Stripping Terrorism of Identity

'Terrorism' has indeed been the hottest yet most elusive topic discussed and debated in politics since the dawn of the 21st century. Regardless of the world being unable to agree upon a universally accepted definition for the same, it has not prevented the extensive research and deconstruction of the notion from its objectives, economic funding, victims, attackers and so on. Having closely followed the media reporting of recent terrorist attacks particularly those in Paris, Nice and Würzburg, which often gain significantly higher levels of airtime in the Western world for the obvious reason of being closer to home among others (which is not a criticism but rather stating the obvious), I unveiled a rather disastrous pattern. Starting from the speculations, statements by state officials, conclusions of investigations to the final declaration of the responsible party the individual/terrorist or group/terrorists responsible are referred to as directly or in a sentence that includes the terms 'Muslim', 'Islam', 'Immigrant', 'Refugee' and/or 'Foreigner'. As one or many may question, since the individuals responsible are after all on paper belonging to one or all of those 'categories' mentioned above, why not? Well here's why I think we shouldn't associate the most detested, feared and derogatory term of the 21st century with those used to identify large, vibrant and vital groups of the society.

Inaccurate generalising
Essentially this indicates that the default status of a terrorist is 'Muslim' or a connotation along the same lines, and he/she is guilty or under suspicion until proven innocent. Resultantly millions of individuals face hostility and skepticism particularly within the modern Western world borders, and find themselves objected to surveillance and hostility because somewhere down the line society decided to run with the theme of 'Muslim terrorists' or 'Islam extremists'.

To come at it from a different angle what if one were to say the default status of all Roman Catholic priests were 'Pedophiles'. What if all priests were pressured to undergo some form of psychological testing, internet history surveillance and criminal background checks to prove themselves innocent of any sexual deviance. Of course the society does not require it because regardless of the child abuse cases filed it is acknowledged that not all priests are pedophiles.

On the contrary when a group of highly evolving psychopaths begin a cult somewhere in the world, engage in ruthless activities, recruit more people with the sole purpose of causing destruction all while labeling themselves as 'Muslims' the world decides to go with it. I wonder if a Caucasian male, with a thick geordie accent, rides a tea cup to the Buckingham Palace, bombs it and declares it was done in the name of Jesus, if the said individual would be called a Christian extremist, British terrorist or simply a 'terrorist'.

Propaganda for terrorism
Furthermore the labeling, mainstream media coverage and global recognition of these covert groups provide them with free, mass scale and continuous propaganda. Thanks to the speed of modern day communication technology names of certain terrorist groups (which I refuse to mention on this blog) have become household names along with their agendas, demands and activities. As a result individuals, particularly adolescents, facing identity crisis, social dilemmas, troubles at home, searching for an adventure or wanting to feed their psychopathic egos are lured by these groups, now more than ever before. If from day one these groups were treated as a group of psychopaths, their ruthless activities censored and not documented by media portals, all whilst the public is educated on vigilance, safety and the need for peace, I am confident the alarming proliferation of these entities would have been significantly hindered.

Propaganda for fascism
A quick dive into current political discussions related to the American election, Brexit, Syrian refugee crisis and so on reveals reoccurring suggestions of 'building walls', 'closing borders', 'including an entire race in the no fly list' and many other alarming remarks. Simultaneously, extreme right wing parties such as UK Independence Party (UKIP), Perussuomalaiset (Finns Party) and Front National (French Resistance) are gaining more and more public approval, mostly led by negative campaigns driven by irrational fear. Without risking blowing things out of proportion it is necessary to mention that not long ago it was similar campaigns which escalated into the massacre of over 6 million Jews. Thus, the act of linking terrorism or the violent actions of a selective group of individuals to an entire race, religion or immigration status risks the marginalisation and alienation of large pockets of the society whilst driving a wedge between the road to successful integration.

Thus, in this interconnected world driven by multiple forms of media it is our civic duty to self educate and influence those around us in the importance of stripping terrorism of identity. These groups should not be discussed other than in the light of attempting to identify their root cause (for as the saying goes one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter), condemn their disruptive actions, focus on dissolution and rehabilitation, along with educating the public on vigilance and cohesion.