‘Civil Terrorism’ Is a Dangerous Category Error
Turn any article into a podcast. Upgrade now to start listening.
TL;DR
- The definition of terrorism is elusive, and some propose broadening it to include low-level crimes and civil disobedience.
- This broad definition, termed 'civil terrorism,' could be used by governments to suppress political dissent and infringe upon First Amendment rights.
- Historical examples show how legal systems have been misused to stifle protected speech, and this new definition could exacerbate the problem.
- Critics argue that equating minor offenses with terrorism is a category error that invites censorship and repression.
- While unlawful activists should face consequences, they should not be branded with a term associated with severe atrocities.