Domestic Terrorism Versus National Militarism

When a person commits an act today that relies onfact, throw out a great deal of hypothetical situations,
force or violence, without being condoned by abut before I do, one must understand that I am not
government or established rule, itis commonly call astretching the rules of relaity or social organization.
"terrorist act," committed by "terrorists" or "militants."Harriet Tubman is a terrorist as much as Adolf Hitler
When a person commits a forceful or violent act,was only a military ruler, the first equalled to Osama
though, under the rule and order of a government orBin Laden and the second equaled to George Bush, as
established rule, condoned by the leaders of thatfar as the their titles go.Consider the imprisonment of
government, it is called a "militaristic act." Prior to thepeople never given the right to a fair hearing or to
election of the National Socialist Party in pre-Nazicouncil, in the United States. This is currently the
Germany, the few secluded violent acts committed bysituation as it is to detained prisoners in Cuba by the
anti-semites were considered vulgar acts of injustice,U.S. government. An attempt to liberate those
committed by political and religious militants, orprisoners, by tearing down the walls of the prison,
"terrorists." Once the National Socialist Party occupiedwould be considered a terroristic act. In fact, I imagine it
the majority positions in the legislature and executivemay be called treasonous, so that the government can
branches of German government, violence committedprosecute with the possibility of the death penalty. But,
against the Jews was no longer considered ain fact, is it deniable that these "terrorists" are simply
"terroristic act," -- in fact, it was considered a "militaristicand actually fulfilling the ideas of the U.S. Constitution --
act," accepted, supported, even funded and led by theideas which have been willingly betrayed by the U.S.
government. Once the Nazi Party was in power, allgovernment. What would the result of the capture of
acts that supported the liberation and welfare of thethese "terrorists" be? Certainly, imprisonment, possibly
persecuted Jews was considered an act of terrorism;death. But, if the courts uphold the rights of these
such people who do this being called "terrorists,"detainees, what is the result? Will American politicians
"vandals," and even "traitors." Harriet Tubman was alsobe indicted? Certainly not. It was fit to indict and charge
considered a terrorist, whose acts of force werethe Nazi party members after World War II, the
directed towards liberating the enslaved black race.Nuremburg Trials, but that is irrelevant: they were
The government would change. Individuals now whosecharged by another government, but the U.S.
actions are towards murdering or harming blacks aregovernm'nt is just as guilty as crimes against humanity
considered "terrorists." To call Osama Bin Laden a-- but, to the great regret of all good, decent peolpe,
terrorist is equally justified as calling Harriet Tubman athe U.S. government is not crumbling. Even worse, the
terrorist, as much as it may displease people and theirU.S. government structure does not allow a system of
cultural prejudice, since the government and media haschecks or balances against elected officials, except
done all that it can to convince us that terrorismagainst each other. The public is left at the mercy of
opposes liberty, when one of the greatest terroristsrapists and murderers.While some Anarchists view all
was also oneof the greatest liberators. Perhaps thestates as equal in their injustice, I feel a bit more
best example to illustrate the point I am making is toopen-minded. Certainly, the elected governments of
describe Adolf Hitler in this way: "A terrorist, until heEurope were more just than the Nazi state of Europe,
became accepted -- then just a ruler of aand certainly the state of Czarist Russia and the
nation."Understand here, that I am making no pardoningU.S.S.R. were with less equaity and peace than many
plea for Adolf Hitler and his ways. This is not aelected, and even unelected, governments. While a
pardoning plea for Nazis; it is an indictment ofking's injustice to rule over a people is wrong, just like
government.The initial response of anyone to thesean elected president's injustice to rule over a people is
string of facts is that the term "leader" versuswrong, the later is somewhat more susceptible to
"terrorist" is neither positive or negative, but completelydesirable results for the people. A government that
neutral. The only thing these terms can indicate is thatallows itself to be checked by the public will remove
an individual does not use passive acts of resistancecorruption and injustice with a greater efficiency.
to accomplish the change they desire in society. TheUnfortunately, the United States government, as well
government's claims that Osama Bin Laden is aas other Western World Republics, does not allow this
"terrorist" and not a "leader" is not different from stalin'sat all. While our government does allow a system of
regime calling the freedom fighters "terrorists" and notchecking, it solely exsits between elected government
"leaders." Similarly, the governments' claims thatofficials.If government officials violate the law or
George Bush is a "nation leader" and not a "terrorist"Constitution through their power, they are exempt from
are no different thank the claims that Mussolini is "justprison. Only for the ruling class (or the Capitalist class)
a military leader" and not a terrorist. The only differenteis this exemption present. But when private citizens
between the terms is that one is popularly acceptedcommit acts which upheld or defend the law, or the
while the other is not.The unfortunate fact of theConstitution, or highest law (the will of the people), they
matter is that governments have committed just asare prosecuted, jailed, and killed. No torture mechanism
horrible acts against the innocent and peaceful ashas been withheld. Individuals who oppose the cruelty
terrorists have, and even worse, the reverse is true.and inhumanity of government officials are given no
Terrorists have liberated, freed millions, doing all in theirjustice within the system. Yet once government
power to break the chains of bondage to everyone inoppresses the freedom of the poor, or the minorities
any unjust slavery -- as some government's have. Itthey are exempt from, any sort of imprisonment or
quite simply is a meaningless term.All of this beingpunishment. National Militarism and Domestic Terrorism
understood, we must consider modern acts ofare different only by which is approved by an
"terrorism." While any act committed by the popularestablished power. The greatest reform government
group, using force, is known as a military act, any actcould accomplish would be its absolution, but that day
committed by an unpopular, underground group,may be far ahead of us. Until that day, I believe that
through force is known as a terroristic act (thegovernment officilias must take legal responsibility for
underground French army that revolted againstall their acts, and that those who uphold justice by
German Nazis, for example). So, by wwhat method isbreaking the law must be allowed to defend
one group effectively established? The methods bythemselves. People who have attended protests are
which a government is chosen hav varied through thebeaten, raped, pepper sprayed, shot with rubber bullets,
ages and diversified through the regions. There is theand murdered. The cops who oppress freedom of
typical method of a leader gaining his support throughspeech may be upholding the law of tyrants, but they
military power, as a king, monarch, despot, or dictator.are doing everything they can to depress the spirit of
The other method of establishing power is throughpeople to live freely. While protestors sit in jail cells for
election, wheret he people choose their king, only he isyears for expressing their opinion, labelled as
called a president, chancellor, or prime minister. In some"terrorists," cops continue their onslaught on people and
cases, these systems are combined, or diversified, orare called, "the law." The system is inherently unjust
both. A house of representatives or two, may haveand the good people will do all we can to fight it.That
two ways of being elected (such as the U.S. has aone day, we may be free. Life,Punkerslut (or Andy
Congress and House of Representatives), but theCarloff) has been writing essays and poetry on social
central executive power may be a king.In ourissues which have caught his attention for several
civilization, I find it unfortunate that so much trust andyears. His website provides a complete list of all of
loyalty would be placed with government. The reasonsthese writings. His life experience includes
why people do so is because their media is draped inhomelessness, squating in New Orleans and LA,
the cloak of government influence. The reason whydropping out of high school, getting expelled from
anyone doubts the government is also obvious,college for "subversive activities," and a myriad of
because some intelligent works slipped through theother revolutionary actions.
barriers to willing and open-minded individuals. I can, in