the subject of terrorism in both the United States and Europe, characterized
by confusion and disorientation particularly as regards a moral evaluation of
the terrorist phenomenon. The approach undertaken in this article offers an
argument rooted deeply in Western philosophy as well as political thought,
thus providing urgently needed illumination for further ethical orientation in
both academia and public discourse.
A History of Ideas and Philosophical-Ethical Reflections
The events of September 11, 2001 notwithstanding, neither the UN nor the international
circles of scientists, scholars, and politicians were able to find a consensual definition of
terror and terrorism, terms that are on everybody‘s mind ever since the massive terrorist
attacks hit both Washington D.C. and New York. Moreover, it still seems to be a problem
whether to specify terrorist activities as political manifestations or simply as illegitimate acts
of criminals.
One of the more comprehensive definitions of terrorism was provided by the U.S.
Department of Defense. Its definition describes terrorism as ―the unlawful or threatened use
of force or violence against individuals or property to coerce and intimidate governments or
societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives.‖[1] As a point of
departure for the analysis at hand which leaves room for unprejudiced consideration, the
term ‗terrorism‘ shall be defined as ―a strategy whereby violence is used to produce certain
effects in a group of people so as to attain some political end or ends.‖[2] In any case,
however, terrorism always refers to a minority of whatever kind intending to put through
their political and social goals against established political structures by outright use of
violent means.

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2006, Page 34
Terminological Clarifications
While some authors and commentators use the terms ‗terror‘ and ‗terrorism‘ synonymously,
others differentiate those terms in the sense that ‗terror‘ refers to the use of terrorist means
―from above,‖ so to say, deriving from the political power structures themselves, whereas
the term ‗terrorism‘ is related to politically motivated violence ―from below.‖
Following these etymological lines, terror can be defined as ―the usage of the domain of
intimidation by the powerful‖ while terrorism can be seen as ―the counterfeiting and practice
of methods of terror by those—for the time being still—‗powerless, despised and desperate‘
who believe not to be taken seriously other than when resorting to terrorist violence.‖[3]
Both terror and terrorism demonstrate pronounced indifference toward the value of human
life, imitate each other in their methods, and—in many cases—are even mutually dependent
upon each other. In the past, for example, dictatorial systems have repeatedly tried to sell
violations of human rights and brutal suppression of individual freedom as inevitable
measures to uphold internal security and national stability.
Terror (State Terrorism) as an Instrument “from Above”
As a historically institutionalized system, terror reached one of its early peaks with the
Jacobin (Terror-) Regime in France near the end of the eighteenth century. The leader of
the French Revolution, Maximilien Robespierre himself, designated the terror applied by the
regime as ―virtuous‖ and emphasized: ―Terror is nothing else but justice, immediate,
unrelenting und unbending justice thus terror is a manifestation of virtue.‖[4]
By the end of the revolutionary period, the ―terror of revolution‖ is frequently found as a
form of violence that, to quote Trotsky, ―reduces all contradictions down to the sole
alternative: Life or death.‖[5] There are, therefore, justifiable reasons to understand and
use the terms terror and terrorism synonymously—not the least of which is that the
terrorism of the National Socialists during the Weimar Republic became a forerunner and, in
fact, was the preparation for the terror of the Third Reich.
Terrorism as an Instrument “from below”
As already mentioned, the term terrorism refers to some kind of politically motivated threat
and application of violence that leads repeatedly, especially in recent times, to severe
disregard of the basic laws of humanity. It seems as though the arbitrary use of terrorist
violence so prominent today does not discern the difference between protected persons or
proscribed ammunitions. In the recent past, therefore, some prominent politicians have
designated the fight against terrorism literally as ―war.‖ In this context, both scientists and
security experts (of different national background) warn against the rise of new, ever more
radical forms of terrorism.
Terrorists want to put pressure on the broad public by spreading fear and uncertainty until
those in power—in the medium or long term—give in to the ideological and political claims
of the perpetrators. Contemporary terrorism particularly fails to show any respect for age,
sex, or descent of the indiscriminately picked victims of their attacks.
Anarchical terrorism as well as political regime terror utilizes the application of violence for
the purpose of spreading fear and intimidation in pursuing either nationalist or revolutionary
goals. Whereas, on the one hand, national terrorism is aiming at getting rid of
heteronymous governance, or attaining national independence or autonomy by way of
illegal use of force, revolutionary terrorism, on the other hand, intends either to bring down
a certain regime or wants to bring about a radical change in the existing political and
societal order.