Mark Jeurgensmeyer.

All major acts of terror are acts of deliberately exaggerated violence.

9/11 is a display of dramatic, theatrical violence.

Car bombs/ Suicide attacks - Many carried out in order to be both vivid and hoffifying.

Targets were chosen because they were familiar and secure - Shopping malls, nightclubs and centres of mass transit.

The timing of the events often ensured that the maximum number of people would be gathered at the target site.

Explosive devices are usually used to would rather than kill.

Such instances of exaggerated violence are constructed events.

By their demonstrative nature, they elicit feelings of revulsion and anger in those who witness them.

Dramatic violence is part of a strategic plan. In some cases it is inherently political e.g. Israeli elections.

OTHER attacks have little strategic value to them: e.g. Sarin gas, 9/11. These creations of terror are not used to achieve a strategic goal, but to make a symbolic statement. Symbolism takes precedence over strategy.

By calling acts of terrorism "symbolic", I mean that they are intended to illustrate or refer to something beyond their immediate target: a grander conquest, for instance, or a struggle more awesome than meets the eye. The bombing of a public building may dramatically indicate to the populace that the government or the economic forces behind the building were seen as enemies, to show the world that they were targeted as satanic foes.

Aum Shinrikyo subway attack - Symbolic. It was a product of logical thought, and had an internal rationale.

Religious terrorism incidents are dramas designed to have an impact on the several audiences that they affect.

The symbolic significance of such events is multifaceted: they mean different things to different observers.

In reference to the people who committed the acts: They probably also hoped that their actions would make a difference. If not in a direct, strategic sense, then in an indirect way asa dramatic show so powerful as to change peoples perceptions of the world.

In virtually every other example of religious terrorism, the building, vehicle, structure or locale has had symbolic significance.

By revealing the vulnerabilities of a nations most stable and powerful entities, movements that undertake these acts of sabotage have touched virtually everyone in the nations society.

By demonstrating the vulnerability of governemental power, to some degree it weakens that power. Because power is largely a matter of perception, symbolic statements can lead to real results.

More significant is the impression - in most cases it is simply an illusion - that the movements perpetrating the acts have enormous power and that the ideologies behind them have cosmic importance.

	Erstellt von Carl Christie vor etwa 11 Jahre

PPR.362 - Religion & Violence Notiz am Untitled, erstellt von Carl Christie am 07/05/2013.