Terrorism in the 21st Century - Essay Example

THE KKK Terrorism in the 21st century is very different than terrorism in the 20th century. In the past, acts of terrorism—which can be defined as attacks on civilian targets rather than military targets—were often committed as part of a campaign of independence or to achieve a nationalist goal. They were often geographically limited and did not cause large scale civilian casualties. Today, terrorism is a global threat motivated by a very different ideology and is much more deadly. A good example of 20th century terrorism is the Algerian revolution against French colonialism. There the Algerians had a limited and nationalist goal: removing the French and declaring independence. They did not attack London or Washington, and they weren’t interested in Spain. Their campaign was focused and motivated by achievable goals. The KKK is a good example of homegrown American version of an old terrorist group. It developed after the civil war as a response to Reconstruction and carried on a racist agenda that involved targeting for violence people who disagreed with it. It continues to exist today, but its terrorism is much more muted and not part of what could be considered the New Terrorism. This essay will examine the origins of the KKK and discuss its role as a terrorist organization. The Civil War marked a major turning point in American history; the slaughter and the defeat of the South changed the way Americans see themselves to this day. But the period immediately before the war was also a turning point, as new technologies shifted the way people lived, worked, and raised families. Culture was rapidly increasing during this period too, as American writers looked inward to their soul and outward to their growing country. Writers like Dickinson, Thoreau and Emerson published works that began the process of defining what it meant to be American. A definition that would be sorely tested during the Civil War. The result of the loss by the Confederacy of the war was a huge demobilized Confederate army. Many of these soldiers did not want to give up and many wanted to continue to fight against the Republicans and against the North. They decided to do it as insurgents. This was when the first KKK was founded. These men dressed in bedsheets and intimidated and killed blacks and their white supporters. They preached hate and white supremacy. Was the KKK encouraged by the response of the federal government to them? The government knew it had to be careful in dealing with them. A question they asked themselves was: Does a state’s use of indiscriminate violence incite insurgent attacks? To date, most existing theories and empirical studies have concluded that such violence is highly counterproductive because it creates new grievances while forcing victims to seek security, if not safety, in rebel arms. Republicans knew this and tried to use the law against the KKK rather than to fight them using indiscriminate violence. They knew that as an insurgent organization’s ranks swell, so too does its coercive capacity. More specifically, it is reasonable to assume that insurgent organizations with larger memberships are more capable of planning and conducting a greater number of attacks than their smaller counterparts. This is likely to be true independent of the skill level of the particular insurgents in question. For example, while organizations with fewer combatants may be able to match the output of larger organizations temporarily, their long-term ability to do so is questionable since sustaining such a rate of violence means demanding more attacks per insurgent, thus exposing these insurgents to relatively higher risk of death or capture. Indiscriminate violence thus appears doubly counterproductive: it not only helps alleviate the insurgent’s collective action dilemma but also increases the amount of “action” that an organization. These were considerations that all states should keep in mind when dealing with homegrown terrorism. Unfortunately, the KKK gained political influence. A decade after the end of the war, most of the southern states were controllled by the Democrats and black rights had been eroded. The KKK had won a kind of power using its immoral techniques. Moral values do not always go hand in hand with power. Looking after power does not always permit morality to look after itself. One without the other can be politically fatal. Some believe that the two are opposed to one another, but political scientists argue otherwise. Anarchism and pacificism are counsels of despair. They are only superficially attractive as they accomplish little. In the end the combination of power and morality is an uneasy one and will remain so forever. The KKK exploited ignorance to achieve an immoral power. As one historian put it: In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired restoration of white supremacy. Its purposes were political, but political in the broadest sense, for it sought to affect power relations, both public and private, throughout Southern society. It aimed to reverse the interlocking changes sweeping over the South during Reconstruction: to destroy the Republican partys infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life. (Foner, 425) In the 20th century the group was resurgent at various times. It preyed on social change and tensions and exploited differences between people to try to achieve its aim of white supremacy. In the 1920s it responded to increased immigration and urbanization with the same tactics of violence and intimidation. It did not distinguish between government members and ordinary civilians. It used fear as a weapon against all. The truth is that these terrorists exist because human identities are not stable they can be manipulated by demagogues and bad people. It is easy for propaganda and newspapers to whip people up into an aggressive frenzy. Ethnicity and nationalism can be used to convince people to kill their neighbours, or blow themselves up on buses full of civilians. It can cleave nations in two, and destabilize whole regions. As Edward Said has written, “Human identity is not natural and stable, but constructed and occasionally even invented outright” (Said). In the course of the rise of the KKK, ethnic nationalism—a collective aspect of human identity—plays a very significant role. The conflict is shaped and motivated by whites who want to secure their claim to land and history. None of this is new, but in a world as connected as ours, such conflicts are more damaging than ever before in our history. These issues form the background and backdrop of the problem. But things can get better. What has been the key to isolating the KKK? Efforts to stabilize ethnic groups’ identities in a way that is inclusive and not aggressive. The KKK was an old terrorist organization. These groups are easier to deal with because they cannot spread their message globally. The terrorism of today is different. The mujahideen in Afghanistan come from all over the Islamic world. Some want to take control of the elected Afghan government, but others want to set up bases in Afghanistan to wage a global jihad against the West under the tutelage of Al Qaeda. They tend to view all Westerners as enemies. Additionally, people who believe in this ideology may belong to sleeper cells, as seen by the recent arrest of Najibullah Zazi in Queens, New York. These people have been radicalized by propaganda often over the Internet. The KKK, like other white supremacist groups, have seen an uptick in activity in recent years with the election of Barack Obama, the first Africa-American president of the United States. But their tactics and techniques still belong to an older generation. They are slow moving and do not engage in spectacular acts. While they may use the internet to do some organizing they have trouble making connections with people in other countries. Perhaps most importantly law enforcement takes a very aggressive view towards them and their ideas have little to no mainstream political influence. The KKK continues to exist but it is an organization that has seen better days. White supremacy does not have a large cache in the United States today. As a terrorist organization the group is largely inactive. This is definitely a step in a positive direction. Works consulted Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: Americas Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877, New York: Perennial Classics, 1989; reprinted 2002, Read More