Any attempt to define terrorism comes with a challenge. The influential author and historian Walter Laqueur (1977, p.5) declared that a comprehensive definition of terrorism is not possible. It has appeared in many different forms, under many different circumstances. It is no wonder that there are many approaches to understanding terrorism and its outcomes. This essay considers two schools of study that investigate the nature of terrorist conflict; Conventional Terrorist Studies (TS) and Critical Terrorist Studies (CTS). It explores the positivist approach taken by TS and its emphasis, especially in a post 9/11 context and the holistic, emancipatory approach of CTS. Conventional studies focus upon the act of state-centric terrorist activity. Critical studies will ask why and how. Although similar, TS and CTS differ in their approach.
GEOFFREY, S (2020). Conventional and Critical Approaches to Terrorism. Afribary.com: Retrieved January 19, 2021, from https://afribary.com/works/conventional-and-critical-approaches-to-terrorism
SAXBY, GEOFFREY. "Conventional and Critical Approaches to Terrorism" Afribary.com. Afribary.com, 04 Dec. 2020, https://afribary.com/works/conventional-and-critical-approaches-to-terrorism . Accessed 19 Jan. 2021.
SAXBY, GEOFFREY. "Conventional and Critical Approaches to Terrorism". Afribary.com, Afribary.com, 04 Dec. 2020. Web. 19 Jan. 2021. < https://afribary.com/works/conventional-and-critical-approaches-to-terrorism >.
SAXBY, GEOFFREY. "Conventional and Critical Approaches to Terrorism" Afribary.com (2020). Accessed January 19, 2021. https://afribary.com/works/conventional-and-critical-approaches-to-terrorism