Terrorist. Has there ever been a more confusing and overused word?  Has there ever been a word that widens the gap; enforces the syntax of "them" and "us"; and creates a mysterious-cum-inhuman-cum-satanic cult of creeps and cretins that are simply ungodly and evil.  Yes evil.  Terrorist.  Evil.  Terrorist.  Inhuman.  Terrorist.  An abomination of the human spirit.

So who is this terrorist?  We use the word terrorist to apply to anyone who goes against the grain of the populace with the use of violence.  Therefore, according to traditional use of the word, the anti-establishment pacifist is not a terrorist, simply because, while irritating and perhaps dangerous in a psychological way, he or she does not intimidate through the means of violence.  This is why Jesus was not a terrorist, although he was "dangerous" to the patriarchy of the time, and killed for his ideas.   It is also why Gandhi was not a terrorist, even though he managed to oust the Brits from India. On the other hand there are similarities between the terrorists and these pacifist movers and shakers.  Both have a fringe status – they represent a minority.  Both question the hierarchy.  Both see hypocrisy in a world that is headed in the wrong direction.  Both are vocal about their discontents and appeal to the poor and downtrodden who are disillusioned by social systems that ignore them.  Both are driven by ideologies.  

Because of the fringe status requirement of the word terrorist, the leaders of society at large cannot be terrorists, however terrible they are.  Hitler was not a terrorist, because while his politics inflicted terror on the millions of jews, blacks, gypsies and gays, as he was the ruling class, he was simply "right".  The Crusaders were not terrorists, because they were sent to conquer countries by the ruling nation.  It was a jihad of sorts to force, if necessary godammit, their religion on the otherwise quite content infidels, heretics and pagans.  All in the name of the "real" God, of course. But they were not terrorists.  I repeat they were not terrorists.  I repeat they were not terrorists.  

And of course, the same applies today with our own Mr. President.  While, under his command, the war on terrorism in Iraq has taken probably close to 100,000 civilian and non civilian lives, and have displaced and maimed many more, Mr. Bush is not a terrorist simply because he is in charge.  Which again, makes him right.  Just as Saddam Hussein was right in his own country until the USA invaded and made him terribly wrong.  And thus is the pendulum of politics.  And also why the word terrorism sounds worse than is really warranted.  The terrorists are not doing anything other than what the anti-terrorists do.  In fact the terrorists and anti-terrorist war mongers are far more similar then they would care to admit.  Their only difference is that they just have a different ideology to fight for.   Both government led and terrorist led attacks, all sacrifice the public at large for some ideology that is just not really attainable.  The mission is not to kill, but to conquer for the sake of a higher ideal, and if that incurs collateral damage then so be it.   Are either right?  Hell no.

Here is a fine example of a non-terrorist attack.  The Cathars in France were a medieval fringe Christian cult, who were founded on love, peace and equality between humankind, a reverence for nature and simplicity and who had quite different views from the Papacy.  This made them heretical.  When this cult became strong enough to be a threat to the structure of Catholism proper (they were not a violent lot, but they were charismatic luring many a stiff old Christian into their lair, and advocating dancing, singing, art and love making for the sake of it …), the Papacy obliterated every last one of them, leaving only traces of their legacy in stories passed down through the generations.  From the papacy’s perspective they were protecting the one true version of Christianity.  After all, the Cathars were a true threat to the truth, not the other way round.  As I said before, this was a non-terrorist attack.

Today, when you ask most, who is this terrorist? The majority will reply that it is a group of fundamentalist Islamic men.  They are the Taliban.  They are fundamentalist, patriarchal jerks.  But besides all the ugly things we can say, they have a cause which is very simple.  They feel threatened by the West.  They don’t want US values to seep into their psyche and turn their world into another America.  They don’t want their women who are still chained to hearth and home, who are most accepting of their place and the indignities imposed upon them, to realize that outside their walls is another way.  They don’t want their children, who are brainwashed with Allah to understand that they have been taught a particular belief that they have a choice of disbelieving.  They don’t want their people to understand the American concept of freedom (even though when it is lived it can be frightfully disappointing).  They want to move on at their own pace.  Run their countries as they wish.  Live in their quagmire of disillusionment, just as we live in ours.  And America threatens them because the corporation nation sees no boundaries to their ideology.   Who is right?  Who is wrong?  Is this just social evolution…some kind of survival of the fittest?

Yes, this article poses many questions.  But one thing is certain.  We all react to our environment and life can be seen as one big scale, constantly trying to strike the perfect balance, the perfect equality between sides.  As soon as the balance tips in one side’s favor, reactionaries work hard to get back the equilibrium.  Maybe, there is no evil going on.  Maybe this is just our way of moving forward in time and balancing the scales that have tipped backwards and forwards since the dawn of humankind impelling periods of mass destruction followed by periods of mass creativity and peace.   Maybe it is nature that is driving us, forcing us through the tidal wave of chaos into a sea of contradictory calm. Just like an inhalation of deep fresh breath must be exhaled, so too must psychological and physical boundaries be eliminated and re-established and eliminated again.  Maybe it is just time our concept of both the world and each other changed.