When, how and why elites frame terrorists

A Wittgensteinian analysis of terror and radicalisation

Bibliographic Data

ID12919143
AuthorsJørgen Staun (0000-0003-2142-5123, Danish Institute for International Studies, corresponding author)
Year2010
Volume3
Issue3
Pages403-420
Publication date2010-12-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueCritical Studies on Terrorism (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1753-9161 • E-ISSN: 1753-9153
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/17539153.2010.521642
OpenAlexW2010410805
LanguageEN
Citations received10
References cited27

Trying to reach an all-encompassing academic definition of terrorism that settles the definition problem once and for all by defining ‘what terror is’ is a blind alley that will lead research nowhere. Terrorism studies are instead in need of non-essentialist or historical studies, and researchers need to start treating terrorism as an inherently unstable concept whose meaning shifts and varies over time and place, and according to the uses to which it is put. Instead of all-inclusive definitions of content, therefore, what are needed are definitions that are limited in time, space and scope. Drawing on the language philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and the Copenhagen School of Security Studies, terrorism can be seen as a securitisation language game. Thus, the focus shifts away from asking ‘what terrorism is’ to asking how and by whom it is defined and what happens when a problem is lifted out of its normal criminal sphere and normal jurisprudence and placed in the realm of security

Epistemology · Essentialism · Jurisprudence · Law and economics · Meaning (existential · Political science · Realm · Sociology · Terrorism · Global Security and Public Health · Law · Philosophy · Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence · War, Ethics, and Justification