Skip to content Skip to footer
|

Let’s Call All Terrorists “Terrorists“

Would people be as willing to call the Paris attack ‘terrorism’ if the suspects involved were white or members of a right-wing hate group?

Earlier today, three gunmen stormed the Paris offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 people, including two policemen.

In the hours since the shooting, politicians and the media have universally condemned the gunmen as “terrorists” and called their actions “terrorism.”

And for good reason, too: the killing of unarmed civilians for apparently political or religious reasons is the classic definition of terrorism.

See more news and opinion from Thom Hartmann at Truthout here.

But would people be as willing to call the Paris attack “terrorism” if the suspects involved were white or members of a right-wing hate group? I don’t think so.

In one really telling quote form earlier today, former deputy director of the CIA Michael Morell called the storming of the Charlie Hebdo headquarters “the worst terrorist attack in Europe since the attacks in London in July of 2005.”

Mike Morell apparently can’t remember the actual worst terrorist attack in Europe between the 2005 London bombings and today’s Paris shootings.

I’m talking, of course, about the 2011 Norway attacks, where a white right-wing extremist and racist named Anders Breivik killed 77 people during a rampage through Oslo and a nearby summer camp.

If Breivik’s name were “Omar” and he said that he acted in the name of Islam as opposed to “Europe” and Christianity, I doubt people like Michael Morell would forget who he is or what he did.

But like other white perpetrators of mass political violence, from the guy who shot up a Sikh Temple in Wisconsin a few years ago to the guy who attacked a Kansas JCC this past April, Breivik gets a free pass from the media.

He’s a “mass shooter” or “mass murderer,” not a “terrorist.”

These are other examples, too. Are the guys who aimed loaded guns at federal officers at the Bundy ranch called “terrorists”? They are. Or the people who bombed the NAACP building yesterday in Colorado? Absolutely.

While this might sound like splitting hairs, it’s not.

In our society, calling an act of violence “terrorism” is an extremely powerful statement. It says that that an action is so awful, so beyond what we consider acceptable human behavior, that we must do everything we can to prevent it from happening ever again.

So when we refuse to call acts of violence that really are terrorism “terrorism,” we’re saying as a society that we don’t need to take them as seriously as we would the acts of violence that we do call terrorism.

This has very real world consequences.

According to some estimates, right-wing terrorists have killed more Americans since 9/11 than Islamic terrorists have.

If we don’t call right-wing terrorists “terrorists,” and thus say to the public that they’re just as bad as Islamic terrorists, the public won’t take right-wing terrorism seriously and it will be that much easier for Neo-Nazis to continue to threaten and to kill people without causing much sustained outrage.

Terrorism is an extremely powerful and persuasive word, but thanks to the media double-standards, it’s becoming meaningless.

If we really want to call-out evildoers, let’s call all terrorists “terrorists” or stop using the word altogether.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.