Among the many symbols used to frighten and manipulate the…
““Among the many symbols used to frighten and manipulate the populace of the democratic states, few have been more important than "terror" and "terrorism." These terms have generally been confined to the use of violence by individuals and marginal groups. Official violence, which is far more extensive in both scale and destructiveness, is placed in a different category altogether. This usage has nothing to do with justice, causal sequence, or numbers abused. Whatever the actual sequence of cause and effect, official violence is described as responsive or provoked ("retaliation," "protective reaction," etc.), not as the active and initiating source of abuse. Similarly, the massive long-term violence inherent in the oppressive social structures that U.S. power has supported or imposed is typically disregarded. The numbers tormented and killed by official violence-wholesale as opposed to retail terror-during recent decades have exceeded those of unofficial terrorists by a factor running into the thousands. But this is not "terror," [...] "security forces" only retaliate and engage in "police action." These terminological devices serve important functions. They help to justify the far more extensive violence of (friendly) state authorities by interpreting them as "reactive" and they implicitly sanction the suppression of information on the methods and scale of official violence by removing it from the category of "terrorism." [...] Thus the language is well-designed for apologetics for wholesale terror.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
The quote argues that labeling state violence as “reactive” and terrorism as “terrorist” creates a double standard that hides the scale of official oppression.
In simple terms: State violence is framed as defensive, while terrorism is seen as offensive.
Key Takeaway
Recognize and challenge biased language that masks state aggression.
Themes
power
language
violence
media
politics
Mood
critical
analytical
skeptical
Type
political
philosophical
critical
When to use this quote
- policy analysis
- activism
- journalism
- human rights advocacy
Key Concepts
double standards
framing
state legitimacy
terrorism discourse
Questions to Reflect On
- How does language shape public perception of violence?
- What criteria should define legitimate state force?
A Different Perspective
The distinction can be contested, but some argue that all violence should be judged by its impact, not its source.