There’s no universally agreed on definition of terrorism, but I think the key difference is that terrorists commit violence for things like ideaology, politics, religion, and asserting racial superiority. Gangs commit violence for things like cash, pride, drugs, notoriety and cred. But both use intimidation and violence to achieve their goals.
I was kind of lumping in anti-government and anti-social/-society behaviour into politics and ideology.
Intimidation and the threat of significant violence against entire groups (i.e. families, households, businesses, other gangs) are commonalities. Fear of violence is the main deal.
I was pondering a while ago… are gangs terrorist organisations?
It’s already illegal to be a terrorist, and gangs are certainly more than just a club.
If a club’s dominant activities are illegal, violent, and lethal… what’s the difference?
There’s no universally agreed on definition of terrorism, but I think the key difference is that terrorists commit violence for things like ideaology, politics, religion, and asserting racial superiority. Gangs commit violence for things like cash, pride, drugs, notoriety and cred. But both use intimidation and violence to achieve their goals.
That’s how I see it anyway.
Good points.
I was kind of lumping in anti-government and anti-social/-society behaviour into politics and ideology.
Intimidation and the threat of significant violence against entire groups (i.e. families, households, businesses, other gangs) are commonalities. Fear of violence is the main deal.
Drugs/theft etc is just fundraising.