Revolutionist vs Terrorist
Few people understand the true differences between a revolutionist and a terrorist. In many cases, a revolutionist has been labeled as a terrorist, and visa versa. In fact, these two terms are the complete opposite of each other, and the underlying principles that decide the actions of both these categories of people are very different as well.
As a simple definition, a terrorist is someone who uses unlawful force and violence to coerce other people, sects or governments to follow their social or political objectives. A terrorist will commit to any type of activity to get his point proven and accepted, and the majority of times these activities are against the law. On the contrary, a revolutionist is someone who also tries to change the mindset of other people, although not with force and violence, but rather with logical reasoning, confidence and honesty.
A revolutionist does not resort to the use of violence, and will not forcibly try to change the way people think. He/she will rather try to convince people to change their actions and thoughts. A terrorist believes that killing people and destroying property is an acceptable way to get what he wants. A terrorist believes that it is better to get rid of people who do not accept his ideologies, rather than trying to convince them otherwise. On the contrary, a revolutionist does not believe in killing other people, and will not be involved in destruction or murder.
In light of the above mentioned facts, a terrorist will be considered a criminal by other people and the law, whereas a revolutionist may be greatly respected for taking the lead and trying to change the world.
A terrorist can also be considered as selfish, as he is someone who wants to change the world to suit himself. Usually, he has the wrong idea of how the world should be. A revolutionist does not only think of himself, but respects the people in the world at large. A revolutionist’s changes will usually help the world to be a better place to live in.
Summary:
A terrorist uses violence and force to get what he wants, while a revolutionist uses reasoning and honesty for the same purpose.
A terrorist will often destroy property and kill people to prove his point, while a revolutionist is not involved in any unlawful activities.
A terrorist is labeled as a criminal, while a revolutionist is often highly respected.
- Difference Between Revolutionist and Terrorist - April 4, 2010
- Difference Between Diamonds and Pearls - April 2, 2010
- Difference Between Canon FS11 and Canon FS21 - April 2, 2010
“Usually, he has the wrong idea of how the world should be.” Wrong and right are completely subjective, value-based notions, and you can’t say what is right or wrong.
Both revolutionaries and terrorists use force. The difference is what “side” you’re on. The French Revolution had a period known as The Terror, and terrorists may use their tactics to bring about a revolution.
You can apply these definitions of “terrorist” to revolutionaries, and of “revolutionaries” to terrorists. Again, the difference is in whose side you are on. Both sides can engage in violence, and both can bring hard to civillians. Some terrorists will value human life (for example, those who seek to destroy systems and infrastructure, not human life), and some revolutionaries will not (the French Revolution saw many hangings, and study of any revolution will see a loss of human life).
This article needs to be heavily revised.
Reply
By this definition, Che Guevara was a terrorist. Correct?
Reply
Yes.
Reply
So the founders of the United States were then, by your definition, terrorists? I think most people would disagree with you on that. Factually however, our founders used violence to achive seperation. They may have attempted to avoid violence, never the less they used it.
You make it sound like revolultions are peaceful. Sometime they are, usually however they involve considerable force and loss of life.
Reply