Is "Terrorism" ever "Politically Correct?"

Terrorism is one of those "ugly" words in today's vocabulary. Since 9/11, the words terrorist and terrorism have held special meaning for Americans and others, who had previously been indifferent to them.

Today, if you are in the United States and hear the words terrorist or terrorism used, it will likely be as part of a discussion about some fanatical islamo-facist suicide bomber or a shadowy web of terrorist cells, bent on our destruction. However, on the eve of Guy Fawkes day I thought it worth reminding ourselves that governments have often branded those who oppose them as "terrorists." Sidebar: V For Vendetta is one of my personal favorite movies.

Since the eighteenth century, it has become increasingly common for states to label dissidents as ‘terrorists’, even when they have not committed any acts of violence. The Nazis called their opponents terrorists; Gandhi and his Indian Independence Movement were labeled terrorists by the British, those who fought for equality in South Africa were also called terrorists.

The United States itself was conceived by men who the British considered to be "terrorists" and the Revolutionary War was won by a vastly outgunned Colonial army, that frequently employed terrorist/guerrilla tactics.

So the question that begs to be answered by our generation is; is terrorism ever politically correct? Do we ever have a moral mandate to engage in activities that some would consider to be "terrorism?"

For my answer to that question I will defer to a quote by one of our former presidents, who is also one of the political figures I admire most.

"We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution."

Abraham Lincoln