Global terrorism is extreme both in its lack of realistic goals and in its cynical exploitation of the vulnerability of complex systems.
Jurgen HabermasRead
Partisans fight on familiar territory with professed political objectives to conquer power. This is what distinguishes them from terrorists
Interpretation
Partisans engage in political conflicts with declared goals, while terrorists lack legitimate political aims.
In this quote, Jurgen Habermas distinguishes between partisans and terrorists, emphasizing that partisans operate within a recognized political framework and aim to achieve specific objectives related to governance and power. In contrast, terrorists act outside this framework, often pursuing violence without legitimate political motives, thereby highlighting the importance of political legitimacy in conflicts.
In practice
In a political debate, one might quote this to explain the distinction between legitimate political resistance and acts of terrorism.
Global terrorism is extreme both in its lack of realistic goals and in its cynical exploitation of the vulnerability of complex systems.
I cannot imagine a context that would some day, in some manner, make the monstrous crime of September 11 an understandable or comprehensible political act
If the September 11 terror attack is supposed to constitute a caesura in world history, it must be able to stand comparison to other events of world historical impact.
The scenarios of biological or chemical warfare painted in detail by the American media during the months after September 11 only betray the inability of the government to determine the magnitude of the danger.
Perhaps September 11 could be called the first historic world event in the strictest sense: the impact, the explosion, the slow collapse - a gruesome reality literally took place in front of a global public.
The difference between political terror and ordinary crime becomes clear during the change of regimes, in which former terrorists become well-regarded representatives of their country.
The GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered. I don't think we need to name any names, do we? Our party is encumbered by an inconsistent approach to freedom. The new GOP will need to embrace liberty in both the economic and the personal sphere.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.'
Close alliances with despots are never safe for free states.
Politicians must set their aims for the high ground and according to our various leanings, Democratic, Republican, Independent, we will follow. Politicians must be told if they continue to sink into the mud of obscenity, they will proceed alone.
Compromise makes a good umbrella, but a poor roof; it is temporary expedient, often wise in party politics, almost sure to be unwise in statesmanship.
Our most dangerous tendency is to expect too much of government, and at the same time do for it too little. . . . We must strive for normalcy to reach stability.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.