EXTREME FINANCIAL RISK-TAKING AS EXTREMISM

COMMENTARY ARCHIVES, 19 Feb 2009

Anthony Judge

Subject to anti-terrorism legislation?

Introduction

This is an exploration of the degree to which financial risk-taking, of the kind acknowledged and deplored as central to the financial crash of 2008, can be defined as "extremism". And, to the extent that that is the case, does such extremism fall under the proscriptions of anti-terrorism legislation — given that "extremism" has been conflated with "terrorism".

The exploration follows from an earlier study on the forms of what be understood as "terrorism" (Varieties of Terrorism — extended to the experience of the terrorized, 2004). Given that there has been a more recent tendency to conflate "extremism" with "terrorism", two further explorations focused on the nature of "extremism" (Presumption of Guilt by Association: reframing extremism in the response to terrorism, 2005; Norms in the Global Struggle against Extremism: "rooting for" normalization vs. "rooting out" extremism? 2005).

Definitional-game playing

Whilst different legislations may define "terrorism" with a degree of precision, it would appear to be the case that no clear international definition exists. This follows from the saga of many years regarding the international definition of "aggression". In particular definitions do not take account of the experiential sitation as to whether people can legitimately claim to have been "terrified" or "terrorized".

They notably fail to take account of "terror" induced by government agencies (for reasons they frame as legitimate) or which they simply deny. This confusion notably arises in relation to any form of "interrogation", defined as legitimate, or of "collateral damage" in a conflcit situation.

Incitment to terrorism, as opposed to any incident defined as involving "violence", has been progressively associated with "extremism" — defined as "unacceptable" in any form. Unfortunately, here again, there is no clear definition of "extremism". The term may be qualified as "violent extremism", presumably to be understood as incitement to violence.

The difficulty with such definitions is that:

·    terrorism may be a matter of personal experience including such forms: bullying and intimidation, mugging, exposure to dangerous driving, etc (as noted in Varieties of Terrorism — extended to the experience of the terrorized, 2004)

·    extremism may include extreme sports, extreme beliefs, extreme diets (as noted in Norms in the Global Struggle against Extremism: "rooting for" normalization vs. "rooting out" extremism? 2005).

·    violence may be understood as limited to actual physical violence in contrast with threats of violence. This unfortunately excludes those forms of violence understood as structural, cultural or psychological.

Johan Galtung (Violence, Peace, and Peace Research, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 6, No. 3. (1969), pp. 167-191) makes a vital distinction between physical violence and structural violence. Physical violence is for the amateur, using weapons in order to dominate. For Galtung, structural violence is the tool of the professional employing exploitation and social injustice to achieve domination.

But beyond the latter, acting behind the scenes (and adjusting the scenery) is surely the conceptual violence of the super-professional, using disinformation and psychological operations (military psy-ops) — and the associated processes of brainwashing. Examples of conceptual violence include use of category euphemism to inhibit or numb recognition of other dimensions of an experience.

This is typical of business and military jargon (bodycount, collateral damage, etc.) but even of reference to body processes (washroom, etc.) — reinforcing an insidious form of experiential denial.

CONTINUE READING IN THE ORIGINAL – LAETUS IN PRAESENS

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 19 Feb 2009.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: EXTREME FINANCIAL RISK-TAKING AS EXTREMISM, is included. Thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.

Comments are closed.