Conflict Theory Terrorism
PUBLIC POLICY TOWARDS TERRORISM
Basic Principles of Conflict Theory:
Conflict theory is the principal alternative to functionalism. The Conflict Theorists shared numerous significant assumptions to view the world with different angles. Conflicts theorists perceive and arena in which crowd seeks influence, where functionalists glimpse interdependence and consensus. According to conflict theorists the control of conflict generally means the ability of one group suppressing the opponent group temporarily. The functionalists believe that societies will progress through the social mechanisms to deal with the social conflict. Conflict theorists observe civil law is a technique of defining and holding a particular social order than benefits some at the expense of others. While Functionalists see civil law as a way of increasing social order. Conflict theorists emphasize on the shifting power between competing groups. Where as Functionalists focus on interdependence and equilibrium. It can be sub divided into Marxism and Neo-Marxism. Social scientists are believed to have moral duty to critique society. It cannot be objective of refusal to separate analyst from the judgment or fact, and also believes in that society can be constructed in such a manner where there is no chance of conflicts and Weberian Conflict Theory. Conflict cannot be separated from the social life, rejects the objection of the ideas of social science, with the intention to establish a scientific social science. According to Marxism an entirely contemporary theory ruins as many sociologists work and it is an integrated perspective.
According to Neo-Marxism, where as economic sub structure is concerned the culture and ideology are its reflection. And contemporary Sociologists views the importance of superstructure is in its own right. The cultural factors play their own role in maintaining inequalities among class as per the eyes of European Neo-Marxists.
C. Wright Mills, sociologist had combined a conflict perception with a tough critique of the social order. According to him there is threat in future, believe that that there is immorality in political and economic systems of U.S., in consideration of political parties are manipulative and craziness, they put their services themselves and calling it as free research value. For him the major issue is the relationship between bureaucracy, isolation and the centralization of power more in a ‘power elite'.
Now a days media plays a significant role by communication about terrorism and focusing on how to react, how public should take that and how to ‘fix terrorism', overwhelmingly the fact that terrorism is not a new thing while it has been around for years and more highly, ignoring the enormous amount of study and publications starting the different theories of terrorism.
As per the terrorist act is concerned, terrorism is nothing but it is a sort of frustration which may create in the mind of persons due to misguidance, illiteracy or unrealistic and the conflict is antagonistic behavior resulting from individual frustration, aggression or pugnacity. Subsequently they use violence, they also believe that unless we do this violence we will lose an existent power struggle, therefore it now regarded that terrorism is a tool of the weak. First they do not have the resources such as money, people and political power to wage an actual war. Second, terrorist used hostility as a means, not a goal, while the main goal is to agitate, expose and emphasize the weaknesses and inability of the government and civil machinery to achieve their direct political objectives. Some of the most highly regarded terrorist profiles are Timothy McVeigh, Theodore Kaczynski, Osama bin Laden.
In the present scenario the number of states getting affected by terrorism is increasing day by day. Terrorist activities became an integral part of guerrilla warfare, the kind of political violence which are facing is relatively a new one. This is considered as a significant and distinct mode of armed conflict.
It is only an aggrieved group has sufficient means to maintain violence on its own without bear from other states. Few states provide moral support to such group which might sound tiny way from being neutral, but valuable moral support from states that promote the political objective. The acts done by the aggrieved groups can be classified as
- Frivolous actions: Peru's electricity poles in Lima city being blown up consecutively for 4 years during the New Year's Eve.
- Indiscriminate Bombings and killings act of disruption and creating atmospheres of fear and insecurity.
- Hijacking of planes and taking hostage became one of the problems into the international prospect.
In order to tackle the situation against the terrorist keeping Public policy in mind, the governments are taking appropriate actions such as killing the terrorists quickly as the best deterrence available is to kill the terrorist. Gathering information and getting cooperation from national as well as international intelligence organizations. Some of them include Organizations such as Interpol, FBI, Europol, etc. “FBI/CIA/Europole”is regarded as world intelligence agency.. Dehumanize, demonize, terrorist. Actions against money laundering, is also regarded as best means to control supply of money, to the terrorist.
There is a difference to face and terrorism. The decision part will be in the hand of the political leaders here. In hijacking and hostage operation the decision lies on the political leaders. There will be involvement of several international organizations and concerned states for such problems. It decision depends on several things so government should have a proper agenda to face these type of situations.
Complying laws with human rights is also necessary. Or else terrorist will use this to voice their protest more and change the sensitive minds set of youngsters. All the theories meant will give basic guidelines about the system and the problems in the system and it is up to the policy makers to use those theories to enact perfect laws that can curtail the problem.
1. Conflict theory, <http://www.edinboro.edu/cwis/soc/SOCIOLOGY/TAYLOR/soc260-conflict_theory.htm>December 22, 2007.
2. David J. Whittaker,( 2004), Terrorists and Terrorism in the Contemporary World. Routledge, New York, Pp: 63.
3. Khan, A. (1987) ‘A legal theory of international terrorism', Connecticut Law Review. pp 945-972.
4. J. Paul De B. Taillon, Hijacking and Hostages: Government Responses to Terrorism. Praeger, Westport, CT. Publication Year: 2002. Pp: 159
5. J. Paul De B. Taillon, Hijacking and Hostages: Government Responses to Terrorism. Praeger, Westport, CT. Publication Year: 2002. Pp: 49
6. Tay Kok Siong, D., Yong Wee, F. and Kien Meng, W (July 2001), Terrorism and Game theory.
Need an essay? You can buy essay help from us today!